By Anna Kaminski, Kansas Reflector
TOPEKA — A brigade of tech sector lobbyists flooded a Kansas committee with information and advocacy before legislators weighed a bill that would require age verification in app stores.
Apple and Google “heavily lobbied” committee members ahead of a two-part hearing Monday and Tuesday, said Rep. Laura Williams, a Lenexa Republican.
Several other lawmakers told Kansas Reflector that lobbyists from Netflix, Roblox and Meta also approached them to offer information.
“There’s a lot of money here on both sides, but at the end of the day it’s our kids that we’re looking at,” Williams said.
Senate Bill 372, or the “app store accountability act,” would require app store providers — Apple and Google — to verify the ages of all app store users before purchasing, downloading and using apps. The Kansas Attorney General’s Office would be authorized under the bill to create age verification methods to prevent young people from being exposed to inappropriate or age-restricted content.
The bill, and others like it, is one solution to unfettered content consumption among minors. Two other bills in Kansas attempt to address the same issue. House Substitute for Senate Bill 281 would restrict cellphone use in schools, and House Bill 2657 proposes a prohibition on social media access for kids younger than 16.
Kansas is among the first wave of states to attempt to pass such a law. A bill failed to pass the South Dakota Senate this week. Texas, Louisiana, Utah and most recently Alabamahave passed similar laws, but the laws in Texas and Utah are tied up in court.
Brittany Jones, president Kansas Family Voice, said Kansas’ bill is different. It’s based in contract law, not First Amendment law, she said. The bill translates what happens when people patronize a liquor store or tobacco shop for the digital world, she said.
Alternatives to app store age verification laws include app-by-app age verification requirements. John Read, senior policy counsel for the Digital Childhood Alliance, said there are 800,000 developers in the Apple App Store, and self-reporting ages from app to app can lead to abuse.
SB 372 would require age verification upon registering a phone with an app store. If a minor creates an account, it must be linked to a parent’s account and the parent must give consent to each download. Users are already required to input payment information and personal data upon owning a phone. The bill would mandate beginning in 2027 that app stores ensure age is one of those pieces of personal data.
Read, who was one one of the bill’s principal proponents, said Apple already created the code because of similar verification laws overseas. The alliance has filed complaints with the Federal Trade Commission against Apple and Google. Read did not answer questions from committee members about the alliance’s funding sources.
Representatives for the tech companies did not testify at the House hearings.
Rep. Leah Howell, a Derby Republican, said she was approached by lobbyists from Google and Netflix. Rep. Dan Osman, an Overland Park Democrat, said Apple, Netflix and the Digital Childhood Alliance approached him. Rep. Steven Howe, a Salina Republican, said Netflix and Google approached him, too.
“There’s a lot of money floating around out there,” Howe told Kansas Reflector.
At the end of the Tuesday hearing, as legislators were walking out the door, Howe asked legislative staff to record whether any opponents to the bill were lobbying on behalf of Roblox, a gaming platform that has a registered lobbyist in Kansas.
Howe said after the hearing he was particularly interested in influence from Roblox, popular among young users and rated for age 9 and above, because it is one of the world’s main drivers of the video game market, fielding more than 10 billion hours of monthly engagement, according to a report from video game industry analyst Matthew Ball.
Roblox has fielded reports of grooming, which refers to a calculated approach building a relationship with a child for the purpose of sexual abuse or exploitation, said Robert Stuart, executive officer for the Kansas Bureau of Investigation, in written testimony.
The company has instituted safety features, Stuart said, but some companies place more emphasis than others on detecting grooming or extortion.
Rep. Bob Lewis, a Garden City Republican, said he spoke with lobbyists for Apple, who oppose the bill, and welcomed discussion he characterized as respectful and informative. Lewis, a lawyer, said following the Tuesday hearing he leaned in favor of the bill, citing his interest in protecting kids in the “new frontier” of the online world.
He specializes in representing victims of child sexual abuse. His firm, the New York-based Marsh Law Firm, is involved in multiple high-caliber lawsuits, including one in California that accuses some of the world’s colossal social media companies of designing their platforms to be addictive to young people.
Much of the opposition to SB 372 focused on data sensitivity and security and concern for duplicating existing parental controls that can safeguard kids against potentially harmful content and internet use.
Eric Stafford, president and CEO of the Kansas Chamber, argued the tools already exist to limit inappropriate content for minors.
“You can restrict apps. You can restrict content. You can restrict music,” he said.
The bill involves a liability shift onto app stores, Stafford said. He added that lawmakers “can’t legislate good parenting.”
Apple recently became a member of the Kansas Chamber, according to Stafford, but he asserted the Chamber formulated its stance on SB 372 independently.
The bill passed the Senate in a 34-6 vote on Feb. 18 with a mix of Republicans and Democrats opposed. The Senate modified the bill, removing a provision that would have allowed a pathway for civil rights of action, but a $7,500 minimum penalty for violations of the act remained.
The Kansas Attorney General’s Office, which supported the bill, recommended in written comments the Legislature increase the penalty to a $10,000 minimum to be consistent with existing enforcement statutes.
