[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 29 (Wednesday, March 16, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: March 16, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                           TELEPHONE PRIVACY

  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to praise an action taken by 
the FCC. Its order on Caller ID, which requires per call blocking, will 
ensure that consumers nationwide retain at least a moderate amount of 
telephone privacy.
  In 1989, the Subcommittee on Technology and the Law opened the book 
on a new issue: Caller ID and its varying consequences. And while we 
thought the development of this new technology could lead to real 
benefits, some of us were aware that, if left unregulated, Caller ID 
had the potential to invade our privacy. Back then, we were among the 
lonely few. But 5 years of persistence has brought our view today to 
the majority. And last week's FCC action brings us closer to the final 
chapter of this story.
  This ruling was crucial because unregulated Caller ID would invade 
our privacy and reduce our rights. People should be able, for example, 
to call a crisis hotline, a business, or even the IRS to ask for help 
without having their numbers displayed. Forcing people to display their 
numbers every time they make a call, in my view, is really undesirable.
  Fortunately, there is a simple way to realize the benefits of Caller 
ID while avoiding its potential problems: Simply let consumers decide 
when they want to reveal their phone numbers and when they do not. The 
technology gives us this choice. Per call blocking allows anyone to 
press a few digits on the phone and block the display of their number. 
And with this option, people can display their numbers when calling 
friends and family, but they can keep their phone number confidential 
whenever they want.
  Recognizing that blocking was necessary to ensure privacy with Caller 
ID, I introduced the Telephone Privacy Act in 1989 and again this year 
with Senator Brown. Although we have yet to turn our legislation into 
law, our bill has nevertheless provided the spark for State 
legislatures and Governments to act.
  Indeed, over the last few years, most States have come around to our 
position; 37 States now require companies offering Caller ID to offer 
free per call or per line blocking. And last week, as I mentioned, the 
FCC ruled that telephone companies should provide Caller ID blocking 
for interstate calls.
  The FCC has also made it clear that companies providing 800-number 
and 900-number service cannot reuse or sell callers' telephone numbers 
to third parties unless callers give their consent. This was also a key 
component of the Telephone Privacy Act.
  As a result, the FCC ruling helps protect the privacy of callers 
nationwide. It moves Caller ID technology toward a uniform Federal 
standard rather than a patchwork of inconsistent State laws. It 
basically does by regulation what we have tried to do by legislation. 
The FCC action does not cover calls made within individual States but 
almost every State has looked at Caller ID by now and has proposed 
blocking. We are glad to share the credit with State legislators and 
Federal regulators.
  Though this ruling has many positive implications, there are still 
serious questions about the legality of Caller ID. Most experts and 
some State courts have concluded that Caller ID is an illegal trap and 
trace device.
  So we still need to ensure the legality of Caller ID, and I will work 
to have that done this year.
  In sum, Mr. President, the FCC action helps us expand use of Caller 
ID nationwide while protecting the privacy rights of individuals. We 
still need to clarify Caller ID's legality under Federal wiretap laws, 
and we still need to encourage every State to approve Caller ID only 
with blocking. But the FCC's recent action is an important step 
forward, and it does deserve our applause.
  Mr. President, before I conclude, I wish to mention the work of a 
brilliant young lawyer on my staff who was instrumental in bringing 
this issue to Congress and, by implication, in protecting the privacy 
of every American. His name is Keenan Peck, and his life was tragically 
taken away from us in 1990, just before our first scheduled hearing on 
Caller ID.
  Mr. President, all of us who knew Keenan miss his intelligence, his 
warm sense of humor, his dedication to civil rights and civil 
liberties. But we know now more than ever that his legacy will live on.
  Thank you, Mr. President. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The absence of a quorum having been suggested, 
the clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, what is the pending business?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair advises the Senator that the Senate 
is currently in morning business.

                          ____________________