[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 45 (Thursday, March 28, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3146-S3147]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT

  Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I would like to make reference to this, and 
will ask for this to be printed in the Record. I notice with great 
interest a full-page ad in the New York Times of March 26, 1996, and 
the startling information here in dark type is ``Does Sex Turn You 
off?'' Then it goes on to say--this is published by Penthouse--entitled 
``The Facts of Life.''
  It says:

       It is a touchy subject. But an important one. Especially if 
     you're a marketer who wants to reach men. If you've never 
     experienced the satisfaction of advertising in Penthouse, 
     there are some facts you should know. Facts that help explain 
     why Penthouse is a savvy business decision, and why it 
     performs as well as it does. For starters, Penthouse's 
     efficiency far surpasses Playboy, GQ, Sports Illustrated and 
     Esquire. We also reach a higher concentration of 25 to 49 
     year old men. And at newsstands, where a full purchase price 
     helps gauge a magazine's true value to readers, Penthouse's 
     sales are routinely on top.
       What's more, study after study has found that the more 
     involved readers are with a magazine's editorial, the more 
     they're involved with its advertising. And no magazine's 
     readers are more involved than Penthouse's. The appeal and 
     leadership of Penthouse extends beyond print, however. On 
     site on the Internet --http://www.penthousemag.com_attracts 
     over 80,000 people daily--(not hits, people.) This not only 
     makes Penthouse one of the Internet's most popular sites, it 
     enables us to guarantee advertisers an audience of 2.4 
     million people every month. This proposition is encouraging 
     more and more marketers to take advantage of both Penthouse 
     Magazine and Penthouse Internet. If you're an advertiser who 
     wants the special stimulation Penthouse offers, contact Ms. 
     Audrey Arnold, Publisher, at 212-702-6000.

  And it says down here:

       Penthouse, The Facts Of life.

  Mr. President, when Congress considered the Communications Decency 
Act, commonly called the CDA, as part of the telecommunications bill, 
opponents of the Communications Decency Act raised all kinds of 
concerns that passage of the Communications Decency Act would restrict 
free speech of adults and end the commercial viability of the Internet.
  Let me repeat that last part again: And end the commercial viability 
of the Internet.
  The Washington Post in this regard printed an editorial that the Exon 
Communications Decency Act would interfere with the matter of making 
money on the Internet.
  I have only cited the article that appeared in a full-page ad in the 
New York Times and intend to make these remarks tonight to thank the 
Penthouse magazine for printing that full-page ad, which is their 
right--pretty expensive but it is their right, and obviously they are a 
pretty good free enterprise, money-making concern. But I think it 
points out more than anything else how all of the opponents to the 
Communications Decency Act are way off base.

  The recent full-page ad in the New York Times both refutes and makes 
meaningless the claims of the elimination of free speech of adults and 
the end of commercial viability on the Internet. Penthouse Magazine, 
which until enactment of the Communications Decency Act, offered free 
adult fare to Internet users of any age, was one of the first purveyors 
of sexual material to take steps to comply with the new law. That law 
is clearly working and has already been instituted to create a great 
success story.
  Before our law was introduced and before it was passed, there was 
thunderous silence, thunderous silence, Mr. President, from both the 
industry and those loud voices that are now hammering away at the 
Communications Decency Act.
  Published reports have indicated that Penthouse and Hustler Internet 
sites, referencing great numbers in the wording from the ad that I just 
read, and maybe some others now require, after passage of the act, a 
card to access these offerings.
  Like it or not, Mr. President, this is the type of electronic 
pornography that is legal and constitutionally protected for adults. If 
their actions are as reported of requiring a credit card before you can 
access this particular part of the Internet that is widely, widely used 
according to Penthouse, if they have indeed instituted the procedure of 
having a credit card, then Penthouse and Hustler and their like appear 
to be in compliance with the new law, and I applaud them for that.
  Adult material remains available then to adults but children are not 
provided pornography. This is precisely what the Communications Decency 
Act was designed to do, and it is working. The fully anticipated court 
challenge that is now underway apparently is not aware of this fact or 
it would be a defense on its face to some of the constitutional 
challenges that are being made.
  The fear that keeping pornography away from children on the Internet 
would destroy this great medium and all of those charges that have been 
made are erroneous, they are unfounded, and it is nonsense.
  During the year the Communications Decency Act was fully debated, 
Internet use doubled, and Internet growth has continued since the 
passage of the bill. Already, AT&T, MCI, and several local telephone 
companies have announced plans to offer easy Internet access and the 
Internet is coming to help other media as well and will come as I 
understand it to cable and satellite television.
  Penthouse boasts, as I have just read, that it attracts over 80,000 
people daily to its Internet site and an audience of 2.4 million each 
month. The ad's enthusiasm for the Internet is in keeping with the 
Communications Decency Act. We know that great system called the 
Internet that provides information and help to a lot of people is not 
only important but I simply say that the scare tactics that continue to 
be used by the Communications Decency Act's opponents are not well 
founded. It is not censorship, the word opponents of the Communications 
Decency Act throw around at will, to responsibly protect our children 
from pornography and, I might add, pedophiles.
  The Communications Decency Act was fully debated, extensively 
negotiated and carefully designed to strike

[[Page S3147]]

the right balance between the protection of children and the growth of 
this exciting and promising new technology. Revisionists like to paint 
a picture of Congress rushing to judgment on computer technology 
especially as it affects the spread of pornography. In my nearly 18 
years in the Senate, I have won passage of many pieces of legislation 
dealing with the most important issues of the day including bills 
affecting national security, law enforcement, transportation, safety 
and deficit reduction. No bill that I have worked on has had as much 
attention, discussion or debate as the Communications Decency Act. For 
one full year, the Nation has talked about the Communications Decency 
Act. And that is good.
  The hands-off crowd, though, have argued that protection of children 
was exclusively and totally the responsibility of the parent. For 
families to safely enjoy the benefits of the Internet, the family had 
to be there turning on the computer or turning it off, making sure that 
whatever the child brought up on the screen was acceptable to them.
  The Communications Decency Act does not lessen--and I emphasize 
again, Mr. President, does not lessen--the need for parents to be 
vigilant, ever vigilant. But, by putting the law on the side of the 
families and the children, the Communications Decency Act recognized, 
as our First Lady might say, ``It Takes A Village.''
  I am also pleased that the President of the United States and the 
U.S. Department of Justice fully support the Communications Decency 
Act. I am delighted that the computer industry has been working to 
develop blocking software and parental control software as well. Before 
the Communications Decency act was introduced, these products did not 
exist. But all the blocking software in the world should not absolve an 
adult from the responsibility for allowing the abuse or the corruption 
of a child. The Communications Decency Act holds those who attempt to 
harm children responsible for their acts.
  To all of those who are worried, the Communications Decency Act is 
law, and the Internet, in the meantime, is doing just fine. They should 
be applauding the article and ad that I read, published by Penthouse.
  Adults still have access to their legal vices. But most important, 
children are steadily gaining protection when they travel on the 
information superhighway.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter from the 
President's counsel to me be printed in the Record, and I yield the 
floor.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                              The White House,

                                    Washington, February 28, 1996.
     Senator Jim Exon,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Exon: Thank you for your recent letter to the 
     President concerning the Telecommunications Reform Act of 
     1996. The President has asked me to respond on his behalf.
       On February 8, 1996, the President was pleased to be able 
     to sign the historic Telecommunications Reform Act into law. 
     I know that the President was equally pleased that you were 
     able to participate in the event.
       Your letter also referred to Title V of the 
     Telecommunications Reform Act, otherwise known as the 
     Communications Decency Act. As you know, the President is 
     committed to defending efforts to protect children from 
     harmful material whether it is targeted at them via the 
     computer or other media. Accordingly, the President firmly 
     supports the Communications Decency Act.
       As you accurately predicted, various challenges to the 
     Communications Decency Act have been filed. The Department of 
     Justice is vigorously defending the Act against these 
     challenges as a proper and narrowly tailored exercise of 
     Congress' power to regulate the exposure of children to 
     computer pornography.
       Again, thank you for your letter and for your expression of 
     support for our endeavors to defend the Communications 
     Decency Act.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Jack Quinn,
     Counsel to the President.

                          ____________________