[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 96 (Wednesday, June 26, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7027-S7028]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

       By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mrs. Boxer):
  S. 1908. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit 
the sale of personal information about children without their parents' 
consent, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


 The Children's Privacy Protection and Parental Empowerment Act of 1996

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to urge my colleagues to 
support this simple but strong legislation to protect our children.
  This bill, which I introduce with Senator Boxer, would provide three 
simple protections:
  First, the bill would prohibit commercial list brokers from selling 
personal information about children under 16 to anyone, without first 
getting the parent's consent.
  All kinds of information about our children--more facts than most of 
us might think or hope for--is rapidly becoming available through these 
list brokers. It is only a matter of time before this information 
begins to fall into the wrong hands.
  Recently, a reporter in Los Angeles was easily able to purchase 
parent's names, birth months and addresses for 5,500 children aged 1-12 
in a particular neighborhood. The reporter used the name of a 
fictitious company, gave a nonworking telephone number, had no credit 
card or check, and identified herself as ``Richard Allen Davis,'' the 
notorious murderer of Polly Klaas. When ordering the list, the company 
representative simply told her, ``Oh, you have a famous name,'' and 
sent her the information COD. This is simply unacceptable.
  Second, the bill would give parents the authority to demand 
information from the list brokers who traffic in the personal data of 
their children--brokers will be required to provide parents with a list 
of all those to whom they sold information about the child, and must 
also tell the parent precisely what kind of information was sold.
  If this personal information is out there, and brokers are buying and 
selling it back and forth, it is only reasonable that we allow parents 
to find out what information has been sold and to whom that information 
has been given.
  Finally, this bill would prohibit list brokers from using prison 
labor to input personal information. This seems like common sense to 
most of us, but unfortunately the use of prison labor is not currently 
prohibited.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a May 6, 1996, Wall 
Street Journal article be printed in the Record. This recent Wall 
Street Journal article described the terrible experience of Beverly 
Dennis, an Ohio grandmother who filled out a detailed marketing 
questionnaire about her buying habits for a mail-in survey. She filled 
out the questionnaire when she was told that she might receive free 
product samples and helpful information. Rather than receiving product 
information, however, she soon began to receive sexually explicit, 
fact-specific letters from a convicted rapist serving time.
  The rapist, writing from his prison cell, had learned the very 
private, intimate details about her life because he was keypunching her 
personal questionnaire data into a computer for a subcontractor. Ms. 
Dennis received letters with elaborate sexual fantasies, woven around 
personal facts provided by her in the questionnaire. This bill would 
have prevented the situation from ever occurring.

[[Page S7028]]

  This bill is really very simple. Some marketing companies may be 
unhappy that the Government is trying to legislate how they do 
business, but we have to weigh the safety and well-being of our 
children against the small inconvenience of requiring parental consent 
in these cases. Given the rapidly changing nature of the marketing 
business and the ways in which child molesters and other criminals 
operate, this bill is an important step in protecting our kids from 
those who would do them harm.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1908

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Children's Privacy 
     Protection and Parental Empowerment Act of 1996''.

     SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN ACTIVITIES RELATING TO 
                   PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT CHILDREN.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 89 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end of the following:

     Sec. 1822. Sale of personal information about children

       ``(a) Whoever, in or affecting interstate or foreign 
     commerce--
       ``(1) being a list broker, knowingly--
       ``(A) sells, purchases, or receives remuneration for 
     providing personal information about a child knowing that 
     such information pertains to a child without the consent of a 
     parent of that child; or
       ``(B) conditions any sale or service to a child or to that 
     child's parent on the granting of such a consent;
       ``(2) being a list broker, knowingly fails to comply with 
     the request of a parent--
       ``(A) to disclose the source of personal information about 
     that parent's child;
       ``(B) to disclose all information that has been sold or 
     otherwise disclosed by that list broker about that child; or
       ``(C) to disclose the identity of all persons who whom the 
     list broker has sold or otherwise disclosed personal 
     information about that child;
       ``(3) being a person who, using any personal information 
     about a child in the course of commerce that was obtained for 
     commercial purposes, has directly contacted that child or a 
     parent of that child to offer a commercial product or service 
     to that child, knowingly fails to comply with the request of 
     a parent--
       ``(A) to disclose to the parent the source of personal 
     information about that parent's child;
       ``(B) to disclose all information that has been sold or 
     otherwise disclosed by that person about that child; or
       ``(C) to disclose the identity of all persons to whom such 
     a person has sold or otherwise disclosed personal information 
     about that child;
       ``(4) knowingly uses prison inmate labor, or any worker who 
     is registered pursuant to title XVII of the Violent Crime 
     Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, for data processing 
     of personal information about children; or
       ``(5) knowingly distributes or receives any personal 
     information about a child, knowing or having reason to 
     believe that the information will be used to abuse the child 
     or physically to harm the child;

     shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 
     one year, or both.
       ``(b) A child or the parent of that child with respect to 
     whom a violation of this section occurs may in a civil action 
     obtain appropriate relief, including statutory money damages 
     of not less than $1,000. The court shall award a prevailing 
     plaintiff in a civil action under this subsection a 
     reasonable attorney's fee as a part of the costs.
       ``(c) As used in this section--
       ``(1) the term `child' means a person who has not attained 
     the age of 16 years;
       ``(2) the term ``parent'' includes a legal guardian;
       ``(3) the term `personal information' means information 
     (including name, address telephone number, social security 
     number, and physical description) about an individual 
     identified as a child, that would suffice to physically 
     locate and contact that individual; and
       ``(4) the term `list broker' means a person who, in the 
     course of business, provides mailing lists, computerized or 
     telephone reference services, or the like containing 
     personnel information of children.''
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 89 of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``1822. Sale of personal information about children.''.
                                                                    ____


              [From the Wall Street Journal, May 6, 1996]

                Privacy Issue Raised in Direct-Mail Case

                          (By James P. Miller)

       Beverly Dennis thought she'd receive free product samples 
     through the mail when she filled out a detailed Metromail 
     Corp. questionnaire about her buying habits. Instead, she got 
     a disturbing letter from an imprisoned rapist.
       Although Ms. Dennis didn't know it at the time, prison 
     inmates were processing data from the questionnaires for the 
     direct-marketing unit of R.R. Donnelley & Sons Inc. The 
     ``highly offensive, sexually graphic and threatening'' letter 
     came from a Texas inmate who learned about her life while 
     keypunching data from the questionnaires, according to a 
     lawsuit Ms. Dennis filed last month in state court in Travis 
     County, Texas.
       The suit accuses Metromail of fraud for not telling Ms. 
     Dennis that prisoners would process the surveys and alleges 
     that the disclosure of personal information to violent 
     criminals constitutes and ``intentional or reckless 
     disregard'' of her safety. The suit seeks class-action status 
     on behalf of all consumers whose privacy interests were 
     allegedly injured in the same way.
       The inmate's 12-page letter ``referred to the magazines of 
     interest to Ms. Dennis, her interest in physical fitness, the 
     fact that she is divorced, her income level, her birthday, 
     and the personal care products she uses,'' according to her 
     lawsuit. In one chilling passage quoted in the lawsuit, the 
     convict spun out a sexual fantasy involving a brand of soap 
     Ms. Dennis had mentioned in the survey.
       The 1994 episode underscores the dangers of giving prison 
     inmates access to highly personal information about 
     consumers. ``It's an important case,'' says Marc Rotenberg, 
     of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, a 
     privacy advocacy group. ``It goes right to the question of 
     privacy safeguards in the marketing industry.''
       Mr. Rotenberg, who teaches privacy law at Georgetown 
     University, says the ``novel questions'' raised by the suit 
     include ``how you establish harm in the misuse of personal 
     information, as well as what the appropriate limitations 
     are'' when handling personal data.
       Michael Lenett, an attorney with the Cuneo Law Group in 
     Washington, D.C., who is representing Ms. Dennis, says the 
     defendants ``would have had to know that disclosure of 
     personal private information to convicted felons would run a 
     very serious risk of possible harm.''
       A Donnelly spokesman says senior management didn't know 
     that prisoners were entering the data because the work was 
     handled through a contractor. Senior management learned of 
     the arrangement when Ms. Dennis received the letter and ``we 
     ordered it stopped,'' he says. Using prisoners to handle 
     consumer data, he says, ``wasn't Metromail's policy then, it 
     isn't now, and it never will be.'' He said he couldn't 
     comment on the suit's specific allegations.
       The suit names as defendants Metromail and its parent, 
     along with the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Also 
     named is closely held Computerized Image & Data Systems Inc., 
     the tiny Roslyn Heights, N.Y., concern that contracted to 
     process Metromail's survey data and then subcontracted the 
     work to the Texas prison system.
       A spokesman for the Texas correctional system said 
     prisoners still process data, but declined comment on the 
     suit. A Computerized Image official said he couldn't 
     immediately respond, but he said the company no longer uses 
     prisoners to process data.
       Inmates in the prison systems of more than a dozen states 
     routinely process data, answer 800-number calls for 
     information, even work as telemarketers. Electronic Privacy's 
     Mr. Rotenberg says the suit will probably shed some light on 
     the questions of how much sensitive consumer information is 
     being handled by prisoners, and how adequate the safeguards 
     are.
       Metromail gathers information about consumers through a 
     variety of sources, such as new-car registrations, birth 
     notices and title transfers. It sells the lists to commercial 
     customers, such as telemarketers.
       Ms. Dennis provided the information about herself in 
     response to Metromail circulars that suggested national 
     grocery-product concerns were prepared to send free product 
     samples and coupons to consumers who got on Metromail's 
     ``Shopper Mail list'' by filling out the questionnaire.
       If it said [on the circular] it would be sent to a prison, 
     I certainly wouldn't have filled it out,'' the Ohio 
     grandmother said in an interview, adding that when she 
     received the letter, she was ``terribly frightened.''

                          ____________________