[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 135 (Thursday, September 26, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H11319-H11321]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               INTERNET ELECTION INFORMATION ACT OF 1996

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill

[[Page H11320]]

(H.R. 3700) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to 
permit interactive computer services to provide their facilities free 
of charge to candidates for Federal offices for the purpose of 
disseminating campaign information and enhancing public debate, as 
amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 3700

         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 ``Internet Election 
     Information Act of 1996''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) For the purposes of enhancing public debate and 
     awareness, candidates for Federal office should be encouraged 
     to provide voters with meaningful and substantive information 
     about their candidacy and important public policy issues.
       (2) The Internet and other interactive computer services 
     did not exist when the laws that currently govern Federal 
     elections were enacted, and these services represent a new 
     medium where voters can obtain meaningful and substantive 
     information about issues and candidates.

     SEC. 3. EXEMPTION OF DONATED INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SERVICES 
                   FROM COVERAGE UNDER FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN 
                   ACT OF 1971.

       (a) Exemption From Treatment as Contribution.--Section 
     301(8)(B) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 431(8)(B)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (xiii);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of clause (xiv) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new clause:
       ``(xv) the value of services provided without charge to a 
     candidate by an interactive computer service (defined as any 
     information service that is generally available to the public 
     or access software provider that provides or enables computer 
     access by multiple users to computer server, including 
     specifically a service or system that provides access to the 
     Internet and such systems operated or services offered by 
     libraries or educational institutions) in permitting the 
     candidate to use its facilities for distributing election or 
     candidate information, posting position papers, responding to 
     campaign related inquiries, soliciting lawful contributions, 
     convening electronic campaign forums, or otherwise lawfully 
     utilizing the resources of the interactive computer service, 
     if the service permits its facilities to be used for such 
     purposes under the same terms and conditions by all other 
     candidates in the election for the same office.''.
       (b) Exemption From Treatment as Expenditure.--Section 
     301(9)(B) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 431(9)(B)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ix);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of clause (x) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new clause:
       ``(xi) any direct costs incurred by an interactive computer 
     service (defined as any information service that is generally 
     available to the public or access software provider that 
     provides or enables computer access by multiple users to 
     computer server, including specifically a service or system 
     that provides access to the Internet and such systems 
     operated or services offered by libraries or educational 
     institutions) in permitting the candidate to use its 
     facilities for distributing election or candidate 
     information, posting position papers, responding to campaign 
     related inquiries, soliciting lawful contributions, convening 
     electronic campaign forums, or otherwise lawfully utilizing 
     the resources of the interactive computer service, if the 
     service permits its facilities to be used for such purposes 
     under the same terms and conditions by all other candidates 
     in the election for the same office.''.

     SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       The amendments shall take effect on the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Thomas] and the gentleman from California [Mr. Fazio] 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California [Mr. Thomas].
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, this piece of legislation passed the 
Committee on House Oversight on September 19, 1996, by unanimous vote, 
and we will probably see additional legislation in the near future 
dealing with what all of us now are becoming more and more aware is a 
fundamental change in the way in which Americans, indeed many people 
around the world, communicate.
  The Federal Elections Campaign Act, as it was written, would not 
allow folks to provide equal access to the Internet, even though it 
would have been done on a universal availability basis for any 
candidates in a particular election. The gentleman from Washington [Mr. 
White], who is chair of the Internet Caucus, quite wisely introduced 
legislation which would allow this to occur, notwithstanding the fact 
that under other circumstances it might appear to be a corporate 
contribution which is banned under the Federal Election Act.
  I think all of us would agree that the ability to enhance 
communication and provide information that would otherwise not be 
available to voters through access to the Internet is indeed something 
that should be allowed, and H.R. 3700 does just that.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to Chairman Thomas' explanation of 
the bill. I think we can all agree that the goals of this bill are 
laudable. We must encourage the development and use of new technologies 
like the Internet. Therefore, I intend to support H.R. 3700.
  I do have some concerns about the bill, and because of the fact that 
it may not become law in this Congress, I will simply include those in 
my remarks for the Record at this time.
  Mr. Speaker, we all agree that the goals of this bill are laudable. 
We must encourage the development and use of new technologies like the 
Internet. Therefore, I will support H.R. 3700.
  The Internet has changed forever the way that Americans communicate. 
As such, there is no doubt that the Internet will play an important 
part in future congressional campaigns.
  On the Internet, we can speak directly to our constituents--without 
the filter of the news media or the high cost of television. Moreover, 
our constituents can respond directly to us--without going through 
pollsters or reporters or other intermediaries. These changes are 
profound, and they are profoundly good for our democracy.
  While I support H.R. 3700, and expect that it will pass the House, 
there is little chance that the Senate will consider this bill or that 
it will become law. It is far more likely that we will revisit this 
issue in the early days of the 105th Congress. With that in mind, I 
believe there are several areas in which this bill can be improved.
  The bill, for example, does not really limit who may provide free 
services to candidates. This creates a loophole for the expanded use of 
soft money. In particular, the bill would permit a political party 
committee or an interest group to use soft money to set up an 
interactive computer service to communicate with Members about Federal 
elections. This stands in stark contrast to the rules governing 
broadcast and print media, which cannot be owned by political parties 
or political committees.
  Similarly, H.R. 3700 has no real limit on the services that can be 
provided for free. This is particularly risky as Internet technology 
advances in ways we cannot anticipate. For example, companies soon will 
offer long distance telephone service over the Internet. This bill 
presumably would allow them to provide free long distance service to 
candidates. Even now, the lack of limits could cause problems, for 
example, a service provider could send employees out to set up and 
administer home pages for candidates.
  Now does H.R. 3700 truly guarantee equal access for all candidates. 
Although the bill requires a service provider to make the same services 
available to all candidates, it does not require a service provider to 
inform all candidates that free services are available. In addition, 
the bill permits service providers to pick and choose which elections 
they will participate in. That choice can be manipulated to benefit 
favored candidates. for example, a service provider could choose only 
to provide free access for Republican primaries--or races involving 
candidates that the company wants to influence.
  Finally, H.R. 3700 lacks any meaningful enforcement mechanism to deal 
with violations. Presumably, a candidate who is denied access would be 
required to file a complaint with the FEC, and then to wait months or 
even years for remedial action. Under this scenario, remedial action 
likely cannot be taken until an election is over and the dispute is 
moot. This same problem permeates the election law.
  In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 3700 because it will 
increase communication between candidates and voters--and that 
communication lies at the heart of our democratic process. However, 
H.R. 3700 has serious potential problems, and I hope that we can 
correct those problems before the bill becomes law.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, yielding myself such time as I may consume, 
I do understand the concerns of the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Fazio]. This is an area in which we are beginning to learn our way as 
to what is, or is not appropriate.
  For example, during its meeting on September 19 the Committee on 
House Oversight unanimously approved an amendment which is included in 
the bill, and the amendment clarifies the definition of ``interactive 
computer services,'' to ensure it applies only to providers of Internet 
software and information services that are available to the public.

[[Page H11321]]

  The line between private and public continues to be explored as we 
move legislation, and we will be very careful as we examine 
legislation, as the gentleman from California [Mr. Fazio] indicated, to 
make sure that what we intend to do, we do, and no more.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WHITE. Mr. Speaker, until about 20 months ago I had never held 
public office before. I ran for Congress because I felt that it was 
time to make some changes to the way our Government works and to make 
our Government smaller, more open, and more efficient.
  On my first day in public office, I voted for a package of reforms 
that made some much needed changes to the way Congress did business. We 
voted to apply all laws to Congress, we voted to cut committee staff by 
one-third, we set term limits for committee chairs, and we got rid of 
three House committees.
  That was only on the first day.
  Over the past 20 months this Congress has worked hard to make some 
much needed changes to our Federal laws. We worked to change our 
Superfund law so that we do a better job of cleaning up hazardous waste 
sites, we worked to change our welfare system to encourage work and 
discourage dependency, and we worked to reform our telecommunications 
laws in order to eliminate Government regulated monopolies. We did not 
accomplish everything we set out to do but we did make considerable 
progress in changing the way our Government works.
  Today, I am pleased that my colleagues are continuing their 
commitment to reform by supporting the Internet Election Information 
Act, a bill I introduced earlier this year to amend the current Federal 
Election Campaign Act [FECA] of 1971.
  This bill is not as significant as the passage of our first day 
reforms or our welfare reform bill, but this reform is needed in order 
to give voters more information and more access to the positions held 
by candidates for Federal office.
  This bill is necessary in order to update our current Federal 
campaign laws. The current laws were passed in the early 1970's before 
the Internet was a widely used medium. Today, people use the Internet 
to send and receive information. In my office, the Internet is a 
valuable tool for providing my constituents with more information and 
for allowing the people in my district to communicate with my office. 
As technology continues to change, we need to make sure that the 
Federal Government is doing what it can to keep up with those changes.
  That is why I introduced the Internet Election Information Act. It's 
time to debug our Federal election laws in order to bring the Federal 
Government into the 21st century. With a simple technical change to the 
law we can help promote more open debate in cyberspace. This change 
will give Federal candidates--challengers and incumbents alike--the 
chance to use the Internet to bring their message and ideas directly to 
the American people.
  Under this bill, the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 will be 
amended to allow interactive computer services to provide free access 
to their online resources for campaign purposes. The bill allows online 
services to include: First, election or candidate information; second, 
candidate position papers; third, responses to campaign questions; 
fourth, solicitations of lawful contributions; and fifth, conveyance of 
electronic campaign forums.
  But this is not an incumbent protection plan as so many of the 
campaign finance reform bills that have been introduced in Congress. 
Instead, the bill requires that all services must be offered to all 
candidates for the same office under the same terms and conditions. 
It's a very simple change that will produce very significant results.
  In closing I want to state that this bill in no way replaces the need 
for a major overhaul of our campaign finance laws. As I have said time 
and time again in this Chamber and to my constituents--we need to 
dramatically reform our campaign finance laws in a way that does not 
favor incumbent members. That is still a goal I will continue to 
pursue.
  But today we will take a small step forward in changing our existing 
campaign finance laws in a way that will give voters more information, 
more access to Federal candidates and a better understanding of the 
issues being debated.
  Ms. DUNN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, let me first commend my 
colleague, Representative Rick White, for his leadership on high 
technology issues. His service and technological literacy is vitally 
important to an institution which, prior to the Republican-led 104th 
Congress, had still been using pencil and paper to balance its 
financial books. Mr. White has been an integral part of our efforts to 
bring the U.S. Congress into the 21st century.
  We have entered an era when the average American may sit down at a 
computer and gain access to information on anything from current 
research on the lifespan of the honeybee to what's playing at their 
neighborhood theater. Congress is changing with the times, and in that 
spirit, I rise in support of H.R. 3700, The Internet Election 
Information Act of 1996.
  This legislation enables online service providers to voluntarily 
offer web sites to candidate--without giving an advantage to any one 
candidate, and without the site being considered an in-king 
contribution to the campaign. This will enhance the ability of all 
Americans to make informed choices and to more fully participate in the 
democratic process.
  The laws governing campaign finance--written in the mid-1970's--were 
passed before the advent of the personal computer and the phenomenon 
known as the Internet. H.R. 3700 updates our campaign finance laws to 
account for the reality of this information-gathering mechanism. I 
support this legislation and praise Representative White for his 
foresight on the issue. The Internet Election Information Act of 1996 
achieves a commonsense change in Federal elections, while providing a 
solid benefit to all Americans interested in learning more about the 
candidates asking for the honor of their vote. The power of knowledge 
and access to information--without preference to any party or any 
candidate--is what this bill secures, and is another step forward 
toward governing in the 21st century.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, before us today is H.R. 3700, 
the Internet Election Information Act. This legislation will amend the 
Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to permit interactive computer 
services to provide their facilities free of charge to candidates for 
Federal offices.
  This legislation was introduced after Internet providers were barred 
from offering free websites to candidates during the last congressional 
election. The bill proposes changes to the Federal Election Campaign 
Act of 1971 to allow donated interactive computer services from 
coverage; and direct costs incurred by a donated interactive computer 
services from treatment as an expenditure if the service permits its 
facilities to be used for such purposes for all other candidates in the 
election for the same office.
  This bill is in the spirit of full Internet access and participation 
of our citizens in our Nation's political process.
  However, there are a few problems with the way this bill is drafted. 
There are no requirements that an interactive computer service provider 
inform the other candidates in a Federal election that they are 
supplying a website to their opponent. Further there are no provisions 
to ensure equal or nontechnical assistance for the development of a 
candidate's website in a Federal election.
  Campaign finance reform is an important issue to my Houston district 
constituents and their best interest are not served if we do not ensure 
fairness in the political process.
  I am a strong supporter of full Internet access and participation, 
but I would caution us to be careful with how we go about legislating 
this access.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for 
time, so I suppose if it were appropriate I would yield back the 
balance of my time and we could move on to the next item.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, yielding myself such time as I may consume, 
I would tell the gentleman from California it is probably appropriate, 
but this gentleman from California is looking for the author of the 
bill. But knowing our schedules and how difficult it is oftentimes, I 
will tell the gentleman if he yields back, I will yield back.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Thomas] that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 3700, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________