[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 86 (Friday, June 26, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1251]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            INTRODUCTION OF THE DIGITAL JAMMING ACT OF 1998

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. EDWARD J. MARKEY

                            of massachusetts

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, June 25, 1998

  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Digital Jamming Act 
of 1998. The growing incidents of ``spamming,'' and ``cramming,'' and 
``slamming'' in our telecommunications arena represent an important 
series of consumer protection issues that need to be addressed by the 
Congress or by appropriate regulatory agencies. I am using the term 
``jamming'' to describe all 3 consumer protection issues because they 
are all unscrupulous practices that either jam consumers' bills with 
unauthorized services or jam our nation's telecommunications networks 
with unwanted messages in the digital era.
  These are, in fact, particularly thorny issues to address because 
there are multiple players involved in resolving these problems in the 
telecommunications industry, and in the Federal Government, and at the 
State level as well. It is hard to find someone these days who has not 
had first hand experience with one or all of these issues. When someone 
is ``slammed'' their telephone carrier is changed without proper 
authorization and it usually leads to higher bills for slammed 
customers and a big hassle in clearing everything up. When someone is 
subjected to ``cramming''--their telephone bill gets filled up with all 
sorts of new and unauthorized charges. And with the rise of the 
Internet, the growth of unsolicited electronic messages--or spamming--
is becoming the daily, nuisance experience for countless people online 
and a burden on Internet service providers who often have their systems 
swamped with spamming traffic. Unfortunately, all three of these issues 
appear to be growing problems.
  The issue of slamming was addressed in the Telecommunications Act of 
1996 where unauthorized switches in carrier selection were prohibited 
and a liability provision for unauthorized charges included in Section 
258 of the Communications Act. The FCC is currently in the process of 
developing rules to further implement that provision and protect the 
public. I want to encourage the Commission's efforts to crack down on 
this problem and look forward to the Commission completing any rule 
revisions in the near future. Moreover, ``cramming'' is increasingly a 
billing quandary for consumers across the country who are taken 
advantage of and I believe that consumers deserve protection from this 
rising telecommunications affliction.

  Finally, the issue of spamming is quickly becoming the bane of many 
online surfers who log onto their computer only to find their mailbox 
stuffed with unsolicited electronic messages. Beyond the nuisance 
factor that massive spamming creates, it also engenders problems 
associated with the unsolicited sending of indecent material and online 
fraud perpetrated by a cadre of high tech hucksters who attempt to dupe 
people online into parting with their money. In addition, the millions 
of unsolicited e-mail messages clog up the networks of many online 
providers and this does a terrible disservices to other subscribers to 
such service and to online commerce generally.
  The legislation I am introducing today seeks to help address the 
spamming issue by building upon work that the Congress performed a few 
years ago in addressing unsolicited telephone marketing and which is 
codified in Section 227 of the Communications Act. In that earlier 
legislation, Congress granted authority to the Commission and 
authorized, at the Commission's discretion, the creation of a ``do-not-
call'' database for people who no longer wanted to receive unsolicited 
telemarketing at home. The Commission elected not to utilize this 
authority in its rulemaking at that time.
  I believe it may be worth exploring however, the creation of ``do-
not-contact'' databases for people who want to put a ``no soliciting'' 
sign in cyberspace and stop the flood of junk e-mail. This could be 
done at the Federal or State levels and technology has advanced to a 
point where this might be a cost-effective and efficient remedy.
  The legislation I will introduce will also include provisions 
building upon Section 258 of the Act to help address slamming and 
cramming issues. I believe it may be worthwhile to expand liability 
provisions contained in Section 258 to permit double damages to be paid 
to consumers--in addition to compensating ``slammed'' carriers for lost 
business--as a deterrent to slammers. In addition, the legislation 
tasks the NTIA in the Commerce Department with the job of conducting an 
analysis into third-party verification clearinghouses. Because those 
authorizing switches in carrier selection have a financial interest in 
making switches, it may be useful to explore the feasibility of giving 
the verification or authorization functions for switching carriers to a 
third party--either at the State or Federal levels. NTIA is asked to 
report back to the Congress on the feasibility and desirability of such 
a system.
  Mr. Speaker, I look forward to working with my colleagues in the 
House Commerce Committee, Chairman Bliley, Mr. Dingell, Chairman 
Tauzin, Mr. Gordon, and others on addressing these issues, as well as 
my other colleagues in the House who have expressed concern on these 
matters.

                          ____________________