[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 151 (Wednesday, October 21, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2277-E2278]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               COMMERCE COMMITTEE CONCURS WITH H.R. 3494

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. TOM BLILEY

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, October 20, 1998

  Mr. BLILEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3494, ``the 
Protection of Children From Sexual Predators Act of 1998.'' Several 
days ago, the House concurred with amendments made to H.R. 3494 by the 
Senate. The legislation is now being prepared for the President's 
signature.
  In general, H.R. 3494 amends current law to strengthen the provisions 
that protect children from sexual predators. The amendments are needed 
to ensure that our laws keep pace with technology and that we do all we 
can to maintain the innocence of our children. While the actions of 
sexual predators are inexcusable, subjecting our children to this sick 
and harmful behavior is morally unacceptable. These practices are 
degrading and undermine the fabric of our society. H.R. 3494 will help 
put an end to such practices.
  The Commerce Committee has been integrally involved in a similar 
effort to protect children. The Commerce Committee has worked in the 
past with the Judiciary Committee to craft similar legislation. Thus, 
the Committee was pleased to see the development of H.R. 3494 as it 
proceeded through the legislative process and chose not to raise 
jurisdictional issues that may have prevented the legislation from 
moving forward. It is important, however, to highlight our 
jurisdictional interest in this important matter.
  I note that at least two sections of H.R. 3494, sections 401 and 901 
fall within the jurisdiction of the Commerce Committee. Section 401 
imposes a new prohibition on the transfer of obscene material to minors 
(under the age of 16). The scope of this provision would cover all 
transfers of such material, including via mail or telecommunications 
networks. Congress has already addressed this matter when it enacted 
section 223(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as added by title V 
of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (also known as the Communications 
Decency Act), which was jointly written by Members of the Commerce and 
Judiciary Committees.
  Section 223(a) provides that whoever makes any comment, request, 
suggestion, proposal, image or other communication which is obscene or 
indecent, knowing that the recipient of the communication is under 18 
years of age, shall be subject to criminal fines and penalties. While 
certain parts of section 223 have been successfully challenged in the 
court system, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of this 
provision relating to transmittal of obscene material. Thus, it seems 
that section 401 of H.R. 3494 would overlap with the provisions of 
section 223(a), providing an additional tool for prosecutors to use. In 
doing so, it should be clear that whether a prosecutor uses section 
223(a) of the Communications Act or section 401 of H.R. 3494 to address 
the increasing problem of the availability of obscene material to 
minors available through a telecommunications device, the Commerce 
Committee retains oversight responsibility.
  Section 901 provides for the Attorney General to contract with the 
National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study of computer-based 
technologies and other methods to address the problem of access to 
pornography by children. The provision requires the study address a 
number of issues, including the present-day computer-based technologies 
for controlling electronic transmission of pornographic images, 
research needed to develop effective computer-based technologies for 
such purposes, potential limitations of computer-based technologies for 
such purposes, and operational procedures necessary to ensure the 
computer-based technologies are effective.
  Over the last few years, the Commerce Committee has addressed 
computer-based technologies, including software screening programs and 
computer-based age verification technologies. In fact, section 901 is 
similar to the provisions added to H.R. 3783, the Child Online 
Protection Act (COPA), which recently passed in the House, to limit 
access to pornographic material by children. Section 104 of H.R. 3783 
establishes a Commission composed of government and industry experts, 
including representatives in the business of providing Internet 
filtering and blocking services and software, Internet access services 
and Internet labeling or ratings services.
  The purpose of the Commission is to study methods to help reduce 
access by minors to material that is harmful to minors on the Internet. 
The Commission is tasked with submitting a report to Congress which 
will include: (1) a description of the technologies and methods 
identified by the study and the results of the analysis of each such 
technology and method; (2) the conclusions and recommendations of the 
Commission regarding each such technology or method; (3) 
recommendations for legislative or administrative actions to implement 
the conclusions of the Commission; and (4) a description of the 
technologies or methods identified by the study that may meet the 
requirements for use as affirmative defenses provided under other 
provisions of law.
  I believe the Commerce Committee and the Judiciary Committee have 
arrived at complimentary solutions. The study authorized by H.R. 3494 
would fit well within the study authorized by H.R. 3873.
  While I am hopeful that H.R. 3783 will become law this Congress, it 
should be recognized that the Commerce Committee intends

[[Page E2278]]

to fully exercise its jurisdiction over future consideration of such 
matters, including involvement with the National Academy of Sciences 
study authorized under H.R. 3494. The Committee intends to monitor the 
implementation of section 401 by the Attorney General particularly as 
it relates to section 223(a) of the Communications Act. Support for 
H.R. 3494 passage this Congress should not be read as a lack of 
interest in the relevant jurisdictional matters.

                          ____________________