[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 45 (Monday, April 24, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3422-S3424]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. NELSON of Florida (for himself and Ms. Snowe):
  S. 2630. A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit 
manipulation of caller identification information; to the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, American consumers and public 
safety officials find themselves confronted by yet another fraudulent 
scam

[[Page S3423]]

in the digital age. This time the scam is known as caller I.D. 
``spoofing.'' Today I am introducing a bipartisan bill with Senator 
Snowe, the Truth in Caller I.D. Act of 2006, to put an end to 
fraudulent caller I.D. spoofing.
  It seems like every week we hear of new threats to our privacy and 
new ways to use the Internet to endanger consumers' financial security 
and physical safety. For several years now, I have been fighting back, 
pushing legislation to combat frauds such as identity theft and the 
unauthorized sale of consumer telephone records. Now it is time to 
fight caller I.D. spoofing.
  What is caller I.D. spoofing? It is a technique that allows a 
telephone caller to alter the phone number that appears on the 
recipient's caller I.D. system. In other words, spoofing allows someone 
to hide behind a misleading phone number to try to scam consumers or 
trick law enforcement officials. As the Miami Herald wrote on March 12, 
2006, caller I.D. spoofing gives ``debt collectors, telemarketers, and 
even scam artists the upper hand in the wearisome game of phone call 
`gotcha'.''
  Beyond that scenario, let me give you a few shocking examples of how 
caller ID spoofing has been exploited in recent months: In one 
dangerous hoax, a sharp-shooting SWAT team was forced to shut down a 
neighborhood in New Brunswick, NJ, after receiving what they believed 
was a legitimate distress call. But what really had happened was that 
the caller used spoofing to trick law enforcement into thinking the 
emergency call was coming from a certain apartment in that 
neighborhood. It was all a cruel trick perpetrated with a deceptive 
phone number.
  In another example, a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives was 
the victim of a sophisticated spoofing plot. It appears that fraudsters 
placed thousands of spoofed calls to the Member's constituents. In each 
case, the fraudster made it look like the phone call was dialed from 
the Member's office, and in each case the fraudster bad-mouthed the 
Member to the constituent on the other end of the line. The Member 
found out about this after his congressional office got angry phone 
calls from constituents.
  In yet another instance, identity thieves bought stolen credit card 
numbers. They then called Western Union, set up caller I.D. to make it 
look like the call originated from the card holder's name, and used the 
credit card number to order cash transfers, which the identity thieves 
then picked up.
  While these examples are serious enough, think about what would 
happen if a stalker used caller I.D. spoofing to trick his victim into 
answering the telephone or giving out sensitive personal information. 
This could put peoples' lives in danger.
  According to experts, there are countless Internet Web sites--going 
by names like Tricktel.com or Spooftech.com--that sell their services 
to criminals and identity thieves, or even bill collectors and private 
investigators. Any person can go to one of these Web sites, pay money 
to order a fake phone number, tell the Web site which phone number to 
reach, and then place the call through a toll-free line. The recipient 
is then tricked when he or she sees the misleading phone number on his 
or her caller I.D. system.
  In essence, these Web sites provide the high-tech tools that identity 
thieves need to do their dirty work. Armed with a misleading phone 
number, an identity thief can call a consumer pretending to be 
representative of the consumer's credit card company or bank. The thief 
can ask the consumer to authenticate a request for personal account 
information. Once an identity thief gets hold of this sensitive 
personal information, he can access a consumer's bank account, credit 
card account, health information, and who knows what else.
  Even if a consumer doesn't become a victim of stalking or identity 
theft, there is a simple concept at work here. Consumers pay money for 
their caller I.D. service. Consumers expect caller I.D. to be accurate 
because it helps them decide whether to answer a phone call and whether 
to trust the person on the other end of the line.
  If the caller I.D. says that my wife is calling me, when I pick up my 
phone, I expect my wife to be on the other end of the line. Instead, we 
have fraudsters and others who want to abuse the system and disguise 
their true identities. That defeats the whole purpose of caller I.D.
  Unfortunately the Federal Communications Commission and Federal Trade 
Commission have been slow to act. Those agencies have not yet brought 
any enforcement actions against caller I.D. spoofers.
  In the meantime, many spoofing companies and the fraudsters that use 
them believe that their activities are legal. Well, it is time to make 
it crystal clear that caller I.D. spoofing is not legal.
  How does the bipartisan Truth in Caller I.D. Act of 2006 address the 
problem of caller I.D. spoofing?
  Quite simply, this bill plugs the hole in the current law and 
prohibits anyone from using caller identification services to transmit 
misleading or inaccurate caller I.D. information. This prohibition 
covers traditional telephone calls or calls made using Voice-Over-
Internet, VOIP, service.
  Senator Snowe and I don't intend to ban all caller I.D. spoofing. 
Instead, our bill recognizes that there are legitimate law enforcement 
uses for spoofing. And the bill requires the Federal Communications 
Commission to create appropriate exceptions for legitimate business 
purposes, after hearing public comment on the issue.
  Anyone who violates this antispoofing law would be subject to a 
penalty of $10,000 per violation or up to 1 year in jail, as set out in 
the Communications Act. Additionally, the bill empowers States to help 
the Federal Government track down and punish these fraudsters. The more 
law enforcers out there to enforce this law, the better.
  I note that Chairman Barton of the House Energy and Commerce 
Committee just introduced a similar bipartisan antispoofing bill, which 
he expects to pass the House in short order. I invite my colleagues to 
join Senator Snowe and myself in supporting the Truth in Caller I.D. 
Act of 2006. We should waste no time in protecting consumers and law 
enforcement authorities against caller I.D. spoofing.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2630

       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 ``Truth in Caller ID Act of 
     2006''.

     SEC. 2. PROHIBITION REGARDING MANIPULATION OF CALLER 
                   IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION.

       Section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
     227) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (e), (f), and (g) as 
     subsections (f), (g), and (h), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(e) Prohibition on Provision of Inaccurate Caller 
     Identification Information.--
       ``(1) In general.--It shall be unlawful for any person 
     within the United States, in connection with any 
     telecommunications service or IP-enabled voice service, to 
     cause any caller identification service to transmit 
     misleading or inaccurate caller identification information, 
     unless such transmission is exempted pursuant to paragraph 
     (3)(B).
       ``(2) Protection for blocking caller identification 
     information.--Nothing in this subsection may be construed to 
     prevent or restrict any person from blocking the capability 
     of any caller identification service to transmit caller 
     identification information.
       ``(3) Regulations.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 6 months after the 
     enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall prescribe 
     regulations to implement this subsection.
       ``(B) Content of regulations.--
       ``(i) In general.--The regulations required under 
     subparagraph (A) shall include such exemptions from the 
     prohibition under paragraph (1) as the Commission determines 
     appropriate.
       ``(ii) Specific exemption for law enforcement agencies or 
     court orders.--The regulations required under subparagraph 
     (A) shall exempt from the prohibition under paragraph (1) 
     transmissions in connection with--

       ``(I) any authorized activity of a law enforcement agency; 
     or
       ``(II) a court order that specifically authorizes the use 
     of caller identification manipulation.

       ``(4) Report.--Not later than 6 months after the enactment 
     of this subsection, the Commission shall report to Congress 
     whether additional legislation is necessary to prohibit the 
     provision of inaccurate caller identification information in 
     technologies that are successor or replacement technologies 
     to

[[Page S3424]]

     telecommunications service or IP-enabled voice service.
       ``(5) Penalties.--
       ``(A) Civil forfeiture.--
       ``(i) In general.--Any person that is determined by the 
     Commission, in accordance with paragraphs (3) and (4) of 
     section 503(b), to have violated this subsection shall be 
     liable to the United States for a forfeiture penalty. A 
     forfeiture penalty under this paragraph shall be in addition 
     to any other penalty provided for by this Act. The amount of 
     the forfeiture penalty determined under this paragraph shall 
     not exceed $10,000 for each violation, or 3 times that amount 
     for each day of a continuing violation, except that the 
     amount assessed for any continuing violation shall not exceed 
     a total of $1,000,000 for any single act or failure to act.
       ``(ii) Recovery.--Any forfeiture penalty determined under 
     clause (i) shall be recoverable pursuant to section 504(a).
       ``(iii) Procedure.--No forfeiture liability shall be 
     determined under clause (i) against any person unless such 
     person receives the notice required by section 503(b)(3) or 
     section 503(b)(4).
       ``(iv) 2-year statute of limitations.--No forfeiture 
     penalty shall be determined or imposed against any person 
     under clause (i) if the violation charged occurred more than 
     2 years prior to the date of issuance of the required notice 
     or notice or apparent liability.
       ``(B) Criminal fine.--Any person who willfully and 
     knowingly violates this subsection shall upon conviction 
     thereof be fined not more than $10,000 for each violation, or 
     3 times that amount for each day of a continuing violation, 
     in lieu of the fine provided by section 501 for such a 
     violation. This subparagraph does not supersede the 
     provisions of section 501 relating to imprisonment or the 
     imposition of a penalty of both fine and imprisonment.
       ``(6) Enforcement by states.--
       ``(A) In general.--The chief legal officer of a State, or 
     any other State officer authorized by law to bring actions on 
     behalf of the residents of a State, may bring a civil action, 
     as parens patriae, on behalf of the residents of that State 
     in an appropriate district court of the United States to 
     enforce this subsection or to impose the civil penalties for 
     violation of this subsection, whenever the chief legal 
     officer or other State officer has reason to believe that the 
     interests of the residents of the State have been or are 
     being threatened or adversely affected by a violation of this 
     subsection or a regulation under this subsection.
       ``(B) Notice.--The chief legal officer or other State 
     officer shall serve written notice on the Commission of any 
     civil action under subparagraph (A) prior to initiating such 
     civil action. The notice shall include a copy of the 
     complaint to be filed to initiate such civil action, except 
     that if it is not feasible for the State to provide such 
     prior notice, the State shall provide such notice immediately 
     upon instituting such civil action.
       ``(C) Authority to intervene.--Upon receiving the notice 
     required by subparagraph (B), the Commission may intervene in 
     such civil action and upon intervening--
       ``(i) be heard on all matters arising in such civil action; 
     and
       ``(ii) file petitions for appeal of a decision in such 
     civil action.
       ``(D) Construction.--For purposes of bringing any civil 
     action under subparagraph (A), nothing in this paragraph 
     shall prevent the chief legal officer or other State officer 
     from exercising the powers conferred on that officer by the 
     laws of such State to conduct investigations or to administer 
     oaths or affirmations or to compel the attendance of 
     witnesses or the production of documentary and other 
     evidence.
       ``(E) Venue; service or process.--
       ``(i) Venue.--An action brought under subparagraph (A) 
     shall be brought in a district court of the United States 
     that meets applicable requirements relating to venue under 
     section 1391 of title 28, United States Code.
       ``(ii) Service of process.--In an action brought under 
     subparagraph (A)--

       ``(I) process may be served without regard to the 
     territorial limits of the district or of the State in which 
     the action is instituted; and
       ``(II) a person who participated in an alleged violation 
     that is being litigated in the civil action may be joined in 
     the civil action without regard to the residence of the 
     person.

       ``(F) Limitation on state action while federal action is 
     pending.--If the Commission has instituted an enforcement 
     action or proceeding for violation of this subsection, the 
     chief legal officer or other State officer of the State in 
     which the violation occurred may not bring an action under 
     this section during the pendency of the proceeding against 
     any person with respect to whom the Commission has instituted 
     the proceeding.
       ``(7) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection:
       ``(A) Caller identification information.--The term `caller 
     identification information' means information provided by a 
     caller identification service regarding the telephone number 
     of, or other information regarding the origination of, a call 
     made using a telecommunications service or IP-enabled voice 
     service.
       ``(B) Caller identification service.--The term `caller 
     identification service' means any service or device designed 
     to provide the user of the service or device with the 
     telephone number of, or other information regarding the 
     origination of, a call made using a telecommunications 
     service or IP-enabled voice service. Such term includes 
     automatic number identification services.
       ``(C) IP-enabled voice service.--The term `IP-enabled voice 
     service' means the provision of real-time 2-way voice 
     communications offered to the public, or such classes of 
     users as to be effectively available to the public, 
     transmitted through customer premises equipment using TCP/IP 
     protocol, or a successor protocol, for a fee (whether part of 
     a bundle of services or separately) with interconnection 
     capability such that the service can originate traffic to, or 
     terminate traffic from, the public switched telephone 
     network.
       ``(8) Limitation.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this section, subsection (f) shall not apply to this 
     subsection or to the regulations under this subsection.''
                                 ______