[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 104 (Wednesday, July 13, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4557-S4558]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Durbin):
  S. 1355. A bill to regulate political robocalls; to the Committee on 
Rules and Administration.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Robocall 
Privacy Act, a simple, straight-forward bill that would allow continued 
political outreach through prerecorded phone messages, but protect 
American families from being inundated by calls throughout the day and 
night. I am pleased to be joined by Senator Durbin.
  In recent years, we have seen an increase in the development of new 
technologies that help political candidates reach out to voters. This 
is a good thing. Political speech is essential and should be protected. 
The vast majority of these developments strengthen the Democratic 
process by promoting an interchange of information and ideas.
  One of these developments is the robocall--a prerecorded message that 
can be sent out to tens of thousands of voters at a minor cost through 
computer automation. With television and radio ads becoming so 
expensive, these prerecorded calls can play an important role in 
alerting voters to a candidate's position and urging their support at 
the polls.
  But the process can be abused. Throughout recent elections, we have 
continued to hear stories about people being inundated with phone calls 
throughout the day and night. There is simply no good reason why 
Americans wanting a good night's sleep should be awakened at 4:30 in 
the morning by a robocall.
  Commercial calls are already limited by the Federal Trade 
Commission's ``Do Not Call'' list, which millions of individuals have 
registered for. But political calls are specifically exempted from this 
list.
  Let me be clear: I am not seeking to eliminate all robocalls. 
Instead, this legislation is carefully designed to provide some 
safeguards. Let me tell you exactly what this bill would do.
  It would ban political robocalls between the hours of 9 p.m. and 8 
a.m.
  It would ban any campaign or group from making more than two 
robocalls to the same telephone number in a single day.
  It would prohibit the organizer of any robocall from blocking the 
``caller identification'' number and require an announcement at the 
beginning of the call indentifying the individual or organization 
making the call, and the fact that it is a prerecorded message. This is 
to prevent robocalls from misleading the recipient of the call.
  The enforcement provisions of this bill are simple and directed 
toward stopping the worst of these calls. The bill would create a civil 
fine for violators of the law, with additional fines for callers who 
willfully violate the law.
  The bill also allows voters to sue to stop those calls immediately, 
but not receive monetary damages. A judge can order violators of the 
law to stop these abusive calls.
  Let me briefly describe a few incidents that showcase why the 
provisions in this bill are so important.
  On Election Day in 2010, over 110,000 Maryland voters began receiving 
anonymous robocalls instructing them to ``relax'' and stay home because 
Governor Martin O'Malley had already won re-election. These calls came 
a full two hours before the polls would close.
  Days before the 2010 Midterm elections, voters in Kansas received 
anonymous robocalls telling them to bring a voter registration card and 
proof of home ownership to the polls on Wednesday. Not only are these 
items not required to vote, but as we know, the election was on a 
Tuesday.
  Similarly, in my home state of California, about two dozen Los 
Angeles residents complained of receiving Spanish language robocalls 
from an unidentifiable source instructing them to vote on Wednesday, 
November 3--the day after Election Day.
  Shortly before last year's elections, individuals in St. Louis, 
Missouri, heard their phones ring and checked the caller ID to find a 
number belonging to a local hospital. Expecting the worst, they 
answered the call. The voice on the other end was not a hospital 
employee, but rather a prerecorded political message from an 
organization that had been able to manipulate caller ID devices to make 
it seem as if the calls were coming from emergency officials.
  In October 2010, 50,000 Nevadans were awoken at 1 a.m. by a robocall 
regarding a ballot question in the state that would change the judicial 
selection process. The calls came in the middle of the night due to a 
programming error--they were supposed to be made at 1 p.m.
  To be clear, incidences like these involving the malicious or 
untimely use of robocalls are not unique to the recent election.
  In a Maryland race in November 2006, in a conservative area residents 
received a middle-of-the-night robocall from the nonexistent ``Gay and 
Lesbian Push Organization,'' urging them to support one of the 
candidates. That candidate lost the election, in part because of the 
false, late-night call.
  In the 2006 Congressional elections, many calls wrongly implied that 
one candidate was making a robocall. The message began with a recorded 
voice stating that the call contained information about U.S. 
Representative Melissa Bean. Some voters called Bean's office to 
complain without listening to the entire message, which eventually 
identified an opposing party committee as the sponsor--when most voters 
had hung up. Representative Bean had to spend campaign funds informing 
voters she had not made that call.
  I am a strong supporter of the First Amendment protection for 
political speech, but the worst of these calls are disturbing people in 
their homes and spreading misleading and outright false information. 
Something must be done to rein in the robocalls which perpetrate these 
actions.
  This bill presents a solution. It does not ban robocalls. It merely 
provides a reasonable framework of tailored time, place, and manner 
restrictions.
  I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting the Robocall Privacy 
Act.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1355

       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 ``Robocall Privacy Act of 
     2011''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Abusive political robocalls harass voters and 
     discourage them from participating in the political process.
       (2) Abusive political robocalls infringe on the privacy 
     rights of individuals by disturbing them in their homes.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this Act--
       (1) Political robocall.--The term ``political robocall'' 
     means any outbound telephone call--
       (A) in which a person is not available to speak with the 
     person answering the call, and the call instead plays a 
     recorded message; and
       (B) which promotes, supports, attacks, or opposes a 
     candidate for Federal office.
       (2) Identity.--The term ``identity'' means, with respect to 
     any individual making a political robocall or causing a 
     political robocall to be made, the name of the sponsor or 
     originator of the call.
       (3) Specified period.--The term ``specified period'' means, 
     with respect to any candidate for Federal office who is 
     promoted, supported, attacked, or opposed in a political 
     robocall--
       (A) the 60-day period ending on the date of any general, 
     special, or run-off election for the office sought by such 
     candidate; and
       (B) the 30-day period ending on the date of any primary or 
     preference election, or any convention or caucus of a 
     political party that has authority to nominate a candidate, 
     for the office sought by such candidate.
       (4) Other definitions.--The terms ``candidate'' and 
     ``Federal office'' have the respective meanings given such 
     terms under section 301 of the Federal Election Campaign Act 
     of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431).

     SEC. 4. REGULATION OF POLITICAL ROBOCALLS.

       It shall be unlawful for any person during the specified 
     period to make a political robocall or to cause a political 
     robocall to be made--
       (1) to any person during the period beginning at 9 p.m. and 
     ending at 8 a.m. in the place which the call is directed;
       (2) to the same telephone number more than twice on the 
     same day;
       (3) without disclosing, at the beginning of the call--

[[Page S4558]]

       (A) that the call is a recorded message; and
       (B) the identity of the person making the call or causing 
     the call to be made; or
       (4) without transmitting the telephone number and the name 
     of the person making the political robocall or causing the 
     political robocall to be made to the caller identification 
     service of the recipient.

     SEC. 5. ENFORCEMENT.

       (a) Enforcement by Federal Election Commission.--
       (1) In general.--Any person aggrieved by a violation of 
     section 4 may file a complaint with the Federal Election 
     Commission under rules similar to the rules under section 
     309(a) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 
     437g(a)).
       (2) Civil penalty.--
       (A) In general.--If the Federal Election Commission or any 
     court determines that there has been a violation of section 
     4, there shall be imposed a civil penalty of not more than 
     $1,000 per violation.
       (B) Willful violations.--In the case the Federal Election 
     Commission or any court determines that there has been a 
     knowing or willful violation of section 4, the amount of any 
     civil penalty under subparagraph (A) for such violation may 
     be increased to not more than 300 percent of the amount under 
     subparagraph (A).
       (b) Private Right of Action.--Any person may bring in an 
     appropriate district court of the United States an action 
     based on a violation of section 4 to enjoin such violation 
     without regard to whether such person has filed a complaint 
     with the Federal Election Commission.
                                 ______