[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.
______