[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 23822-23824]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                      KNOW YOUR CALLER ACT OF 2001

  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 90) to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit 
telemarketers from interfering with the caller identification service 
of any person to whom a telephone solicitation is made, and for other 
purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                H.R. 90

       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 ``Know Your Caller Act of 
     2001''.

     SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF INTERFERENCE WITH CALLER 
                   IDENTIFICATION SERVICES.

       Section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
     227) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (e) and (f) as subsections 
     (f) and (g), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(e) Prohibition on Interference With Caller 
     Identification Services.--
       ``(1) In general.--It shall be unlawful for any person 
     within the United States, in making any telephone 
     solicitation--
       ``(A) to interfere with or circumvent the capability of a 
     caller identification service to access or provide to the 
     recipient of the telephone call involved in the solicitation 
     any information regarding the call that such service is 
     capable of providing; and
       ``(B) to fail to provide caller identification information 
     in a manner that is accessible by a caller identification 
     service, if such person has capability to provide such 
     information in such a manner.

     For purposes of this section, the use of a telecommunications 
     service or equipment that is incapable of transmitting caller 
     identification information shall not, of itself, constitute 
     interference with or circumvention of the capability of a 
     caller identification service to access or provide such 
     information.
       ``(2) Regulations.--Not later than 6 months after the 
     enactment of the Know Your Caller Act of 2001, the Commission 
     shall prescribe regulations to implement this subsection, 
     which shall--
       ``(A) specify that the information regarding a call that 
     the prohibition under paragraph (1) applies to includes--
       ``(i) the name of the person or entity who makes the 
     telephone call involved in the solicitation;

[[Page 23823]]

       ``(ii) the name of the person or entity on whose behalf the 
     solicitation is made; and
       ``(iii) a valid and working telephone number at which the 
     person or entity on whose behalf the telephone solicitation 
     is made may be reached during regular business hours for the 
     purpose of requesting that the recipient of the solicitation 
     be placed on the do-not-call list required under section 
     64.1200 of the Commission's regulations (47 CFR 64.1200) to 
     be maintained by such person or entity; and
       ``(B) provide that a person or entity may not use such a 
     do-not-call list for any purpose (including transfer or sale 
     to any other person or entity for marketing use) other than 
     enforcement of such list.
       ``(3) Private right of action.--A person or entity may, if 
     otherwise permitted by the laws or rules of court of a State, 
     bring in an appropriate court of that State--
       ``(A) an action based on a violation of this subsection or 
     the regulations prescribed under this subsection to enjoin 
     such violation;
       ``(B) an action to recover for actual monetary loss from 
     such a violation, or to receive $500 in damages for each such 
     violation, whichever is greater; or
       ``(C) both such actions.

     If the court finds that the defendant willfully or knowingly 
     violated this subsection or the regulations prescribed under 
     this subsection, the court may, in its discretion, increase 
     the amount of the award to an amount equal to not more than 3 
     times the amount available under subparagraph (B) of this 
     paragraph.
       ``(4) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection:
       ``(A) 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 an incoming telephone call.
       ``(B) Telephone call.--The term `telephone call' means any 
     telephone call or other transmission which is made to or 
     received at a telephone number of any type of telephone 
     service and includes telephone calls made using the Internet 
     (irrespective of the type of customer premises equipment used 
     in connection with such services). Such term also includes 
     calls made by an automatic telephone dialing system, an 
     integrated services digital network, and a commercial mobile 
     radio source.''.

     SEC. 3. EFFECT ON STATE LAW AND STATE ACTIONS.

       (a) Effect on State Law.--Subsection (f)(1) of section 227 
     of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227(f)(1)), as 
     so redesignated by section 2(1) of this Act, is further 
     amended by inserting after ``subsection (d)'' the following: 
     ``and the prohibition under paragraphs (1) and (2) of 
     subsection (e),''.
       (b) Actions by States.--The first sentence of subsection 
     (g)(1) of section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
     U.S.C. 227(g)(1)), as so redesignated by section 2(1) of this 
     Act, is further amended by striking ``telephone calls'' and 
     inserting ``telephone solicitations, telephone calls,''.

     SEC. 4. STUDY REGARDING TRANSMISSION OF CALLER IDENTIFICATION 
                   INFORMATION.

       The Federal Communications Commission shall conduct a study 
     to determine--
       (1) the extent of the capability of the public switched 
     network to transmit the information that can be accessed by 
     caller identification services;
       (2) the types of telecommunications equipment being used in 
     the telemarketing industry, the extent of such use, and the 
     capabilities of such types of equipment to transmit the 
     information that can be accessed by caller identification 
     services; and
       (3) the changes to the public switched network and to the 
     types of telecommunications equipment commonly being used in 
     the telemarketing industry that would be necessary to provide 
     for the public switched network to be able to transmit caller 
     identification information on all telephone calls, and the 
     costs (including costs to the telemarketing industry) to 
     implement such changes.

     The Commission shall complete the study and submit a report 
     to the Congress on the results of the study, not later than 
     one year after the date of the enactment of this Act.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin).


                             General Leave

  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
and insert extraneous material on this legislation.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Louisiana?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 90, the Know Your Caller Act, by my good friend the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen), deals with the 
controversial business practice of telemarketing.
  There are thousands of reputable telemarketing companies and they 
provide a benefit to the public by offering a broad range of consumer 
products and business opportunities. These companies employ hundreds of 
thousands of citizens across this country and they fuel this economy 
with literally billions of dollars.
  Increasingly, however, telemarketers are the cause of complaints. 
Consumers are concerned that telemarketers are intruding into their 
homes, and we continue to hear stories about telemarketing schemes that 
separate consumers from their hard-earned money.
  In fact, telemarketing complaints lodged with the Federal Trade 
Commission seem to support these consumer concerns. In 1997, for 
example, there were 2,260 complaints. In 2000, there were 36,804 
complaints, a significant increase.
  H.R. 90 takes these consumer complaints seriously. With the excellent 
work of the author, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen), 
we can remove the cloak of secrecy that fraudulent telemarketers use to 
swindle their victims. No longer will telemarketers be able to hide 
behind the anonymous telephone call.
  H.R. 90 prohibits telemarketers from blocking the transmission of 
caller ID information. In addition, this bill requires telemarketers to 
send caller ID information if their equipment is capable to do so. What 
this means is that the flashing signals on caller ID boxes, ``caller 
unknown,'' or ``out of area'' will no longer protect the scam artist.
  The transmission of caller identification information is so important 
to consumers, not only for safety and privacy reasons, but also because 
it provides the consumer with a telephone number that can be used to 
place the consumer on what is known as a telemarketer's ``do-not-call'' 
list. You see, if you know who is calling you and you do not want them 
to call him again, under the law, you can put a call in and say do not 
call me anymore; I do not want to be bothered anymore. By being placed 
on a do-not-call list, the telemarketer is prohibited from calling back 
for the next 10 years. That will protect you for a while.
  Additionally, the bill takes steps to prevent the sale of do-not-call 
lists, which is currently allowed under the law.
  I have worked with the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) on 
bipartisan amendment efforts to clarify this point. To remedy this 
loophole, H.R. 90 prohibits telemarketers from selling, leasing or 
receiving anything of value for these do-not-call lists. Few things are 
more offensive than being asked to be placed on a do-not-call list, 
only to have your name sold to another direct mail company.
  This amendment respects and protects the privacy requests of the 
consumer and should prevent an increase in unwanted telephone 
solicitations.
  I believe this bill strikes a good balance between the consumers' 
right to privacy and safety and the telemarketers' legitimate business 
interests. It protects consumers as well as the very thriving 
commercial industry and, indeed, protects the good players from the bad 
consequences of bad actors.
  I support this bill and urge support from the House as well.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by complimenting the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen), the sponsor of H.R. 90, who did excellent 
work here in crafting this legislation.
  Consumers who want to exercise their right to be placed on a do-not-
call list, or to take a telemarketer to small claims court after being 
called, are often frustrated when they cannot get the caller ID 
information from the telemarketer to identify them.
  This legislation prohibits telemarketers from interfering with or 
circumventing the capability of caller ID services. Telemarketers who 
solicit the

[[Page 23824]]

public in their homes for commercial gains should not be permitted to 
evade the purpose and function of caller ID services. This bill will 
prevent the telemarketers from doing so, while further empowering 
consumers to control the communications going to and from their home.
  Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is the telecommunications revolution 
gives enormous opportunities for telemarketers, but it also gives 
opportunities for consumer power. These powers should include the 
ability, by using caller ID, to prevent information from going to their 
family which they deem and believe is inappropriate.
  I think this information strikes a good balance between the rights of 
consumers to protect their privacy and the rights of telemarketers to 
practice their trade. This bill allows consumers to use the best 
available technology to protect their privacy but does not allow 
telemarketers to start a de facto race to outsmart this technology.
  I congratulate the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen).
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1530

  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield as much time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen), the 
author of the legislation.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Louisiana 
(Mr. Tauzin) for yielding me the time, and I want to commend him and 
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the ranking member, and all 
Members for their assistance in getting this bill to the floor, 
particularly the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), who has been 
very helpful. He has been very supportive, and he has been personally 
very interested in this bill. H.R. 90 would not be here without his 
support and the way that he has helped me along the way.
  Mr. Speaker, the Know Your Caller Act will provide a simple but 
important consumer protection. Many consumers purchase and pay for 
caller ID service and caller ID equipment for several reasons: In the 
first instance, to protect their privacy; secondly, they provide for 
their personal security by identifying incoming calls and allow them 
the opportunity to decide before picking up the receiver, whether or 
not to answer the call.
  Guess what, some of the most frequent calls, those from 
telemarketers, not all telemarketers but many, appear with a message 
Out of the Area or Caller Unknown. Mr. Speaker, telemarketing is a 
commercial enterprise. As such, what would be the reason for not 
disclosing a business telephone number? There simply is no reason.
  I believe that all commercial enterprises that use the telephone to 
advertise or sell their services to encourage the purchase of property 
or goods or for any other good commercial purposes should be required 
to have the name of their business and their business telephone number 
disclosed on caller ID boxes. Some telemarketing enterprises purposely 
block out caller ID devices; yet these same companies know a person's 
name, address, and telephone number. Is it not only fair that they 
share their company name and their telephone number so a person can 
make sure that they are a legitimate company, that they are who they 
say they are?
  Also, if my colleagues are like me and politely ask to have their 
name removed from their list, I think we should also be able to track 
the name and number of these telemarketing callers to ensure that they 
do not call back again. My legislation will simply require any person 
making a telephone solicitation to clearly identify themselves on these 
devices.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation will help separate legitimate 
telemarketers from fraudulent ones. While the majority of telemarketers 
are legitimate business people attempting to sell a product or service, 
there are some unscrupulous individuals and companies violating 
existing telemarketing rules and scamming many customers.
  Consumers pay a monthly service fee to subscribe to the caller ID 
service because they want to protect their personal privacy and their 
pocketbooks, but they have little recourse to protest intrusions on 
their privacy because most telemarketers intentionally block their 
identity from being transmitted to caller ID devices.
  Mr. Speaker, we already require telemarketers to identify themselves 
over the telephone and via telephone fax transmission. This bill simply 
extends the protection to consumers with caller ID devices.
  Mr. Speaker, I express my thanks for this opportunity. This bill 
passed unanimously in the last session; and again, I thank the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) for his support of it.
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I say in closing that this is a good bill. I especially appreciate 
the ability of individuals and the private cause of action that is in 
the legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Again, I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Frelinghuysen) for his absolute perseverance in seeing to it that this 
bill is passed again this year. Hopefully, it will become law and 
consumers will be much better off for it and he will be a hero. A lot 
of Americans have been troubled by this, and I commend this bill to the 
House.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Petri). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 90, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________