[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 23255-23261]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




     RATIFYING AUTHORITY OF FTC TO ESTABLISH A DO-NOT-CALL REGISTRY

  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the previous order of the House, 
I call up the bill (H.R. 3161) to ratify the authority of the Federal 
Trade Commission to establish a do-not-call registry, and ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of H.R. 3161 is as follows:

                               H.R. 3161

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. NATIONAL DO-NOT-CALL REGISTRY.

       (a) Authority.--The Federal Trade Commission is authorized 
     under section 3(a)(3)(A) of the Telemarketing and Consumer 
     Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act (15 U.S.C. 6102(a)(3)(A)) to 
     implement and enforce a national do-not-call registry.
       (b) Ratification.--The do-not-call registry provision of 
     the Telemarketing Sales Rule (16 C.F.R. 310.4(b)(1)(iii)), 
     which was promulgated by the Federal Trade Commission, 
     effective March 31, 2003, is ratified.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House, 
Wednesday, September 24, 2003, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. 
Tauzin) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) each will control 
30 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 to insert extraneous material on the bill.
  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, welcome to Groundhog Day, courtesy of a misguided court 
decision, soon to be overthrown, I believe, were we not acting today, 
but one that jeopardizes one of the most consumer-friendly regulations 
ever to come out of Washington in a long time. Just several months ago, 
President Bush signed the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act into law. That 
law authorized the funding of the Federal Trade Commission's National 
Do-Not-Call registry, a concept so embraced by consumers in America 
that 50 million Americans have now signed up to be on that list since 
then. And, Mr. Speaker, Congress passes a law, and an agency then 
implements it. Nothing wrong, right? Wrong. One can imagine our 
surprise when we found out yesterday morning that a Federal court in 
Oklahoma, not California, Oklahoma, invalidated the FTC's do-not-call 
registry. And even more surprising was the judge's basis for the 
decision. He found the FTC did not have the statutory authority to 
create a national do-not-call list.
  Nothing could be further from the truth. As I mentioned in February 
of this year, Congress passed the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act. 
Obviously, Congress would not have funded something that it thought was 
unauthorized. Indeed, back in 1994, Congress

[[Page 23256]]

passed the Telemarketing Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act, which gave the 
FTC power to regulate abusive telemarketing practices. Certainly, 
allowing consumers to sign up for a do-not-call list, to essentially 
opt out of an abusive telemarketing practice, is well within the 
mandate given to the FTC.
  Make no mistake. The judge in this case is dead wrong, and I am sure 
his decision will, in turn, be overturned. In an abundance of caution, 
however, and I make perfectly clear to any and all who may have doubts, 
today we consider H.R. 3161. This bill specifically authorizes the FTC 
to create a national do-not-call list and explicitly ratifies the FTC's 
actions over the past year to implement that list. We should probably 
call the bill ``This Time We Really Mean It Act'' to cure any myopia in 
the judicial branch.
  The bill leaves no doubt as to the intent of Congress. The FTC wants 
this list. The President of the United States wants this list, and more 
importantly, 50 million Americans, who are growing impatient about 
being interrupted at mealtime by unwanted and unnecessary harassing 
telemarketing calls, want this list. And this Congress is going to make 
sure they have this list today.
  Every consumer should have the right to choose whom they want to talk 
to. We allow consumers to opt out of junk mail. All they have to do is 
go down to the post office and tell the Postal Service they do not want 
junk mail coming to their house, and it does not come. They can choose 
not to answer a knock at the door. They can decide who enters their 
house and who communicates with them there. Consumers ought to have the 
power to say ``no'' to unwelcomed and unwanted telemarketing calls. 
Families ought to have the right to enjoy a little time together at the 
end of a day and no longer come home to find their answering machines 
jam filled with telemarketing calls.
  Worst of all, they get that call and answer it, and there is nobody 
there. These new devices that rotary dial three, four, five, maybe 20 
people at a time and the first one who answers, they hang up on all the 
rest, those are the worst to me. Americans are signing up to end that 
kind of abusive practice, and we need to give the FTC clear authority.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the 
ranking Democrat on our committee and the dean of our House, because he 
and I have promised to do everything in our power to make sure that the 
do-not-call list becomes a reality, and he is here with me today to 
make sure we pass this bill.
  Less than 1 week from today, on October 1, 2003, we hope to give 
Americans access to precisely what they have been asking for, a 
national do-not-call list, and today we are effectively hanging up on 
the telemarketers who have been bothering me at that precious hour of 
the day.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, unwanted telemarketing calls are less popular than a 
skunk at a church picnic, and they are more persistent and obnoxious 
than athlete's foot. Today we are going to bring them under control at 
the request of the American people.
  In 1994 this body passed the Telemarketing Act to protect consumer 
privacy and to curb abusive and abrasive telemarketing. Through that 
law, the Federal Trade Commission created a national do-not-call 
registry, and over 50 million American consumers have registered their 
numbers on that list. They do not want to be called.
  Earlier this year, I introduced the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act 
with my dear friend and colleague, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. 
Tauzin), the chairman of the committee. That bill was passed by both 
Chambers by an overwhelming majority. It provided necessary funding so 
that the do-not-call list could go into effect on time. It also was 
said in the hearings by the Federal Trade Commission that no additional 
authority was needed by that body to issue this do-not-call list.
  Well, the telemarketers are back. Despite our previous efforts, an 
erroneous decision made in Oklahoma agreed with the Direct Marketing 
Association that we did not give the Federal Trade Commission authority 
to create the list. That decision was in remarkable error, and we are 
today going to overrule it.
  Last night I, once again, in concert with my distinguished friend and 
the chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, introduced 
legislation to settle this question for good and all. That legislation 
is now before us. It unequivocally states that the FTC is authorized to 
create and to enforce a national do-not-call registry, and it 
officially ratifies the existing list.
  I commend and congratulate my friend, the gentleman from Louisiana 
(Mr. Tauzin), the chairman, for his splendid work on this matter. I 
urge my colleagues to vote for that legislation.
  The registry is scheduled to go into effect in less than one week. 
And we are here to make sure that it stays on schedule. I encourage my 
colleagues in both Chambers to pass this legislation swiftly. And I 
hope the President will heed the call of consumers and sign this 
legislation into law.
  Mr. Speaker, 50 million Americans cannot be wrong. They want this 
legislation, they deserve no less. I urge my colleagues to enact the 
legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the distinguished 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), and I ask unanimous consent 
that he may be permitted to yield time on behalf of this side of the 
aisle. He has had much experience with this and has been a great leader 
in the matter.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). Without objection, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts will control the time of the gentleman 
from Michigan.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton).
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation 
that fixes Judge Lee R. West's decision of earlier this week. I have 
the phone number for Judge Lee R. West. I thought maybe the 50 million 
folks that have decided to call the FTC and say enough is enough, maybe 
we ought to pass on this phone number to his office in Oklahoma. I do 
not know that they would get anything done for the next couple of 
weeks.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support. And I do not know of a family 
out there that has not received these awful phone calls, usually at 
some important moment. I can remember earlier this summer, I was 
finally home from a long day, and my wife and kids are ready to go with 
their friends down to Lake Michigan, my dog is wagging his tail. That 
is one of the words that he knows, ``beach.'' He is so excited. The 
phone rings. It is a solicitation call from a good group, I am sure. My 
wife has it down pat. Do you know what she does? ``It is for you.'' I 
get to the phone, and I have got to make sure they are not from our 
district, and then with that, that phone call is gone.
  Mr. Speaker, 50 million folks like our house have called the FTC. 
When you look at it, that is 50 percent of America. We have about 100 
million households, so 50 million households have said hang up. We do 
not want this. And, yet, Judge Lee R. West, I cannot say a good guy, a 
guy out in Oklahoma, has said no.
  This legislation changes it. We are going to get it done. Let us all 
vote for this bill.

                              {time}  1145

  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Doyle).
  Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, we had a very unfortunate ruling in Oklahoma 
City, one that we are going to undo today.
  This reminds me a lot about back in the days before I was in 
Congress. I was in the insurance business, and we used to do a lot of 
cold calling to make insurance calls. They always told us as they were 
training us that you had to get nine noes in order to get a yes; but if 
you kept calling, that every time a

[[Page 23257]]

person said no to you, not to lose faith, because you were one step 
closer to the yes.
  So today we are doing a tremendous favor for the telemarketers in 
America, something that I wish they had done for me when I first 
started in the insurance business. We are giving them the list of the 
noes up front, so they do not have to make these nine calls to get a 
yes. We are telling them up front the people that do not want to talk 
to them, and now all they have to do is call the people that want to 
hear from them, that want to buy their products.
  I think it is a wonderful thing which we do today for the 
telemarketers, and it is a wonderful thing we do for the 50 million 
Americans that do not want to have to pick up that phone at dinnertime.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to associate myself with the 
excellent comments and argument of the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent 
request to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer).
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the U.S. District Court for the 
Western District of Oklahoma ruled that the Federal Trade Commission 
did not have the authority to create a national ``do-not-call'' 
registry.
  While the Court can and did make legal arguments to support its 
ruling, what it cannot and should not deny is the will of the people. 
And the will of the people when it comes to a national ``do not call 
list'' is strong and vigilant.
  Since June, when the registry was first opened, over 50 million phone 
numbers have been submitted to the FTC registry. People are simply fed 
up with telemarketers interrupting their meals by offering vacations or 
more credit cards.
  In my home state of Indiana, almost 1.5 million phones are registered 
for the Telephone Privacy program. That represents almost 58 percent of 
our state, meaning that 3.5 million Hoosiers have chosen to reduce 
unwanted telemarketing calls. A survey in Indiana found that those on 
the Indiana Telephone Privacy list had their calls reduced from an 
average of twelve per week to only one per week. Indiana's Telephone 
Privacy law works.
  One important feature of the Indiana law is that it contains very few 
exemptions. In fact, Indiana's law has fewer exemptions than the FCC 
and FTC rules.
  While we have permitted these agencies to provide more exemptions on 
the Federal level, it must be made clear that Congress does not intend 
to interfere with statutes, like Indiana's, that choose to tighten 
these loopholes. Indeed, efforts like Indiana's that inspired the 
Federal ``do not call'' program, demonstrate the critical role that 
States can play in achieving creative solutions to serious problems. 
Such efforts should not be discouraged.
  It is my understanding that Congress has no intention of preempting 
State laws that provide protections greater than those provided by our 
Federal ``do not call'' program. Furthermore, I also understand that 
Congress has no intention of permitting the FCC or FTC to preempt, by 
regulation or otherwise, State statutes that provide greater 
protections than the Federal ``Do Not Call'' program provides.
  The FCC and FTC should be reminded that the mandate from Congress is 
create a ``do not call'' program that provides a nationwide minimum 
standard of protection for all Americans. States that choose to exceed 
that standard should in no way be prohibited from doing so.
  I am pleased by the swift action of the Chairman and Ranking Member 
of the Energy and Commerce Committee. H.R. 3161 will allow the will of 
the people to prevail in light of the judicial interference from 
yesterday.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Speaker, let me again emphasize this is extraordinary. The court 
decision came out yesterday. The leadership of this House authorized 
this bill to the floor today. We are about to pass this bill, I believe 
the Senate is about to do the same thing, and, in all likelihood, we 
will have a bill on the President's desk this afternoon.
  This Congress has often been called a slow and cumbersome beast, but 
I think you can see how fast this Congress is prepared to move when 50 
million Americans are angry, and I cannot imagine more anger now, when 
50 million Americans found out the national do-not-call list was put in 
jeopardy by a single judge in Oklahoma somewhere.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), the ranking member on the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer 
Protection, which has jurisdiction over the Federal Trade Commission.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
time, but, more importantly, today I thank him for his nearly decade-
long leadership on this issue.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bipartisan legislation. 
I want to thank the gentleman from Louisiana (Chairman Tauzin) and the 
full committee ranking Democratic Member, the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Dingell), for their outstanding leadership in quickly advancing 
this pro-consumer legislation.
  Yesterday's decision by the Federal District Judge blocking the FTC 
from implementing its national do-not-call registry was, I believe, 
incorrect. Earlier this session we passed the National Do-Not-Call 
Implementation Act with overwhelming bipartisan support. The new law 
explicitly gave the FTC the authority to collect fees and create a 
national do-not-call list.
  I am actually confident that the court's decision would have 
eventually been overturned on appeal. But, fortunately, we are not 
waiting for that process to occur. Today we are removing any 
uncertainty about Congress' intent. With the passage of this 
legislation, the Federal Trade Commission will be able to add more 
people to their list, and they will be able to implement its do-not-
call registry without interruption or delay.
  Mr. Speaker, we all appreciate the very precious time that we have at 
home with our families after a long day at work, but who has not been 
interrupted by an unwanted telemarketer? We all know from personal 
experience how intrusive these calls can be.
  I think it is important to note that it will not block the calls from 
companies with whom you already do business. I received a telemarketing 
call from a credit card company offering me a deal that could lower my 
rate, et cetera. I was happy to get that call, and we actually made 
that change. Those calls will be able to continue.
  But we all know the calls. My last name is ``Schakowsky.'' My key is 
when they say, ``Is Mrs. Schakowsky home,'' or all kinds of funny 
names, I just say ``no,'' and hang up. We all have our strategies for 
dealing with those.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this pro-consumer 
legislation.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
senior gentleman from New Jersey, (Mr. Frelinghuysen).
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a cosponsor and 
strong supporter of the chairman from Louisiana's bill and commend him 
for taking swift action against the ruling of the District Court in 
Oklahoma City.
  Over the years through my Know-Your-Caller Act, I have worked with 
the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) and the FTC to bring 
consumers greater protection from the many unwanted annoying calls that 
telemarketers placed at all hours of the day and night, seven days a 
week. These calls are an invasion of privacy, not to mention that many 
of these callers are unscrupulous and prey on older American senior 
citizens.
  The FTC, Congress, and the American consumers have got it right, and 
this district court has got it completely wrong. This is the most 
incorrect and outrageous ruling I have seen in a long time. It is a 
direct shot at every consumer. Millions of them have registered to get 
their names on the list, who receive these annoying calls during dinner 
with their families, in the middle of the night, and then again early 
in the morning.
  Mr. Speaker, I support this bill, and commend the chairman for his 
leadership and quick action.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Engel).
  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me time.
  As a member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and as a 
cosponsor of this bill, I really want to thank the judge. We ought to 
have more court

[[Page 23258]]

rulings like this, because I have never seen one that brings this 
Congress closer together the whole year. This has often been a 
contentious Congress that clashes on issues. Here everyone agrees. I 
want to thank the judge for making us all love each other.
  We do it because 50 million Americans have signed up to not be 
bothered by telemarketers. That is a phenomenal amount of people in a 
very short time. So if there was ever an issue on which everyone 
agrees, this is the issue.
  Everyone has been bothered at the dinner table with these annoying 
calls. This morning as I was leaving to come here to the Capitol, the 
phone rang. I picked it up, and there it was, another telemarketer 
asking kind of sneaky questions, intrusive questions, trying to get you 
to give them some information in a very sneaky way. People are just fed 
up with it.
  There are no first amendment rights here. All of the things that have 
been said about why this law should be blocked are ridiculous. Again, 
in all my years in Congress, I have hardly ever seen anything with 
which everyone agrees.
  So, again, I want to thank the judge for bringing us together. I rise 
in strong support of the legislation, and as a cosponsor, I commend the 
chairman of our committee, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), 
and the ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell). That 
is why this is such a great committee; we all agree on so many 
important things.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to 
do something very unusual on the House floor. As the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) knows, every now and then, we are accused of 
voting for bills we have not totally read. I am going to read the whole 
bill.
  I want all the judges of America to pay close attention. I want you 
to tune in good. Turn up the volume a little bit and turn off your 
telephone and listen real carefully, because I am going to read the 
whole bill to you. Every judge in America, here it comes:
  ``(a) AUTHORITY. The Federal Trade Commission is authorized under 
section 3(a)3(A) of the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse 
Prevention Act (15 U.S.C. 6102(A)(3)(A)) to implement and enforce a 
national do-not-call registry.''
  Do you hear me? To implement and enforce a do-not-call registry.
  ``(b) RATIFICATION. The do-not-call registry provision of the 
Telemarketing Sales Rule, (16 C.F.R. 310.4(b)(1)(iii)), which was 
promulgated by the Federal Trade Commission, effective March 31, 2003, 
is ratified.''
  Did you hear me, judges? Ratified.
  When this bill passes today, when the Senate does the same thing, 
none of you judges ought to have any doubt. We really mean it, do you 
understand? We really mean it. We want the national do-not-call list to 
become law on October 1.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support for this bill, and I rise in 
strong commendation for the chairman of the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) and for our ranking 
member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell).
  The gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) has brought this bill out 
at such a rapid pace that I believe that this legislation has set the 
Congressional land speed record for legislating in the aftermath of a 
terrible Oklahoma court decision, and I want to congratulate the 
gentleman from Louisiana. I think this record, like Roger Bannister's 
breaking of the four-minute mile, will be viewed as a landmark for all 
future legislation in the history of our country.
  This legislation got to the House floor faster than a consumer can 
hang up on a telemarketer at dinner time. I mean, the gentleman just 
did a phenomenal job in ensuring that we are able to protect the 
American people, because we need this bill in order to ensure that by 
Christmastime, the only ringing bells consumers will hear are jingle 
bells and sleigh bells, not the jangling phone ruining people's family 
holidays.
  Now, if we do not pass this legislation, the judge in Oklahoma will 
have to put his own courthouse phone number on a do-not-call list, 
because he will have millions of phone calls from complaining Americans 
demanding that this decision be reversed. So we are doing the judge a 
big favor today. We are saving him from the same headache that tens of 
millions of Americans feel that they are subjected to on a daily basis 
by the phone calls that come into their homes on an unwanted basis.
  What is our purpose? The gentleman from Louisiana, the gentleman from 
Michigan, all the Members of Congress, all we are trying to do is to 
make the Direct Marketing Association, these telemarketers, more 
efficient. How efficient is it to know exactly who is receptive to your 
hundreds of calls a year than for us to put together a list for you of 
all of the people in America who want to get these calls?
  Now, I do not happen to be one of them. I actually signed up at 12:01 
a.m. on the first day that it was available to end these calls coming 
in to my own home, personally, and I threw my cell phone in as well. 
Those 50 million other phone numbers that are on that list, I was 
trying to be number one in that land speed race to end it once and for 
all.
  What we have got now on our hands is, in my opinion, a very efficient 
telemarketing industry, one which can now use their huckster sales 
pitch to address just those Americans who kind of enjoy having people 
call them at all hours of the day, and we know there are people out 
there that really do like it.
  If a salesman comes to your front door and knocks on the front door, 
you do not have to answer. That is your way of dealing with them. But 
if someone calls you on the phone, that phone just keeps ringing until 
you have to answer it. That is the difference between a door-to-door 
salesman and someone who calls you on the phone. That person can ruin 
your supper, can ruin your day. So this do-not-call database proposal 
is a winner for the millions of consumers who are plagued by those 
unsolicited commercial telemarketing calls.
  The bill which we consider today permits the FTC to proceed on a 
timely basis, so that by October 1, consumers can begin to see a 
reduction in unwanted telemarketing calls.
  Having first proposed a national do-not-call database registry in 
legislation that the Congress successfully enacted in 1991, I believe 
its implementation is action that is long overdue. Consumers across the 
country have clearly voted in favor of signing up for the database, 
indicating by the millions that they want an effective ``no 
soliciting'' sign on their home phone or cell phone.

                              {time}  1200

  They want this national database to help to bring a halt to the 
seemingly nightly ritual of phone calls, interrupting dinner or 
precious family time.
  I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of this bill with the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Chairman Tauzin). Again, I want to commend 
the chairman for his alacrity in bringing this bill to the floor so 
soon after the court decision. He and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Dingell) and all of the Members who worked on this and the staff who 
worked on this overnight deserve an enormous amount of credit.
  Finally, I want to commend FTC Chairman Timothy Muris for his pro-
consumer action in creating the Federal Trade Commission do-not-call 
rules. This do-not-call database will be a powerful new tool for 
consumers to combat unwanted telemarketing intrusions. It is a landmark 
day in the history of consumer legislation in our country. Tim Muris 
deserves a lot of credit, the rest of the FTC, the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Chairman Tauzin), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), 
and all of the other Members.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my friend from Massachusetts

[[Page 23259]]

for his compliments and, most importantly, for his extraordinary long-
standing support for actions to protect consumers in America, and this 
is just one more step in that direction.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
Walden), a distinguished member of our committee.
  Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, as a cosponsor of H.R. 3161, I 
stand here today to express my strong opposition to yesterday's 
decision by the U.S. District Court in Oklahoma.
  As of September of this year, 16 percent of all Oregonians, that is 
541,117 citizens, have made the decision to be on the do-not-call list; 
16 percent. These citizens have expressed their rights to uninterrupted 
free speech at the dinner table and the breakfast table and the lunch 
table, and the middle of the night.
  Earlier this year, I received a call from Mr. Chad De Gennaro of 
Grants Pass, Oregon, that best summarizes the frustration that I think 
all of us have felt after getting these unsolicited phone calls in our 
homes when we did not want them. Chad said, ``As only one person, I 
cannot single-handedly defend myself against telemarketing companies 
with banks of telephones and hundreds of phone solicitors. No matter 
how many times I say that I do not want to be called again, sure 
enough, I wind up getting called again, and at all times of the day.''
  Mr. Speaker, 541,117 Oregonians looked to the Federal Government, to 
us, to protect them from these unsolicited phone calls and trusted that 
this list would allow them some peace and quiet in their homes. That is 
what the FTC's list would have provided on October 1.
  Here in Congress, we understood from the FTC that they had the 
authority to prepare and implement this list. The FTC believed they had 
the right to create this list; and more importantly, the citizens of 
Oregon and across America knew and believed that the FTC was going to 
protect them by implementing this list and this legislation. Only the 
U.S. District Court of Oklahoma thought otherwise.
  Mr. Speaker, I join my chairman and my colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle today in support of this legislation. I appreciate the quick 
action of our chairman, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), in 
moving this bill forward so that we can protect ourselves from calls we 
do not want coming into our phones and into our homes.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I have no other requests for time to speak 
on this important bill, so I will continue to reserve my time.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this 
time, and I applaud his stunningly quick action with alacrity to speak 
on behalf of the elected representatives of the American people on this 
subject.
  Mr. Speaker, one unelected Federal judge in Oklahoma took it upon 
himself to strike down a law passed by Congress, actioned by the 
executive branch, and two appropriations acts, and the action of 40 
million Americans to sign a do-not-call registry. Never in history has 
so much been screwed up by such a small number of people: one judge.
  Protecting telemarketers under the first amendment is like protecting 
the classroom bully who insists that it is his first amendment right to 
harass all of the other children in class. I think the judge in this 
case has wondered if the Congress has been clear in this case. Well, 
Congress is going to be blisteringly clear; and we are going to follow 
this up, if this bill does not pass the Senate quickly, with 
appropriations action to make sure that in this Congress, in this year, 
we keep the do-not-call registry online, that we do not force any other 
Americans to reregister, that we keep those who signed up on the list, 
and that we protect that sacred zone of privacy in Americans' homes so 
that they can have dinner with their wives and kids and not be harassed 
by these calls.
  Mr. Speaker, I applaud the ranking member and the chairman for this 
quick action, and I urge rapid adoption of this legislation.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, with compliments to the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Chairman Tauzin) and to the gentleman from Michigan (Ranking 
Member Dingell), and to all of the Members who worked on this 
legislation, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  In summation, let me again thank the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Markey) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) for their 
extraordinary bipartisan cooperation in moving this as rapidly as we 
have. It is the sort of cooperation we always seem to get from our 
members on both sides of the aisle on the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce when we have a problem that clearly faces our country that is 
neither Democrat nor Republican, but is American. This is an American 
problem, and we are solving it as Americans in this House, and that is 
always a proud moment in this House when that occurs. I want to thank 
my colleagues for all of the courtesies and the help that we have 
gotten in moving this legislation forward.
  The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) was correct in 
complimenting the chairman of the FTC, Mr. Muris. I want to also join 
in that compliment. The Federal Trade Commission, as the gentleman 
knows, took on what the FCC would not take on. We had originally given 
this authority to the Federal Communications Commission which declined 
to put together a national do-not-call list. Mr. Muris and the Federal 
Trade Commission decided to go forward with it with our help. So we 
authorized the money for them to proceed with the list. Only this judge 
seems to want to stand in the way of it, and this Congress now makes it 
very clear today that we want to give Americans this right.
  I want to make a public apology. These harassing phone calls that 
come to us in the middle of the precious time we have with our family 
have gotten to a point of, I know, such aggravation that some of us 
react very badly to a call we get at a most inappropriate moment, and 
sometimes we are pretty ugly to a telemarketer who is bothering us or 
interrupting us. I hung up on the Ambassador's wife from Norway one 
day, thinking she was a telemarketer. She belongs to an international 
club with my wife, and we had to make great apologies afterwards 
because I thought I was being harassed by a telemarketer. Those sorts 
of things ought not happen in America. We ought not be caught in these 
awful circumstances where we are so aggravated that we are impolite to 
someone as important as an Ambassador's wife who was trying to make a 
call to my wife, and I apologize both to my wife and to her again 
publicly for my impatience.
  But Americans are impatient, and they are tired of this kind of 
problem, and they want it fixed; and this legislation will fix it 
today. We have heard some of the passion on this floor. The passion 
that we feel about this issue is the passion that Americans feel about 
this issue. When 50 million Americans sign up as fast as they have, 
that tells us how passionately Americans feel about a national do-not-
call list, and it is time to be implemented.
  Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TAUZIN. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the chair for his rapidity 
in bringing this to the floor. I just want to say there is total 
bipartisan agreement that Americans are sick and tired of having their 
dinners interrupted by these calls, and today that is going to stop.
  I just want to answer the people who have raised freedom-of-speech 
issues here, which I do not believe apply to this, because there is 
also a freedom not to listen. What we are saying today is Americans 
have the right not to listen to these telemarketing calls. This is in 
the finest tradition of the Constitution which said we, the people, in 
order to assure the common defense

[[Page 23260]]

and assure domestic tranquility, and we are standing up for domestic 
tranquility today. This is a good day to do it.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman 
for those comments. In fact, we have been asked so many times, is this 
a free-speech issue. The United States Constitution gives you the right 
to speak; it does not give you the right to be heard. None of us have 
an obligation to listen if we do not want to. As a courtesy, we listen 
to one another in this House, hopefully we do, but nobody has an 
obligation to listen. The fact that Americans have the right not to be 
bothered by some speech they do not want to listen to is a right we 
ought to protect too. That is what we do today.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TAUZIN. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I just want to ask the chairman if, after he 
hung up on that Ambassador's wife, if he still got the pocket fisherman 
or the ginsu knife, if they still might have sent that along.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I can only tell the 
gentleman it was an embarrassing moment and, again, I apologize to both 
of them. But the gentleman knows we have heard this bill in committee, 
and he knows how absolutely aggravated people get with these calls. 
They seem to come at the worst moment. When you are just leaving the 
house, you are trying to get everything in the car and the phone rings, 
it could be your mother calling, your daughter, your son, somebody 
important; and you rush back in and it is one of these doggone calls. 
They always come at the exact wrong moment. I am not saying 
telemarketers are bad people. There are many good telemarketing firms, 
and for folks who want to receive these calls and take advantage of 
them, they will have that right under the bill. But it is just going to 
end the ones we do not want, the ones that aggravate us to the point 
where we do something as stupid as I did, for which I have apologized 
today a few times.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, the Do-Not-Call Registry was crafted as a 
balance between the rights of businesses to market their products and 
the right of consumers to avoid unnecessary harassment. Today, due to a 
judicial decision, we are back here on the House floor to reaffirm the 
validity of the registry.
  Telemarketers have, like everyone else in this country, the right to 
free speech. They have the right to say what they want. What they don't 
have is the right to force Americans to listen to their sales pitches.
  Americans, on the other hand, should have the right to a little peace 
and quiet. They should have the right to not have to get unwanted 
advertising pitches over the phone during dinnertime.
  Telemarketers already have the tools they need to exercise their 
right to free speech--they have autodialing computers, prerecorded 
messages, phone registries, and legions of operators. In creating the 
Do-Not-Call Registry, the FTC was merely trying to provide consumers 
with the power to truly exercise this right. The Do-Not-Call Registry 
is just one simple, effective tool that will give consumers the ability 
to exercise their right to a little peace and quiet.
  Unfortunately, Judge Lee R. West of the Western District of Oklahoma 
recently ruled that Congress did not give the FTC explicit authority to 
create the do-not-call list. Of course, Judge West has the right to 
make that ruling, if he thinks that is the correct interpretation of 
the law. Congress then has the responsibility to clarify that it has 
indeed given the FTC authority to protect consumers by creating the 
registry, as we are doing today.
  While I strongly support the continued implementation of the Do-Not-
Call Registry, I should mention that the FTC left some loopholes. If 
you've bought, leased, or rented something from a company in the past 
18 months, they can still call you until you say, ``Stop.'' They can 
also call you if you've applied or inquired with them over the past 
three months--even something as mundane as asking for a store's hours.
  Telemarketers have jumped to these loopholes, showing the lengths 
that many of them will go to in order to call people during dinnertime 
with unwanted ads. The FTC should revisit its rules and see if these 
loopholes can be closed.
  Even still, it's critical that we reaffirm the validity of the do-
not-call list. I want to commend Chairman Tauzin, Ranking Member 
Dingell, and all the members of the Energy and Commerce Committee, for 
bringing this clarifying legislation to the floor. I'm sure my 
constituents will be pleased to see this body reacting so quickly.
  I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this bill so it can be signed 
into law and we can avoid delaying implementation of the do-not-call 
list.
  Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that Chairman Tauzin and 
Ranking Member Dingell have moved so quickly to address this week's 
decision by the Federal district court in Oklahoma that the FTC did not 
have authority to implement the national Do Not Call list.
  It is not often that we can move forward with such speed in a 
bipartisan manner in both bodies, but this action only proves that 
Congress intends this list to go into effect, despite what Judge West 
in Oklahoma may think.
  This list was to have gone into effect on October 1, and millions of 
consumers were looking forward to getting some relief from 
telemarketers.
  I am somewhat amazed by the decision of the court, given that 
Congress clearly expressed its intent to provide the FTC with the 
authority to implement the list by passing the Do Not Call 
Implementation Act.
  I do not know how much more clear we could have been--we gave the 
agency funding to set up the list, but yet the court managed to find 
that no authority existed from Congress.
  This bill will make things clear, and I am pleased at this quick 
response to the ruling. I am a cosponsor of this bill and look forward 
to its quick passage.
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this 
legislation to clarify that Congress specifically authorizes the 
Federal Trade Commission to establish a Do Not Call Registry.
  During debate last year on the Do Not Call Registry, I had initially 
preferred that Congress enact even stronger language.
  But, in voting for the registry, I never thought that the language we 
enacted wouldn't be sufficient enough to withstand judicial review.
  Mr. Speaker, the people have spoken.
  They want the power to reduce the number of annoying telemarketing 
calls that too often interrupt the precious, yet increasingly limited, 
time that they spend with their families.
  The response has been tremendous
  I've joined over 50 million Americans who have already signed up for 
the registry, and it hasn't even gone into effect yet.
  The Do Not Call Registry is a popular consumer protection tool that 
needs to be implemented.
  The FTC has moved swiftly on behalf of consumers, and we should do 
the same.
  If the FTC needs this specific authority, then let's pass this bill 
today, get it to the President and make sure that there is no 
disruption in the FTC's ambitious timeline to make the Do Not Call 
Registry a reality for millions of American consumers.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the bill, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). Pursuant to the order of the 
House of Wednesday, September 24, 2003, the bill is considered read for 
amendment and the previous question is ordered.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clauses 8 and 9 of rule XX, this 
15-minute vote on H.R. 3161 will be followed by 5-minute votes on the 
motion to instruct on H.R. 1, by the yeas and nays; and the motion to 
instruct on H.R. 1588, by the yeas and nays.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 412, 
nays 8, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 521]

                               YEAS--412

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Ballance
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Becerra
     Bell

[[Page 23261]]


     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NY)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burns
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Carter
     Case
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley (CA)
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harman
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Janklow
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Lynch
     Majette
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nethercutt
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Turner (OH)
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watson
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--8

     Bishop (UT)
     Cannon
     Flake
     Meek (FL)
     Paul
     Ryan (OH)
     Strickland
     Terry

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Bishop (GA)
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Jones (OH)
     Kucinich
     Larson (CT)
     Lewis (GA)
     Nadler
     Pastor
     Pombo
     Reyes
     Shays
     Watt
     Weldon (PA)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson) (during the vote). Members are 
advised that 2 minutes remain in this vote.

                              {time}  1233

  Mr. TERRY and Mr. RYAN of Ohio changed their vote from ``yea'' to 
``nay.''
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________