The House Energy & Commerce Committee expects to authorize by Jan. 31 the $16 million in funding the Federal Trade Commission had requested to create a national-do-not-call list, a committee aide said Wednesday.
Staff from both the FTC and the committee were ironing out the details following a briefing Wednesday on the issue. One sticking point was whether the money would be appropriated in one lump sum or, as is more likely, over a short trial period of one or two years to make sure the program was working, the aide said.
“They want to make sure that we have sufficient power to make it a solid, enforceable, registry and should there be any downside to it that the funding doesn’t continue permanently and they can cut us off if things don’t go as anticipated,” FTC spokeperson Cathy MacFarline said.
There had been some concern that the funding would be blocked by Rep. Billy Tauzin, R-LA, the chairman of the committee, who was unhappy with language in the bill authorizing the collection of fees by the FTC. He said that this collection would be considered a “new activity” on the part of the FTC, and subject to debate by the committee.
Tauzin supports a national registry, but expects the details to be worked out, the aide said. He also reportedly prefers to fund the program on a pilot basis that would be extended if it worked.
The FTC has said that it would repay what it termed a $16 million loan through fees collected from telemarketers, MacFarline said. An act of Congress is necessary to approve the collection of the fees.
At the Wednesday briefing, coordinated by the committee with the FTC, Congress requested more information before it is willing to authorize the funding. In general, Congressional support is high for a national registry.
A sense of urgency prevailed as FTC chairman Timothy J. Muris warned the committee that if the FTC didn’t receive the funding by the end of the month it would have to delay the program until 2004. Muris provided an overview of the project.
“We have given the commitment that we will work with the FTC to get this thing up and running this year,” the committee aide said.
The FTC’s MacFarline added, “Clearly there was support for the do-not-call program but there are some questions that need to be answered before Congress is comfortable moving forward with giving us the authority to collect the fees or issue us the money.”
Questions were raised about jurisdiction, harmony with state do-not-call lists, coordination with the Federal Communications Commission (which is also considering a national do-not-call registry) and closing other potential loopholes.
Part of the discussion focused on whether charities and political entities—currently exempt from using a FTC or FCC national registry—should be required to comply with the rules.
There was also some concern that the FCC may introduce rules that vary from the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR), causing a double burden on telemarketers and consumers. Congress had previously granted the authority to the FCC to create a national registry.
“They wanted to make certain that the TSR amendment that they fund represents the best possible program for consumer interests as well as the two agencies involved [the FTC and FCC],” McFarline said.
With the implementation of a national FTC registry, marketers would be required to “scrub” their lists using the registry every three months and to honor company-specific do-not-call requests. Fines for noncompliance could total $11,000 per day. There would be no charge for consumers to register.
The Direct Marketing Association applauded the questioning by the committee. The DMA “continues to support a national do-not call list that provides a one-stop mechanism for opting out of national telephone solicitations for consumers and a one-stop shop for marketers to clean their lists,” said president H. Robert Wientzen in a statement. “Such a national registry should include the lists from the various states, which the FCC is required to do, in any list they mandate.”
The DMA has said in the past that the proposed FTC registry may be unlawful because the Commission may not have the authority to create one, and that it is not necessary in light of the DMA’s Telemarketing Preference Service, a national do-not-call list with 8 million registrants. The DMA had threatened to take legal action.
Network
