HOUSE WANTS TO MOVE QUICKLY ON FCC FAX RULES RELAXATION
House Commerce Committee leaders on Tues. said they were eager to pass a bill to soften FCC fax regulations but questioned whether the Senate would follow suit. House Telecom Subcommittee Chmn. Upton (R-Mich.) said the “Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2004” could be introduced as early as today (Wed.) with strong bipartisan support and have Subcommittee and full Committee markups by the end of next week. The bill has been pushed for by businesses and associations, who say the FCC’s new fax rules would place heavy burdens on sending faxes to customers or members (CD May 26 p1).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The bill would reinstate the “existing business relationship” (EBR) standard that the FCC eliminated last Aug. On Jan. 1, new rules are scheduled to take effect that will require express signed consent before businesses and other groups can send faxes to clients or members. It also requires the FCC to report to Congress each year on junk fax complaints and enforcement and mandates a General Accounting Office (GAO) study on junk fax issues. On Tues., the National Assn. of Realtors, American Society of Assn. Executives and the National Newspaper Assn. argued that requiring expressed written consent was too much of a burden, requiring time and resources that were prohibitive, particularly on small businesses.
But FCC Consumer & Govt. Affairs Bureau Chief Dane Snowden said the Commission has learned that “inclusion of an established business relationship within the meaning of prior expressed permission had resulted in consumers and businesses assuming the unwanted advertising costs of faxing, of any entity with which they could conduct business.” He told the Subcommittee that complaints about unwanted faxing were on the rise, with nearly 1,500 complaints a month in 2003. “Unwanted faxed advertisements have proliferated, particularly as facsimile service providers (or fax broadcasters) enable sellers to send advertisements to multiple destinations at relatively little cost,” he said.
However, Snowden also said many of the fax complaints came from operators that already skirted junk fax laws. He said in 5 years, the FCC has brought just 233 citations for fax violations. Snowden said it was “very, very difficult” to find violators. He also said the $11,000 fine for fax violations should be raised, but said FCC Chmn. Powell would tell the Committee how much that fine should be raised. Supporters of the bill seized on Snowden’s comments, saying the FCC rules punished only those that followed the law and did nothing to increase enforcement against malefactors.
House Telecom Subcommittee ranking Democrat Markey (Mass.) said he supported the bill, partly because it also requires fax senders to include an opt-out option on the front page of any fax sent. He also said the bill should require a legal name of the fax sender to be on the fax cover sheet. Upton told reporters after the markup that provision could be added in markup.
House Commerce Committee Chmn. Barton (R-Tex.) and Committee ranking Democrat Dingell (Mich.) said they supported the bill, with Dingell adding that legitimate consumer privacy concerns should be balanced. During the markup, Upton asked Snowden if the FCC would delay the implementation of the rules if the bill fails to pass through Congress before the new rules are implemented. He said it was possible that the House would quickly pass the bill, only to see it languish in the Senate (as several other House Commerce Committee bills now sit waiting for Senate approval). Snowden said he couldn’t make any such commitment.