WASHINGTON—The Senate Commerce Committee Thursday morning passed the Protecting Consumer Phone Records Act of 2006 but only after adding an amendment that the chairman of the committee believes will doom the bill to failure.
By voice vote, the Senate Commerce Committee amended the bill to require that wireless carriers first obtain their customers’ permission before including their mobile-phone numbers in a wireless 411 directory.
“It will not pass with this amendment,” said Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, noting that when the amendment was a stand-alone bill in the last Congress, it was subject to a hold. A hold is when a senator indicates he or she may filibuster a bill. To prevent wasting time on the Senate floor with a filibuster, items with holds are rarely brought up for consideration until the hold is removed.
“If we are going to allow ourselves to be blackmailed as we try to protect consumers, I would hate to see us not put something in a bill because we are afraid that one of our colleagues will put a hold on this bill,” said Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), the sponsor of the amendment and a critic of the wireless industry’s attempts to create a 411 directory.
Some in the industry support creating a 411 directory for wireless-phone numbers, but privacy advocates have pushed for Congress to act before the directory can be created.
A similar amendment was included when the House Commerce Committee passed its version of a telecommunications records bill earlier this month The Protecting Consumer Phone Records Act of 2006 primarily stands as a response to the theft and subsequent sale of consumers’ cell phone records. The bill outlaws such practices.
As part of the bill, consumers will also have the right to sue if they can prove that the release of their telecommunications records caused them harm. This amendment to the bill, by Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), was narrowly approved by the Senate Commerce Committee. Before the Pryor amendment passed, the bill allowed telecom carriers to file suit in federal court but did not give the same right to consumers.
“The telephone company’s interest is not the same as the consumer’s interest,” said Pryor. “It is ironic if we pass this act without the ability for the consumers to protect themselves.”
The Senate Judiciary Committee has already passed its version of a cell-phone privacy bill.
Several states also have legislation and criminal investigations pending on the issue of cell-phone call records. Recently, the California attorney general filed a $10 million lawsuit against a pretexter—someone who impersonates a telephone customer to obtain his or her phone records.
In addition to legislative action, the Federal Communications Commission recently proposed strengthening the protection of customer call records. Last month , the commission began seeking comment on five specific measures proposed by the Electronic Privacy Information Center on the topic. Although the customer-call-records scandal erupted in early January following a segment aired on the CBS Evening News, EPIC first raised the issue last August. EPIC asked that the FCC implement rules to protect customers’ call records. The wireless industry opposed the EPIC petition.
In a separate action, the House Commerce Committee Wednesday morning unanimously passed a bill to better protect data and require data brokers to notify consumers if their security has been breached and their information may be at risk.
The bill “sends a clear message: ‘If you can’t protect it, don’t collect it,’” said Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), ranking member of the House Commerce Committee.
