THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Doc Contents
I stated during hearings on the study legislation, before the Senate Subcommittee on Forests and Public Land
[Page: S13801] GPO's PDF
What I could not have expected and what I am extremely pleased to report is that the support for protection of the White Clay Creek is so strong, that over 190 miles of the approximately 400 river miles studied in the watershed are being requested for designation today. Clearly, Delawareans and Pennsylvanians alike understand the value of preserving areas as unique as the White Clay Creek.
And, the legislation I am introducing will do just that. It directs the National Park Service to incorporate 190.9 miles of the White Clay Creek and its tributaries into its National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Along with the designation, all 15 local governments within the watershed area have unanimously supported, through the passage of resolutions, the ideals and goals of the White Clay Creek Management Plan. The plan, developed by the White Clay Creek Task Force, will ensure long-term protection of the White Clay Creek watershed, emphasizing the importance of local governments working together, which is key in obtaining the federal designation I am seeking today.
Designation of the White Clay Creek and its tributaries will bring national attention to the unique cultural, natural and recreational values of the area. It will provide an added level of protection from over development, by requiring an in-depth review by the National Park Service of any proposed project requiring federal permits or federal funding in the affected area. And finally, it elevates the value of the watershed when applying for state, local and federal preservation grants.
Of the 69,000 acres in the watershed, 5,000 acres are public lands owned by state and local governments, the rest is privately owned and maintained. There are no federal lands within the watershed and no federal dollars will be used to purchase any land within its boundaries.
I believe the protection of the White Clay Creek watershed to be one of the most important environmental initiatives I have undertaken since taking office in 1973, and it is my hope that Congress will act quickly on this bill so it can be preserved not only for us, but also for all the generations to come.
By Mr. EDWARDS:
S. 1850. A bill to amend section 222 of the Communications Act of 1934 to modify the requirements relating to the use and disclosure of customer proprietary network information, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
TELEPHONE CALL PRIVACY ACT OF 1999
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. President, I rise to talk about privacy and about how we can regain some control over our personal information. Privacy is an increasing concern for all Americans. And the public rightly believes that their control over some of their most personal information is being slowly but surely eroded.
Today I introduce legislation that would help end that erosion. The ``Telephone Call Privacy Act of 1999,'' would prevent telecommunications companies from using an individual's personal phone call records without their consent, in order to sell that individual products or services.
Most Americans would be stunned to learn that the law does not protect them from having their phone records sold to third parties. Imagine getting a call one night--during dinner--and having a telemarketer try to sell you membership in a travel club because your phone calling patterns show frequent calls overseas. My legislation would prevent this from occurring without the individual's permission.
Mr. President, no one denies that the rapid development of modern technology has been beneficial. New and improved technologies have enabled us to obtain information more quickly and easily than ever before. Students can participate in classes that are being taught in other states, or even other countries. Current events can be broadcast around the world as they happen. And companies have streamlined their processes for providing goods and services.
But these remarkable developments can have a startling downside. They have made it easier to track personal information such as medical and financial records, and buying habits. And in turn, our ability to keep our personal information private is being eroded. I have to say there are times when it feels like companies know more about me than I know myself.
The list of ways our privacy is being eroded is growing longer and longer. And sadly telephone call privacy got added to the list this August when the 10th Circuit struck down FCC regulations aimed at protecting privacy and implementing congressional intent.
The decision was the result of a suit filed by U.S. West against the FCC arguing that its regulations restrict the ability of carriers to engage in commercial speech with customers. In August, the Tenth Circuit issued its decision in the case and agreed with U.S. West. The court stated that ``privacy is not an absolute good because it imposes real costs on society.''
I believe the court was terribly wrong. Individuals have a reasonable expectation that their calling habits are not being shared with third parties without their knowledge or permission. And when I weigh the right of people to control who has access to their personal information against the ability of companies to use only one of many marketing methods, there is no question that the right of people to privacy is overriding. Surely people have a right to control some of their most private information. And surely they have the right to prevent harassing and unwanted solicitations. I for one cannot believe that expanding the variety of marketing techniques at a company's disposal is more important than a person's privacy right.
Mr. President, let me describe how my legislation would address the problem. Current law defines information about who we call, how often, and how long we talk to them as ``customer proprietary network information, '' or ``CPNI.'' It is possible for telephone companies to track an individual's CPNI and use it to market various products and services to that person.
My legislation requires that consumers be notified about potential disclosures of their private calling information and allows them to have some measure of control over how their information can be used. Specifically, my bill would do two things.
First, if a telecommunications carrier wishes to use CPNI in order to market its own products or services to them, it must provide each customer with a clear and conspicuous notice stating the type of calling information that may be used and the purpose for which it will be used. The customer may contact the carrier to deny permission to use their information within 15 days of the notice. If the customer does not contact the carrier in that time, the carrier can use the customer's CPNI to market its products and services to that customer. In other words, customers are provided with a limited opportunity to ``opt-out'' of the sharing of their information under these circumstances.
The second part of my bill addresses situations where a carrier wishes to share a customer's CPNI with a third party, such as a telemarketer. In these situations, in addition to providing the customer with notice, the carrier must also receive prior written approval from the customer. My bill clearly spells out that customers must affirmatively ``opt-in'' before a carrier can sell calling information to any third party.
The ``Telephone Call Privacy Act'' also allows for some reasonable and common sense exceptions. If a telecommunications carrier uses a customer's CPNI to provide the customer with the very services the carrier used to obtain the calling information, or if law enforcement or the courts require CPNI for certain reasons, the carrier does not need to provide the customer with notice and the opportunity to opt-out or opt-in.
Mr. President, consumers are very worried about how their personal information is being used. In 1994, a Harris Survey assessed Americans' views about privacy. It found that eighty-two percent of people surveyed are concerned about threats to their personal
[Page: S13802] GPO's PDF
Something must be done to empower consumers to prevent their private calling information from being used without their consent. The Telephone Call Privacy Act is an important step towards this goal. I believe the principles set forth in my legislation are a reasonable way to protect privacy and do not unduly burden the ability of businesses to market their products and services.
As Justice Brandeis said in his famous dissent in Olmstead v. U.S., ``the right to be let alone [is] the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.'' The government must not only refrain from violating this right, but it must also ensure its preservation. I believe the Telephone Call Privacy Act is a sensible means to achieving this goal. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Telephone Call Privacy Act of 1999''.
SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO USE AND DISCLOSURE OF CUSTOMER PROPRIETARY NETWORK INFORMATION.
(a) MODIFICATION OF REQUIREMENTS.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Paragraph (1) of section 222(c) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 222(c)) is amended to read as follows:
``(1) PRIVACY REQUIREMENTS FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIERS.--
``(A) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B) or as required by law, a telecommunications carrier that receives or obtains customer proprietary network information by virtue of its provision of a telecommunications service may use, disclose, or permit access to customer proprietary network information that identifies a customer as follows:
``(i) In the provision of--
``(I) the telecommunications service from which such information is derived; and
``(II) services necessary to, or used in, the provision of such telecommunications service, including the publishing of directories.
``(ii) In the case of the use of such information by the telecommunications carrier for the provision of another of its products or services to the customer, only if the telecommunications carrier--
``(I) provides the customer a clear and conspicuous notice meeting the requirements set forth in subparagraph (C);
``(II) permits the customer to review such information for accuracy, and to correct and supplement such information; and
``(III) does not receive from the customer within 15 days after the date of the notice under subclause (I) notice disapproving the use of such information for the provision of such product or service to the customer as specified in the notice under such subclause.
``(iii) In the case of the use, disclosure, or access of or to such information by another party, only if the telecommunications carrier that originally receives or obtains such information- -
``(I) meets the requirements set forth in subclauses (I) and (II) of clause (ii) with respect to such information; and
``(II) receives from the customer written notice approving the use, disclosure, or access of or to such information for the provision of the product or service to the customer as specified in the notice under subclause (I) of this clause.
``(B) CUSTOMER DISAPPROVAL.--Notwithstanding the previous approval of the use, disclosure, or access of or to information for a purpose under clause (ii) or (iii) of subparagraph (A), upon receipt from a customer of written notice of the customer's disapproval of the use, disclosure, or access of or to information for such purpose, a telecommunications carrier shall terminate the use, disclosure, or access of or to such information for such purpose.
``(C) NOTICE ELEMENTS.--Each notice under clause (ii) or (iii) of subparagraph (A) shall include the following:
``(i) The types information that may be used, disclosed, or accessed.
``(ii) The specific types of businesses or individuals that may use or access the information or to which the information may be disclosed.
``(iii) The specific product or service for which the information may be used, disclosed, or accessed.''.
(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.--Paragraph (3) of such section is amended by striking ``paragraph (1)'' both places it appears and inserting ``paragraph (1)(A)(i)''.
(b) JUDICIAL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES.--Such section is further amended by adding at the end the following:
``(4) JUDICIAL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES.--
``(A) IN GENERAL.--A person that receives or obtains consumer proprietary network information may disclose such information- -
``(i) pursuant to the standards and procedures established in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or comparable rules of other courts or administrative agencies, in connection with litigation or proceedings to which an individual who is the subject of the information is a party and in which the individual has placed the use, disclosure, or access to such information at issue;
``(ii) to a court, and to others ordered by the court, if in response to a court order issued in accordance with subparagraph (B); or
``(iii) to an investigative or law enforcement officer pursuant to a warrant issued under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, an equivalent State warrant, or a grand jury subpoena, or a court order issued in accordance with subparagraph (B).
``(B) REQUIREMENTS FOR COURT ORDERS.--
``(i) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in clause (ii), a court order for the disclosure of customer proprietary network information under subparagraph (A) may be issued by a court of competent jurisdiction only upon written application, upon oath or equivalent affirmation, by an investigative or law enforcement officer demonstrating that there is probable cause to believe that--
``(I) the information sought is relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation; and
``(II) the law enforcement need for the information outweighs the privacy interest of the individual to whom the information pertains.
``(ii) CERTAIN ORDERS.--A court order may not be issued under this paragraph upon application of an officer of a State or local government if prohibited by the law of the State concerned.''.
(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.--The amendments made by this section shall take effect 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Doc Contents