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
With wireless access, consumers will no longer be dependent upon personal computers to reach the Internet. However, wireless Internet access will only
[Page: S14614] GPO's PDF
Third-generation wireless services represent the first wave of truly broadband mobile services. Third-generation services should enable wireless users to achieve speeds of up to 384 kilobits per second. But, Mr. President, to ensure the rapid deployment of third-generation services, Congress needs to provide wireless carriers with the ability to purchase additional spectrum at future FCC auctions, which many carriers cannot do under the current FCC policy.
Manufacturers are hesitant to produce equipment for third-generation applications, and wireless carriers are unable to roll out third-generation services, because wireless carriers do not have enough spectrum to offer true third-generation services. Consumers have an opportunity to have wireless high-speed access to the Internet. But until there is regulatory certainty that carriers will be able to obtain the spectrum necessary to offer third-generation services, consumers will have to wait before they can have a mobile on-ramp to the information superhighway.
Mr. President, 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:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Third-Generation Wireless Internet Act.''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds the following:
(1) Mobile telephony has been one of the fastest growing industries of the telecommunications sector, offering consumers innovative services at affordable rates.
(2) Demand for mobile telecommunications services has greatly exceeded industry expectations.
(3) Mobile carriers are poised to bring high-speed Internet access to consumers through wireless telecommunications devices.
(4) Third Generation mobile systems (hereinafter referred to as ``3G'') are capable of delivering high-speed data services for Internet access and other multimedia applications.
(5) Advanced wireless services such as 3G may be the most efficient and economic way to provide high-speed Internet access to rural areas of the United States.
(6) Under the current Federal Communications Commission rules, commercial mobile service providers may not use more than 45 megahertz of combined cellular, broadband Personal Communications Service, and Specialized Mobile Radio spectrum within any geographic area.
(7) Assignments of additional spectrum may be needed to enable mobile operators to keep pace with the demand for 3G services.
(8) The application of the current Commission spectrum cap rules to new spectrum auctioned by the FCC would greatly impede the deployment of 3G services.
SEC. 3. WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES.
Section 332(c) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 332(c)) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
``(9) NON-APPLICATION OF SPECTRUM AGGREGATION LIMITS TO NEW AUCTIONS.--
``(A) The Commission may not apply section 20.6(a) of its regulations (47 C.F.R. 20.6(a)) to a license for spectrum assigned by initial auction held for after December 31, 1999.
``(B) The Commission may relax or eliminate the spectrum aggregation limits of section 20.6 of its regulations (47 C.F.R. 20.6), but may not lower these limits.''.
By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. BRYAN, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. FEINGOLD, and Mr. ROBB):
S. 1924. A bill to ensure personal privacy with respect to financial information , to provide customers notice and choice about how their financial institutions share or sell their personally identifiable sensitive financial information , to provide for strong enforcement of these rights, and to protect States' rights; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
THE FINANCIAL INFORMATION PRIVACY AND SECURITY ACT
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Financial Information Privacy and Security Act of 1999. I am pleased that Senators BRYAN, HARKIN, DURBIN, and FEINGOLD are original cosponsors of this legislation to protect the financial privacy of all Americans.
The right of privacy is a personal and fundamental right protected by the Constitution of the United States. But today, the American people are growing more and more concerned over encroachments on their personal privacy .
New technologies, new communications media, and new business services created with the best of intentions and highest of expectations also pose a threat to our ability to keep our lives to ourselves, and to live, work and think without having personal information about us collected without our knowledge or consent.
This incremental invasion of our privacy has happened through the lack of safeguards on personal , financial and medical information , which can be stolen, sold or mishandled and find its way into the wrong hands with the push of a button or click of a mouse.
Our right of privacy has become one of the most vulnerable rights in the information age. The digitalization of information and the explosion in the growth of computing and electronic networking offer tremendous potential benefits to the way Americans live, work, conduct commerce, and interact with their government.
It makes it possible for me, sitting in my farmhouse in Vermont, to connect with any Member of Congress or friends around the world, to get information with the click of a mouse on my computer.
But the new technology also presents new threats to our individual privacy and security, in particular, our ability to control the terms under which our personal information is acquired, disclosed, and used.
Just last week, President Clinton signed into law the landmark Financial Modernization Act of 1999, which updates our financial laws and opens up the financial services industry to become more competitive, both at home and abroad. I supported this legislation because I believe it will benefit businesses and consumers. It will make it easier for banking, securities, and insurance firms to consolidate their services, cut expenses and offer more products at a lower cost to all. But it also raises new concerns about our financial privacy .
New conglomerates in the financial services industry may now offer a widening variety of services, each of which may require a customer to provide financial, medical or other personal information . Nothing in the new law prevents these new subsidiaries or affiliates of financial conglomerates from sharing this information for uses beyond those the customer thought he or she was providing it.
For example, the new law has no requirement for the consumer to consent before these new financial subsidiaries or affiliates sell, share, or publish information on savings account balances, certificates of deposit maturity dates and balances, stock and mutual fund purchases and sales, life insurance payouts or health insurance claims.
That is wrong. You shouldn't be able to have that information and go around to anybody who wants to use it to pitch you some new product or scare you into cashing in life savings or anything else.
As President Clinton recently warned:
Although consumers put a great value on privacy of their financial records, our laws have not caught up to technological developments that make it possible and potentially profitable for companies to share financial data in new ways. Consumers who undergo physical exams to obtain insurance, for example, should not have to fear the information will be used to lower their credit card limits or deny them mortgages.
I strongly agree. If we had this information in a desk drawer at home, nobody could come in and just take it. Instead, it is in the electronic desk drawer of one of the companies we have given it to, and they can share it with anybody they want within their organization.
Mr. President, the Financial Information Privacy and Security Act of 1999 offers this Congress the historic opportunity to provide fundamental privacy of every American's personal financial information . This bill would protect the privacy of this financial information by directing the Federal Reserve Board, Office of Thrift Supervision, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Securities and Exchange Commission jointly to promulgate rules requiring the financial
[Page: S14615] GPO's PDF
In addition, this bill provides individuals the civil right of action to enforce their financial privacy rights and to recover punitive damages, reasonable attorneys fees, and other litigation costs. Privacy rights must be enforceable in a court of law to be truly effective.
To be sure, this legislation would not affect any state law which provides greater financial privacy protections to its citizens. Some states have already recognized the growing need for financial privacy protections. For example, I am proud to say that Vermont instituted cutting edge financial privacy laws five years ago. This bill is intended to provide the most basic rights of financial privacy to all American consumers. They deserve nothing less.
When President Clinton signed the financial modernization bill last week, he directed the National Economic Council to work with the Treasury Department and Office of Management and Budget to craft legislative proposals to forward to Congress next year to protect financial privacy in the new financial services marketplace. I believe the Financial Information Privacy and Security Act of 1999, which we are introducing today, should serve as the foundation for the Administration's financial privacy bill.
Americans ought to be able to enjoy the exciting innovations of this burgeoning information era without losing control over the use of their financial information .
The Financial Information Privacy and Security Act updates United States privacy laws to provide these fundamental protections of personal financial information in the evolving financial services industry.
I urge my colleagues to support it.
On privacy , in Vermont we care greatly about this. I have been in public life for a long time. During that time, I have only clipped and actually saved and framed a couple articles about me from the press.
My distinguished friend from Nevada, who is on the floor, like me lives in a rural area--he in Searchlight, I in Middlesex, VT. I live on this dirt road. I look down this valley, 35 miles down a valley, mountains on either side. I literally cannot see another house from my front yard. It is a beautiful spot, this place my parents got when I was a teenager just for a summer home. Marcelle and I have made a year-round place out of it. There is a neighboring farm family who, for 40 years, have hayed the fields and done work around there. They have known me since I was a teenager. The article I cut from the papers was from one of our largest newspapers. It was a sidebar. Here is almost verbatim the way it went.
The out-of-State reporter drives up to a farmer who is sitting on his porch along the dirt road. He says to the farmer, ``Does Senator LEAHY live up this road?'' The farmer said, ``You a relative of his?'' He said, ``No, I am not.'' He says, ``You a friend of his?'' He said, ``Not really.'' He says, ``Is he expecting you?'' The reporter says, ``No.'' The farmer looks him right in the eye and says, ``Never heard of him.''
Now, we Vermonters like our privacy . This was a Saturday, and the farmer wasn't about to tell somebody where I lived and direct him down the dirt road to it. It is a humorous story, but I kept that over the years because it reminds me of other ways to protect our privacy . By the same token, I would not want--whether it is that reporter or somebody I never met--to go onto a computer and find my bank statements, my medical records, my children's medical records, or my spouse's, and find out whether we have applied for a mortgage or not, or find out whether we have bought life insurance or cashed in life insurance. So I think we have to ask ourselves as we go into the new millennium, one where information will flow quicker and in more detail than could have even been conceived a generation ago--it could not have been conceived at the time my parents purchased that beautiful spot in Vermont. Ten years from now, we will move faster and with more complexity than we could even think of today.
So I think the Congress, if it is going to fulfill its responsibility to the American people, has to do more and more to protect our privacy and allow technology to move as fast as it can, but not at the price of our individual privacy . We all know basically what we, our friends, neighbors, families, would want to give up of their personal privacy --not very much. Think to yourself, if this was something you had in the top drawer of your desk at home, knowing nobody could get it, they would need search warrants or they would break the law by coming in and taking it. That is all the more reason why on somebody's computer they should not be allowed to take it.
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. REID, Mrs. BOXER, and Mr. BRYAN):
S. 1925. A bill to promote environmental restoration around the Lake Tahoe basin; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
THE LAKE TAHOE RESTORATION ACT
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, in June, joined by Senators REID, BOXER, and BRYAN, I introduced the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act (S. 1192) which would jump start the process of cleaning up Lake Tahoe.
Lake Tahoe, one of the largest, deepest, clearest lakes in the world is in the midst of an economic crisis. Water clarity is declining at the rate of more than 1 foot each year; more than 1/3 of the trees in the forest are either dead or dying; and sediment and algae-nourishing phosphorus and nitrogen continue to flow into the lake from a variety of sources.
Over the last few months, I worked with the Congressmen from the Tahoe areas, Representative DOOLITTLE and Representative GIBBONS to craft a House version of the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act that could garner bipartisan support. I am pleased that we've been able to build on S. 1192 and develop a compromise bill which I am introducing today.
Like S. 1192, this bill first and foremost authorizes the necessary funding to clean up and restore Lake Tahoe. This bill includes two major changes:
First, to address the problem of MTBE in the Lake Tahoe basin, I added a section that provides $1 million to the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency and local utility districts to clean up contaminated wells and surface water.
Second, to help local governments who would otherwise be burdened by relocation costs that may be needed to clean up the basin, this bill promises that the federal government will pay 2/3 of any needed relocation costs.
I believe these provisions improve on the original bill and increase the breadth of support for this bill.
The bill requires the Forest Service to develop an annual priority list of environmental restoration projects and authorizes $200 million dollars over 10 years to the forest service to implement these projects on federal lands. The list must include projects that will improve water quality, forest health, soil conservation, air quality, and fish and wildlife habitat around the lake.
In developing the environmental restoration priority list, the Forest Service must rely on the best available science, and consider projects that local governments, businesses, and environmental groups have targeted as top priorities. The Forest Service also must consult with local community leaders.
The bill requires the Forest Service to give special attention on its priority list to five key activities: acquisition of environmentally sensitive land from willing sellers, erosion and sediment control, fire risk reduction, cleaning up MTBE contamination, and traffic and parking management, including promotion of public transportation.
The Lake Tahoe Restoration Act also requires that an additional $100 million be authorized over 10 years be as payments to local governments for erosion
[Page: S14616] GPO's PDF
I spent my childhood at Lake Tahoe, but I had not been back for a number of years until I returned for the 1997 Presidential summit with President Clinton. I saw things I had never seen before at Lake Tahoe.
I saw the penetration of MTBE in the water and learned that 30 percent of the South Lake Tahoe water supply has been eliminated by MTBE. I observed gasoline spread over the water
surface. I noticed that a third of the magnificent forest that surrounds the lake was dead or dying. I saw major land erosion problems that were bringing all kinds of sediment into the lake and which had effectively cut the lake's clarity by thirty feet since the last time I had visited. And then I learned that the experts believe that in 10 years the clouding of the amazing crystal water clarity would be impossible to reverse and in 30 years it would be lost forever.
The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency estimates that it will cost $900 million over the next 10 years to restore the Lake.
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