Legislation could open cell phones to robocalls

The communications landscape has changed dramatically since the Telephone Consumer Protection Act was passed in 1991, and a House bill would bring it up to date by treating cellular phones more like traditional wireline phones.

But H.R. 3035, The Mobile Information Call Act of 2011, could be either a boon for customers by enabling better communications or a bane that opens up cell phones to harassing robocalls, witnesses told a House panel Nov. 4.

“In today’s world, with more and more individuals relying solely on mobile phones, it is becoming even more important to permit informational calls to mobile devices,” said Stephen Alterman, president of the Cargo Airline Association, which often needs to contact customers about shipments. He told the Energy and Commerce Committee's subcommittee on Communications and Technology that “upwards of 50 percent of all contact numbers provided are, in fact, cell phone numbers,” and that current laws prevent automated or prerecorded calls to those numbers.

But removing that prohibition would lead to abuses by telemarketers and debt collectors, said Delicia Reynolds Hand, legislative director National Association of Consumer Advocates, who also testified on behalf of the National Consumer Law Center.

“Harassing robocalls on consumer cell phones will become the new norm if H.R. 3035 becomes law in its present form,” Hand said. In current economic conditions, “consumers need increased protection, not additional exposure to robocalls and harassment from debt collectors.”

When the Telephone Consumer Protection Act was passed to protect customers from intrusive telephone marketing, it allowed many types of informational and businesses calls to be made to traditional landline telephones. But cell phones were a relatively new technology at that time, and virtually all unsolicited calls to cellular numbers were banned under the TCPA.

In 1991 there were only 7.5 million cell phone customers, and most of them paid for incoming calls, so all telemarketing and prerecorded or automated calls were prohibited to those numbers. Today there are about 300 million cellular subscribers and landlines are being replaced in many households. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about one in four households is wireless.

These shifts have made it difficult for some businesses that rely on automated calls to reach customers for legitimate purposes and for school systems or government agencies to reach students and families with information about snow days and other emergencies.

“This shift creates challenges for companies and government agencies that want to provide legitimate informational calls to individuals who are not reachable in any other way and who may value such calls,” said Michael Altschul, general counsel at CTIA – The Wireless Association.

The bill is intended to bring regulations for contacting cell phones into line with those for wireline service. Automatic dialing systems would be redefined so that automated dialing of specific lists of numbers would be allowed, and indiscriminate generation of numbers or dialing in sequence still would be prohibited.

Faith Schwartz, executive director of the HOPE NOW Alliance, a mortgage industry group that supports loan counseling as an alternative to foreclosure, said consumers would benefit from the proposed law.

“The single greatest obstacle to keeping a delinquent borrower in their home is the inability to contact them and make them aware of the workout options available,” Schwartz said. “We know from experience that often borrowers in financial distress do not open mail, cancel their land-line service or increasing rely on wireless phones as their primary or exclusive communications device.”

But Hand said the current law is sufficiently modern and flexible and should be preserved, and that the bill’s proposed definition of “prior business relationship” would be too broad for cellular protection. Emergency and consent provisions already allow contact to any number, and cell phones are kept private for a reason, she said. “H.R. 3035 is simply unnecessary and potentially harmful.”

Indiana Attorney General Gregory Zoeller expressed concern that the new bill would interfere with enforcement of state laws.

“H.R. 3035 will create obstacles to effective enforcement of state consumer protection laws and go far beyond the stated goal of giving debt collectors a new avenue to contact debtors,” Zoeller said. “The state proposes that Congress instead eliminate any suggestion from the TCPA that state statutes regulating interstate telephone and fax harassment are pre-empted.”



Reader Comments

Sat, Nov 26, 2011 Allen J. Ellison Texas, USA

i agree with everyone else. These robo-calls serve no purpose at all. telemarketers are already breaking the law as they are right now, still calling people even when on DNC under the pretense of an informational call. But with the new bill allowing them to call cellphones, too? That's a nightmare. If the lawmakers need more people against the new bill, they're free to visit consumer complaint sites such as http://www.callercenter.com and read all the post there. Some people may find this new bill acceptable, but not everyone shares their opinion.

Thu, Nov 10, 2011 Dave K

I never answer calls if I don't recognize the number, so DNC or not makes no difference to me. Even when I recognize the number I usually let voicemail take it... I value my time and refuse to let the tools I own become my owners.

Wed, Nov 9, 2011 Alan3 Kentucky

Snow Days? Responsable parents know to find out, it is not nessesary to have a automatic diling system for that. I agree with the comment that they should be illegal with maybe the exeption of natural disasters and that should be optional for the cell phone owner. I paid for my phone, I pay for my service and I should be able to choose who uses the service I pay for.

Tue, Nov 8, 2011

BS

Mon, Nov 7, 2011

I'll have to set ring tones for my contact list, refuse to answer all other calls and discard the voice message without retreiving them. If I get charged for "attempted" contacts, I'll look for another carrier.

Show All Comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above