|
|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE |
|
CONTACT: Jay Purdy |
State Rep. Mike
McGeehan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lawmakers offer relief from campaign ‘robo-calls’
HARRISBURG, Feb. 7 – State Sen. Michael O’Pake, D-Berks, and state Rep. Mike McGeehan, D-Phila. have introduced bills (S.B. 70, H.B. 293) in their respective chambers that would expand the state’s “Do Not Call” law to include automated political messages. Under the current Do Not Call Act, people can add their names to a list of telephone customers whom telemarketers cannot call.
The lawmakers held a Harrisburg news conference today to unveil the legislation they believe would bring the swarms of messages under control.
The legislators said many Pennsylvanians have been demanding a way to unplug themselves from political “robo-calls.” Those prerecorded computer-dialed phone calls have been on the rise in recent years, moving from the status of effective campaign tool to an annual visit by a plague of locusts, interrupting dinners and sleep.
O’Pake’s bill also would require that a political robo-call begin with an identification of the sponsor of the call.
A third measure (H.B. 295) introduced by state Rep. Eugene DePasquale, D-York, would mandate that the beginning of an automated political message include the name of the organization or candidate funding the call, something that paid television and radio commercials and political mail already must do. This would stop the tactic of some campaigns producing messages that appear to be from the opponent of the candidate actually paying for the call.
O’Pake said automated calls only increase public distrust and dislike for the political process by making people hostages in their own homes to unwelcome intrusions of robo-calls.
"Parts of my district experienced some of the most outrageous and disturbing abuses during the past election,” said O’Pake. “People need to be able to lock the door on these unwanted peddlers and their messages. This legislation gives them the key.
“That they are on behalf of candidates or issues does not make these calls less intrusive or annoying than commercial calls, and this last election cycle showed they can be even worse.”
McGeehan said people were particularly incensed by a robo-call employed in suburban Philadelphia that began with a woman sobbing, causing many listeners to think for a moment that it was a distraught loved one.
“This was at least as bad as an obscene phone call,” said McGeehan. “When used in moderation, robo-calls could play a positive roll in informing voters, but last fall, the level-headed messages were swept along in a tidal wave of intrusive, obnoxious, repetitious, aggravating and sometimes outrageously misleading calls.”
McGeehan added that in a second Philadelphia-area congressional campaign, the robo-call onslaught deteriorated into a nasty “Did too! Did not!” scenario of attack and counterattack with telephone customers caught in the middle, helpless to keep the argument from infringing on them at home.
“Our bills would not be arbitrary restrictions on free speech in the political process,” said McGeehan. “Rather, they would put control in the hands of telephone consumers. If they don’t want the interruptions of automated political calls, they would put their name on the Do-Not-Call list. If they don’t mind the calls, they don’t have to do a thing.”
“Robo-calls have been an instrument used by politicians or interest groups to try and destroy people’s reputations – with no accountability,” said DePasquale. “I agree with Representative McGeehan that the ‘Do-Not-Call’ list needs to be respected for political calls as well.
“However, for those not on that list, they have a right to know who is paying for the call. My legislation seeks to do just that. If someone is going to try and pull a dirty trick, they should at least acknowledge who is paying for it.”
The legislation also would establish fines for violations on a per-call basis, which would rapidly make violations extremely expensive for perpetrators.
The restrictions would not apply to “live” political calls.
“Unlike the automated calls, if the recipient is ticked off by the timing on contents of a live call, they can make their displeasure known instantly in whatever way they see fit,” McGeehan added.
Both O’Pake and McGeehan initially introduced their bills shortly before the end of the legislative session in November to begin momentum toward action in the new session now under way.
##jp/2007/mjh
l:\print\releases\robocalls5.173