02/22/1996 09:43 AM Senate FIN

                                                                               
       SENATE BILL NO. 239                                                     
                                                                               
       "An   Act   relating   to   telephone   advertisements,                 
  solicitations,      and directory listings."                                 
                                                                               
  Testimony was  given by  the sponsor  of  the bill,  Senator                 
  Steve  Rieger.   He  advised  that  the bill  would  allow a                 
  residential telephone subscriber  to have a  notation placed                 
  in a directory expressing a desire to not  receive telephone                 
  solicitations.  With reference to  Amendment #1 the chairman                 
  of  Labor and Commerce Committee  requested the scope of the                 
  bill no longer  include opinion polls.   This would prohibit                 
  automated polling and interconnects with some Federal  laws.                 
  Reference was made to Amendment #2 and the Alaska  Telephone                 
  Association  requested  amendments put  in  by the  House be                 
  offered here to keep the two bills the same.  They felt they                 
  should not have out-of-pocket  costs to do this  notation in                 
  the directory.  This should be submitted and approved by the                 
  APUC as an extra charge.                                                     
                                                                               
  Senator  Phillips   wanted  to   know  what   triggered  the                 
  introduction of this bill.   Senator Rieger said that  there                 
  has been on-going  low level  complaints where everyone  has                 
  been bothered by calls and would like to have flexibility to                 
  control their lives a  little more and place that  notice in                 
  the directory.  It does not prohibit commercial solicitation                 
  but  rather  allows   an  individual  to  opt   to  prohibit                 
  solicitation to  themselves.   Senator Phillips  inquired if                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  this would extend  to U.S. mail.   Senator Frank noted  that                 
  some people have  "no soliciting" signs on  their mailbox or                 
  house.    Senator  Rieger further  explained  that  when the                 
  telephone rings one has no  idea if it is an  emergency call                 
  or something you do not want to answer.  It is reasonable to                 
  be able to  have some control because  sometimes these calls                 
  are very inconvenient and frustrating.   The unlisted number                 
  does not  prevent solicitation because  it is  not always  a                 
  case of using a phone book but rather a computer set of just                 
  telephone numbers provided in electronic format by the phone                 
  company to a  solicitor.    GCI requested an amendment  that                 
  they be allowed  to provide  no solicitation information  in                 
  the electronic format.                                                       
                                                                               
  Senator  Frank  asked  about  the  penalties and  the  costs                 
  allowed to be deducted by APUC.  Why would they have to have                 
  this  specifically   allowed  to  be  deducted   from  their                 
  expenses?  Senator  Rieger said this was a  specific request                 
  by  the   telephone  association  and  explained   how  they                 
  interpreted  it.  The extent of the costs would be clear and                 
  not be spread as part of  an overall residential rate.   The                 
  cost would be  borne by the one requesting the  service.  In                 
  regards to the  penalties there is  a section of the  Alaska                 
  Statutes   called  Unfair   Trade  Practices   and  Consumer                 
  Protection  and  this just  adds  to  a long  list  of items                 
  already included.                                                            
                                                                               
  Senator Sharp commented that this is different than the mail                 
  wherein  the  mail is  being  paid  for by  the  sender; the                 
  telephone is something an individual  pays for and therefore                 
  this  bill would  give the customer  some control  over what                 
  they  pay for  and who has  access to  use it for  their own                 
  commercial benefit.  Senator Sharp  elaborated as an example                 
  of the high number  of calls one might receive  between 5:00                 
  p.m. and 7:00  p.m. and that this is out of control.  He did                 
  note that charitable organizations  were excluded from  this                 
  bill.                                                                        
                                                                               
  Senator Phillips  discussed the deletion  of opinion polling                 
  and that it was also a form of solicitation.  Senator Rieger                 
  informed   the  committee   that  there  was   an  expressed                 
  permission  in  the   Federal  Law  permitting  computerized                 
  polling and also the  Telecommunications Act of 1991.    Co-                 
  chairman Halford wanted to know if this ruling under Federal                 
  Law would supercede any State law.   Senator Frank said that                 
  if that was the case our law would just be invalidated.                      
                                                                               
  Senator  Rieger  MOVED  amendment  #1  and  asked  unanimous                 
  consent.    Senator  Frank  asked  who  would  enforce  this                 
  amendment and felt  that if it  was contrary to Federal  Law                 
  then  they  should  be the  ones  to  enforce  it.   Senator                 
  Phillips reiterated the  fact that he opposes  the amendment                 
  because  if  people do  not want  to  be bothered  then they                 
  should  not  be   subject  to  any  form   of  solicitation.                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  Amendment #1 FAILED adoption.                                                
                                                                               
  Senator  Rieger  MOVED  amendment  #2  and  asked  unanimous                 
  consent.    Without  objection  amendment  #2  was  ADOPTED.                 
  Senator Rieger MOVED SCS CSSB 239(FIN) and without objection                 
  it was REPORTED OUT with individual recommendations and zero                 
  fiscal notes from the  Department of Law and  the Department                 
  of Commerce and Economic Development.