Legislature(1993 - 1994)

03/11/1993 03:00 PM L&C

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
  SJR 27:  FEDERAL FISHING VESSEL SAFETY RULES                                 
  Number 060                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN HUDSON brought up SJR 27 and explained that this                    
  bill was the companion bill to HJR 33 passed out of the                      
  Labor and Commerce Committee previously.                                     
  Number 075                                                                   
  REP. MULDER moved for passage of SJR 27 with a zero fiscal                   
  note and unanimous consent.  No objections were heard, it                    
  was so ordered.                                                              
  Number 100                                                                   
  REP. KAY BROWN testified as PRIME SPONSOR of HB 54.  Rep.                    
  Brown explained that the bill was introduced to address                      
  privacy issues due to the advances of technology.                            
  REP. BROWN further explained that the bill would protect                     
  Alaskan's individual privacy rights in two important areas:                  
  - it would provide caller identification "line blocking"                     
  services without charge to telephone utility customers; and                  
  - it would require telephone utilities to offer customers an                 
  opportunity to avoid telemarketing solicitations.                            
  REP. BROWN added that additions and amendments to Alaska                     
  statutes provided by this legislation would make it clear                    
  that a citizen's right to individual privacy included the                    
  right to be protected from unethical, abusive, or annoying                   
  misuse of telephones and monitoring and recording equipment.                 
  REP. BROWN suggested that Section 2 of SJR 27 be deleted as                  
  the more information in opposition to this particular                        
  section comes in.  This section concerns eavesdropping.                      
  REP. BROWN then outlined the sectional analysis.  (The                       
  sectional analysis is on file in the committee room.)                        
  Number 281                                                                   
  REP. MULDER asked Rep. Brown if she would comment on the                     
  criticism brought up in the Securities Industry Association                  
  letter dated March 5, 1993, which stated, "The FCC further                   
  noted that, ultimately, this option combines the                             
  disadvantages of maximum cost to all participants with                       
  minimal potential effectiveness, and therefore is not a                      
  suitable means of accomplishing the goals of the Telephone                   
  Consumer Protection Act."                                                    
  Number 302                                                                   
  REP. BROWN responded that the congressional author of the                    
  bill, as well as consumer groups, were not happy with the                    
  way the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) implemented                  
  the bill.  She further noted that the bill provided that the                 
  person choosing the options pays them.                                       
  REP. BROWN explained that the telemarketers are saying that                  
  it is too much of a problem to keep up with the updated                      
  information regarding who does not wish to be called and who                 
  REP. BROWN suggested that it would actually be a benefit to                  
  the telemarketers to know who wanted to be called and who                    
  Number 333                                                                   
  REP. MULDER asked how often the list would be updated.                       
  REP. BROWN responded the list would be noted in the                          
  telephone book that comes out once or twice a year.                          
  Number 358                                                                   
  REP. PORTER asked how many states offer this service, how                    
  much it costs, and how much it would cost here.                              
  REP. BROWN suggested that there were other people who would                  
  be testifying on the subject who may have that information.                  
  Number 390                                                                   
  REP. PORTER raised the concern that under the exceptions for                 
  telephone solicitation the language would allow for                          
  telemarketers to simply open up the conversation with a                      
  couple of questions and circumvent the intent of the law.                    
  Number 395                                                                   
  REP. BROWN answered that she believes the language used as                   
  the definition of solicitation was clear enough to cover                     
  that concern.                                                                
  Number 403                                                                   
  REP. HUDSON inquired what the penalty would be if someone                    
  called another party who had indicated they did not want to                  
  be called.                                                                   
  REP. BROWN replied that the attorney general could bring                     
  action and fine at the rate of $200.00 or actual damages,                    
  whichever is greater.  The court could also award punitive                   
  damages, court costs, and attorney fees, or whatever else it                 
  deemed reasonable.                                                           
  REP. SITTON stated that he appreciated the motivation                        
  driving this bill as he believes privacy is the issue of the                 
  decade.  Rep. Sitton indicated his concern that the                          
  eavesdropping portion of the bill was deleted.                               
  Number 433                                                                   
  REP. BROWN replied that federal law provides with one                        
  party's consent for the conversation to be taped.  She added                 
  that wiretapping is carefully regulated.                                     
  Number 468                                                                   
  MELLIE TERWILLIGER testified via teleconference that she was                 
  concerned about having hers or anyone else's conversations                   
  recorded without their knowledge.                                            
  Number 501                                                                   
  REP. PORTER added that a law enforcement officer cannot use                  
  a tape recorded conversation in court against an individual                  
  unless he obtains a warrant first.                                           

Document Name Date/Time Subjects