HB 54 - TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION Number 179 REP. KAY BROWN, PRIME SPONSOR OF HB 54, noted that at the last committee hearing on this bill the committee discussed the proposed committee substitute (CS) which deletes section 2 and focuses on two main areas: caller identification and the other unlawful telephone solicitation. REP. BROWN further noted that at the last meeting a number of questions were raised that she attempted to answer in the memo the committee had been given. (This memo is on file in the committee room until the end of session.) Number 219 REP. MULDER moved to adopt CSHB 54(L&C). No objections to the adoption of the CS were noted, it was so ordered. Number 226 REP. GREEN informed the committee that TOM ROY of the ALASKA TELEPHONE ASSOCIATION was not able to be at this meeting but wanted it to be known that he opposed the bill as currently written, but with some compromise that he could support it. Number 245 GAIL GAREY, MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS, testified via teleconference in opposition to this bill, especially the sections regulating telephone solicitation. Ms. Garey cited the Federal Communications Commission regulation as the answer to the problems brought up by consumers. (Note: There were some technical problems regarding Ms. Garey's testimony on the teleconference network.) MS. GAREY noted that this further prohibition would only duplicate what the federal government already did. REP. BROWN asked Ms. Garey if MCI currently markets any products or services in Alaska. MS. GAREY replied that MCI does not have the authority to market in Alaska on an intra-state basis, but they do offer 800 service. REP. GREEN suggested that HB 54 be held for gathering further information. Number 405 REP. BROWN noted that both Reps. Green and Porter were on the next committee of referral and she would prefer to have the bill move on and do further work in that committee. Number 411 REP. MULDER stated he supported section 1 of the bill, but he thought sections 2 and 3 send a wrong message to businesses that makes it difficult to do business here. Rep. Mulder moved to delete sections 2 and 3 of HB 54. Number 429 REP. BROWN stated she believed that sections 2 and 3 will have a positive effect on business since it will in effect weed out those persons who don't wish to be telemarketed. REP. PORTER said he was not completely convinced regarding the need for sections 2 and 3, but he did not wish to see them taken out at this time. Number 500 Discussion ensued regarding how sections 2 and 3 would affect consumers and business. TAPE 93-22, SIDE B Number 001 Discussion continued. Number 073 REP. MULDER moved to delete sections 2 and 3 of HB 54. No objections were heard, it was so ordered. Number 100 REP. PORTER moved for passage of CSHB 54(L&C) as amended with zero fiscal note and effective date. No objections were noted, it was so ordered. Number 130