Hello, I'm calling on behalf of the Elephant in the Room. Would you like to buy an Elephant in the Room?

Opposition to the "Do Not Call" List Claims First Political Victim

(Well, maybe not the first but the most famous)

As noted in the original telemarketing_votes.html page (appended below), one of the few US Congresspeople who voted against the Federal "Do Not Call" List is one Ron Paul.

This had gone essentially unnoticed, and was ascribed to some political beliefs of Ron Paul, perhaps relating to the gub'ment not telling telemarketing scum what to do. As mentioned in the "voted against" page, this was more significant as an indication of the individual Congresspeople's regard for their constituents than for the effect on the "Do Not Call" List itself. (The List received nearly unanimous Congressional support.)

Now, in 2007-08 Ron Paul is running for President. As in "The President", "White House Occupant". POTUS.
In order to gain the Republican Party nomination, Ron Paul would have to defeat several prominent pols.

But there's another way. If no single candidate garners enough nomination deligates, one of two things happens:

1. One or more nominees drops out and enough of the delegates of that nominees move to a different candidate; one candidate enters the Republican National Convention with sufficent delegates to take the nomination anyway.
2. No one candidate takes the nomination going into the convention, resulting in a brokered convention. This was how Ron Paul was to have a chance at the election.

Come Ron Paul. Ron Paul has mounted a sort of grass roots campaign, and would be in an excellent position to garner enough votes from a brokered convention to win the nomination.
Except for one problem -- that vote against the "Do Not Call" List.

In contrast, more realistic possibilities are ... well just think of the descriptors of all of the major US candidates and what they either are or what their political positions are:

• Receiving financial support from special interests (other than the telemarketing industry)
• Receiving substantial financial support from people with criminal indictments
• Supporting the war in Iraq
• Refusing to support the war in Iraq
• Refusing to support the war in Iraq sometimes and supporting the war in Iraq other times
• A documented history of "tanking" national health care programs
• Religious beliefs issues
• Open support for a woman who expressed a desire to drive off the George Washington Bridge with her children.   (That was within earshot of the child.   As of October-07, the candidate still has not retracted her support.)
• Opposing abortion
• Supporting abortion (choice) - in a Republican primary
• Both opposing and supporting abortion (also a Republican)
• A Republican candidate who supported gun control

Obviously all of these are major issues, yet those candidates were viable.

John McCain now has the GOP nomination cinched, but that wasn't a given at the beginning of the campaign. It is noteworthy that during the nomination, a candidate "getting less votes than RonPaul" was regarded as a definitive loss.

Maybe Ron Paul should have "called" on his telemarketing industry supporters to get the nominating convention to take him seriously.

Put another way, The Telemarketing Scum Page took on Ron Paul (on regulating telemarketing operations). And won.

The US national "Do Not Call" list has started accepting numbers.
Information on the new FCC "Do Not Call" List

(More information on the Federal Telemarketing Rule is at the Telemarketing Scum Page)

---

BACKGROUND

On 24-Sep-03, a federal judge in Oklahoma (or someplace like that) issued a temporary injunction staying the implementation of the "do not call" provisions of the Federal Telemarketing Rule. The basis for the injunction is that the FTC exceeded its legislative mandate in invoking the Rule. HELLO ?!! -- Didn't Congress specifically fund this "do not call" list last February (2003)?

This injunction is subject to review by the Federal Court of Appeals (10th Cir. if this is from Oklahoma).

In the meantime, it is likely that Congress will enact enabling legislation expeditiously. There are 50 million people who signed onto the "do not call" list. If 1 in 1000 of those people call their Congressional representatives, they will receive 50,000 calls on the subject. No matter how much lobbying the telescum do, no elected official wants to get the blame on this one!

The House (lower house of US Congress) passed new enablement legislation 25-Sep-2003 412 to 8. The debate lasted an hour. (The Holy See in the Vatican is considering whether to classify this as a miracle.) The Senate is expected to pass corresponding legislation that evening or the next day. === Senate voted 95-0; Pres. Bush xpct'd to say "Add me to your 'do not call' list." faster than he'd send Saadam Hussain to Gitmo.

=== Meantime, the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) indicated that they would accept the list should the court block the FTC (Federal Trade Comm'n) from enforcing the call prohibition. This could be implemented as "emergency rulemaking" under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA).

Further information on Yahoo (search for "Telemarketing" under the "news")

---

The Votes

There were two bills:

H R 395: Do-Not-Call Implementation Act

Passed the House 12-Feb-2003

The original bill to ratify, enable, and authorize funding for the Rule implemented by the FTC, and to mandate the FCC implement a corresponding rule.

H R 3161: To Ratify the Authority of the Federal Trade Commission to Establish a Do-Not-Call Registry

Passed the House 25-Sep-2003. Enacted within a day after some Oklahoma judge ruled the "do not call" provisions of the Federal Telemarketing Rule invalid.

LATEST:

As of Tuesday, 7-Oct-03 the 10th Cir. Ct. Appeals reversed the Denver court's injunction, meaning the FTC is cleared to enforce the "Do Not Call" provisions of the Telemarketing Regulation, and presumably forward a copy of the list to the FCC. In addition, the FCC is enforcing parallel rules. This can be reversed by the lower court, but the 10th Circuit indicated it didn't think a challenge would be likely to succeed when brought back through the Ct. of Appeals. Ultimately this will be either reviewed by the Supremes (without Diana Ross) or they'll deny cert. and allow a circuit court ruling to stand.

The FTC's "Do Not Call"  is now also the FCC's list. The lists are being maintained jointly by the FTC and FCC. Several links to the list are below.

opinion.   (wordperfect format).

The 10th Circuit uses a particular four-part test for temporary injunctions, requiring (paraphrased)

go to 10th Cir. website for the more recent opinion which is also there but i'm too tired to get the url. that's the one reversing the denver court. -s (i guess i'm turning this thing into a blogsite)

1. liklihood of success on appeal
2. irreparable harm to the plaintiff in motion
3. absence of harm to third parties
4. risk of harm to public intent

This contrasts in its wording with the traditional 3-part test used in most US jurisdictions, and specifically takes into account public and third-party interests.

Of greater interest is the fact that the 10th Circuit court expressed an opinion that they would probably rule in favour of one party (the FTC). "... On the record presented, we conclude that petitioners have failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits ... ."10th&Cir. no. 03-9571, 26-Sep-03.

The Oklahoma District Ct. ruling relates to jurisdiction and was made moot by the Telecommunications Rule Enablement Law, presumably signed into law on 29th Sep. Curiously, the Denver District Ct. ruling contradicts the Oklahoma District Ct. ruling on the matter of jurisdiction.

Also of note, it does not appear that the corresponding FCC rule, using the same list, was subject to either court ruling. This would have meant that even if the FTC "Do Not Call" list is held unenforcable, there would be no corresponding ruling affecting the FCC's rule.

Congressmen Who Voted Against

H R 395: Do-Not-Call Implementation Act, passed the House 12-FEB-2003

I decided to bite my tongue and not use derogative names here. Besides, these people, if elected, have at least a moderate amount of intelligence.

Nay Votes (7):

1. Bishop (Brigham City, UT, r, Representative Rob Bishop) (note - there is at least one other "Bishop")
2. Strickland (Lucasville, OH, d, Governor Ted Strickland)
3. Paul (Surfside, TX, r - supposedly running for Presidental nomination, 2008, Representative Ron Paul)
4. Terry (Omaha, r, Representative Lee Terry)
5. Flake (Yes, that's his real name. Mesa, AZ ,r, Representative Jeff Flake)
6. Ryan (Niles, OH, d, Representative Tim Ryan) (note - there is at least one other "Ryan")
7. Tancredo (Littleton, CO, r, Representative Thomas Tancredo)

H R 3161: To Ratify the Authority of the Federal Trade Commission to Establish a Do-Not-Call Registry

These are at clerk.house.gov Nay Votes (8):

1. Bishop (Brigham City, UT) (note - there is at least one other "Bishop")
2. Kendrick Meek (Miami, FL, d, Representative ) (note - there is at least one other "Meek-")
3. Strickland (Lucasville, OH, d)
4. Chris Cannon (Mapleton, UT, r, Representative )
5. Paul (Surfside, TX, r - supposedly running for Presidental nomination, 2008)
6. Terry (Omaha, r)
7. Flake (Yes, that's his real name. Mesa, AZ ,r)
8. Ryan (Niles, OH, d) (note - there is at least one other "Ryan")

(Duplicate names -- the Congressmen from NY, WI, KS all voted in favor or abstained. I did not include abstentions because under the circumstances of a 412-8 vote, being 'present' was merely symbolic.)

The above list has 2 from Utah. Utah only has 3 Representatives total!

This was an easy one, given the 50 million who signed up for the list before it started.

The Senate unanimously passed both bills.

Obviously, if a politician has a reasonably secure seat, xe can afford to stick that middle finger at the public (or the 70% who ultimately signed onto the List), but also presume that to be close to the highpoint of xyr career. As soon as a close election comes along, expect the public to be reminded of that middle finger!

---

Federal "Do Not Call" List) Links

The US national "Do Not Call" list has started accepting numbers.
(The link will be posted shortly; meantime the links below should get you there within a few clicks.)
a target="new" href="http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/12/donotcall.htm">FTC Announcement
newer FTC "Donotcall List" information
- Sign-up was to begin July-'03, but has started 27-June. (10 million people signed up that weekend!) FTC "donotcall" homepage (This is it!)
donotcall.gov/ (direct link to the registry itself)
Registro Nacional "No Llame" la Regulacin de Ventas de Telemercadeo - de FTC en Español
(Yahoo - Reuters Story)

Seattle Community Network
SCN Member Pages

site first posted November 3, 1996 ~~ rev February 13, 2008 ~~ written in WordPerfect 5.1 ~~ copyright 2003 by S. Protigal ~~ Feel free to link to this.