Ben Campbell

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Will the Chair tell us the pending business and the division of the time on this amendment?

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, my colleague is not yet here, so I suggest the absence of a quorum and ask unanimous consent that no time be charged against Senator Stevens during that quorum call.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Was there a unanimous-consent request dividing the time, 2 minutes equally divided?

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, Senator Bingaman and Senator Stevens have not yet arrived at the floor so, until they do, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, are there any further amendments to S. 1023?

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that S. 1023 not be engrossed and that it remain at the desk pending receipt of the House companion measure.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, the staff and Senator Kohl have worked very hard on this bill. We have tried to accommodate all of the Members' suggestions. It is probably not a perfect bill, but we think it is a good bill. We ask that Senators support its passage.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that will address a significant consumer issue--the unauthorized change of telecommunications subscribers from one carrier to another, otherwise known as slamming. Consumers have the right to choose their primary long distance company and to change companies whenever they wish. Sometimes a consumer's telecommunications company is changed without the consumer's knowledge or consent, a practice known as slamming. As competition among telecommunications carriers has increased, so has the number of complaints arising from unauthorized or unknowingly authorized changes of consumers' telecommunications carriers. To give an idea of the scope of the problem, the Federal Communications Commission [FCC] reports that it received over 1,700 complaints during fiscal year 1993. By 1995, that number had escalated to over 38,000 consumer telephone complaints and over 25,000 written complaints. In fact, the FCC says slamming complaints are their fastest growing category of consumer complaint, and my home State of Colorado ranks among the top five States in 1996 slamming complaints per million customers. The FCC reports that a slammed consumer may lose important service features, get lower quality service, or be charged higher rates for his or her telephone calls. Slamming also distorts the telecommunications competitive market by rewarding companies that engage in deceptive and misleading marketing prices. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 includes provisions designed to reduce slamming, and it charges the FCC to adopt rules to implement these provisions. The bill I am introducing today will give teeth to the Commission's efforts to curb slamming. I firmly believe that enforcement, streamlined processing of slamming complaints, and consumer education will help stem the tide of unauthorized carrier changes. My bill, the Interstate Slamming Prevention Act of 1997, imposes a deadline of April 30, 1998 for the completion of the FCC's rulemaking on slamming. Currently, the Telecommunications Act does not define a deadline for action, and one is needed to ensure that consumers are protected as soon as possible from companies that engage in deceptive marketing practices. Nine months is sufficient time for the FCC to build a full record, solicit input from all interested parties, and put forth new antislamming rules. My legislation directs the FCC, in its rulemaking, to develop rules and regulations regarding penalties and liabilities--including substantial fines or forfeitures under section 503 of the Communications Act--for the unauthorized switching of a customer's preferred telecommunications carrier. It also directs the FCC to consider whether telecommunications carriers should be required to set up toll-free numbers dedicated to reporting unauthorized long distance carrier switches, with the obligation for a customer service representative to answer incoming calls within 2 minutes. I support such a toll-free number with call answering standards. Requiring consumers to pay for a call to report a slamming incident or having them endure a long wait before speaking to a customer service representative, would pose real barriers to accurate reporting. My legislation further directs the Commission to consider a process that would secure facts and statistical data from telecommunications carriers related to the number of consumer complaints they receive regarding slamming. By October 31, 1998, the bill directs the FCC to report to Congress the identities of those telecommunications carriers that represent the 10 top slammers for 1997--based on the ratio of annual customer complaints regarding unauthorized carrier changes to the total number of customers served by such carriers. It is my hope that such a list will serve as an effective deterrent to companies contemplating deceptive marketing campaigns. Negative publicity could be the best defense in the fight against slamming. This report also should identify whether telecommunications carriers have been assessed fines or forfeitures by the Commission--including the amount of the fine or forfeiture, and whether the assessment was the result of a full prosecution or pursuant to a consent decree. After the first report in October 1998, the bill requires an annual report be submitted by the FCC to Congress each April 30. Before Congress takes more dramatic action in this regard, my bill would look to the FCC for its recommendations on the following issues: Whether consumers should be provided a private cause of action, with minimum statutory penalties, relating to unauthorized slamming; whether the FCC's current fine and forfeiture authority is sufficient to meaningfully address and curb actions of telecommunications carriers that engage in slamming; and what penalties should be applied to telecommunications carriers which switch a customer's preferred telecommunications carrier without a customer's authorization either willfully and knowingly or by means of a forged document? It is simply unfair for unsuspecting consumers, especially senior citizens, who in good faith select a long distance carrier only to have their long distance phone service changed without their knowledge. Slamming is unfair and against the law. My bill will help protect consumers from this unfair practice. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Record. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that will address a significant consumer issue--the unauthorized change of telecommunications subscribers from one carrier to another, otherwise known as slamming. Consumers have the right to choose their primary long distance company and to change companies whenever they wish. Sometimes a consumer's telecommunications company is changed without the consumer's knowledge or consent, a practice known as slamming. As competition among telecommunications carriers has increased, so has the number of complaints arising from unauthorized or unknowingly authorized changes of consumers' telecommunications carriers. To give an idea of the scope of the problem, the Federal Communications Commission [FCC] reports that it received over 1,700 complaints during fiscal year 1993. By 1995, that number had escalated to over 38,000 consumer telephone complaints and over 25,000 written complaints. In fact, the FCC says slamming complaints are their fastest growing category of consumer complaint, and my home State of Colorado ranks among the top five States in 1996 slamming complaints per million customers. The FCC reports that a slammed consumer may lose important service features, get lower quality service, or be charged higher rates for his or her telephone calls. Slamming also distorts the telecommunications competitive market by rewarding companies that engage in deceptive and misleading marketing prices. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 includes provisions designed to reduce slamming, and it charges the FCC to adopt rules to implement these provisions. The bill I am introducing today will give teeth to the Commission's efforts to curb slamming. I firmly believe that enforcement, streamlined processing of slamming complaints, and consumer education will help stem the tide of unauthorized carrier changes. My bill, the Interstate Slamming Prevention Act of 1997, imposes a deadline of April 30, 1998 for the completion of the FCC's rulemaking on slamming. Currently, the Telecommunications Act does not define a deadline for action, and one is needed to ensure that consumers are protected as soon as possible from companies that engage in deceptive marketing practices. Nine months is sufficient time for the FCC to build a full record, solicit input from all interested parties, and put forth new antislamming rules. My legislation directs the FCC, in its rulemaking, to develop rules and regulations regarding penalties and liabilities--including substantial fines or forfeitures under section 503 of the Communications Act--for the unauthorized switching of a customer's preferred telecommunications carrier. It also directs the FCC to consider whether telecommunications carriers should be required to set up toll-free numbers dedicated to reporting unauthorized long distance carrier switches, with the obligation for a customer service representative to answer incoming calls within 2 minutes. I support such a toll-free number with call answering standards. Requiring consumers to pay for a call to report a slamming incident or having them endure a long wait before speaking to a customer service representative, would pose real barriers to accurate reporting. My legislation further directs the Commission to consider a process that would secure facts and statistical data from telecommunications carriers related to the number of consumer complaints they receive regarding slamming. By October 31, 1998, the bill directs the FCC to report to Congress the identities of those telecommunications carriers that represent the 10 top slammers for 1997--based on the ratio of annual customer complaints regarding unauthorized carrier changes to the total number of customers served by such carriers. It is my hope that such a list will serve as an effective deterrent to companies contemplating deceptive marketing campaigns. Negative publicity could be the best defense in the fight against slamming. This report also should identify whether telecommunications carriers have been assessed fines or forfeitures by the Commission--including the amount of the fine or forfeiture, and whether the assessment was the result of a full prosecution or pursuant to a consent decree. After the first report in October 1998, the bill requires an annual report be submitted by the FCC to Congress each April 30. Before Congress takes more dramatic action in this regard, my bill would look to the FCC for its recommendations on the following issues: Whether consumers should be provided a private cause of action, with minimum statutory penalties, relating to unauthorized slamming; whether the FCC's current fine and forfeiture authority is sufficient to meaningfully address and curb actions of telecommunications carriers that engage in slamming; and what penalties should be applied to telecommunications carriers which switch a customer's preferred telecommunications carrier without a customer's authorization either willfully and knowingly or by means of a forged document? It is simply unfair for unsuspecting consumers, especially senior citizens, who in good faith select a long distance carrier only to have their long distance phone service changed without their knowledge. Slamming is unfair and against the law. My bill will help protect consumers from this unfair practice. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Record. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, on behalf of the majority leader, today the Senate will resume consideration of S. 1023, the Treasury, general Government appropriations bill, with 10 minutes of debate remaining on the bill. At 10 a.m., a series of votes, possibly three, will occur on the remaining pending amendments to the Treasury, general Government appropriations bill, including a vote on final passage of S. 1023. Following the disposition of S. 1023, the Senate will resume consideration of the VA-HUD appropriations bill. Therefore additional votes will occur during today's session of the Senate. As a reminder, the Senate will recess from the hours of 12:30 to 2:15 today for the weekly policy luncheons to meet. On behalf of the leader, I thank my colleagues for their attention.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. I thank my colleague from Oklahoma for raising this important issue. The fact that this data is not now made available only adds to the public's mistrust of Government. I look forward to working with you to develop an appropriate solution.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that amendments Nos. 942 and 943 be modified, and I send those modifications to the desk.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 921, adopted previously, be modified and I send that modification to the desk.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that amendments Nos. 940, 941, 942, as modified and 943, as modified, be adopted, en bloc, and that the motion to reconsider the vote on the adoption of those amendments be laid upon the table.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, the Senator from Vermont is correct. The Senate report clearly states that if the July RIF did not address the employment shortage at the Newport IRS office, that the Service should move forward with the waiver. Because that RIF will be delayed for some time, IRS should move forward immediately with the Newport hiring waiver.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following individuals be granted privilege of the floor for the duration of the consideration of S. 1023, the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 1998: Patricia Raymond, Tammy Perrin, Lula Edwards, Barbara Retzlaff, Frank Larkin and Jay Kimmitt.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I am pleased today to introduce legislation to extend and improve the native American veteran direct loan pilot program. I am pleased to add Senators Johnson, Domenici, and Hatch as cosponsors of this legislation. America's most important resource has always been the individuals willing to lay down their lives for their country. Throughout our history we have been blessed with men and women willing to put themselves at risk for the greater good. Native Americans have been proud to be a part of this Nation's defense. From the revolutionary era to our ongoing peacekeeping missions around the globe, native Americans have served and continue to serve the United States honorably. It may surprise some members to know that native Americans served, suffered, and died in service to this Nation even though they were not allowed to be citizens until 1924. As a veteran I feel a special kinship with all those men and women who served this Nation in peacetime and in war. As an Indian veteran I am keenly aware of the dedicated service Indians, Alaskans, and Hawaiians have given--often without recognition of their sacrifice. How can we compensate these men and women for making the greatest sacrifice they could? There is no dollar value we can place on a life. At the very least, we must provide the basic benefits of health care, housing, and education to those that laid down their lives for America. Since 1992, the Department of Veterans Affairs has operated a direct housing loan program to help native America veterans build decent homes. I was amazed to find out that in the last 5 years, that program had provided eight Indian veterans with loans. That is not an indication that all Indian veterans have no housing needs. During a hearing on veterans issues, members of the Indian Affairs Committee saw videotape of the houses used by Navajo veterans. They looked like something you would see in a Third World nation, not America. Houses had holes in their roofs and walls and plastic sheets for windows. Many houses do not have working plumbing and water has to be carried from miles away. This is certainly not the appreciation and respect war veterans deserve. Native Americans seeking home loans face many obstacles unique to Indian country, including poor economic conditions and the fact that the land cannot be used as collateral. But the most surprising revelation at the committee's hearing was that the majority of Indian veterans seem to have little or no knowledge that the VA's direct loan program exists. If they do, many do not know how or where to apply. The Government has no problem finding these men and women when it is time to draft them to fight in a war. But when it is time to pay them back for their sacrifice, the effort just is not there. That is why the bill I introduce today does more than extend the direct loan program for 3 years. It includes measures to boost the Department of Veterans Affairs' efforts to implement the direct loan program for native American veterans. The bill places new requirements on the Department to consult with tribal organizations, native veterans organizations, and other groups prior to making decisions under the act. It also expresses Congress's desire that the Department carry out vigorous outreach and education efforts to inform potential beneficiaries of the housing assistance benefits under the act. The bill requires the Department to submit annual reports to the Committee on Indian Affairs, the House Resources Committee, and the Veterans' Committees of both Chambers containing a description of the outreach activities undertaken by the VA on a regional basis, with a second mandate that the VA conduct an assessment of how effective these efforts have been in encouraging greater use of the loan program. We must honor the service and sacrifice of our warriors. We must recognize the sacrifice they have made for all of us. The direct loan program is an ambitious idea designed to help our veterans with the most basic human need: a roof over their heads. It should not sit unused because of bureaucratic complacency. It is my hope that this reauthorization, with the appropriate changes, will jumpstart the Department's efforts to make the program available to native veterans and help them use it. I believe it is the least we can do. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this critical legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and a section-by-section analysis be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. CAMPBELL. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 934

Mr. CAMPBELL. The amendment has been cleared by the majority side, Mr. President.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, at this time I would like to yield some time to Senator Collins, who would like to speak on the amendment.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, the amendment has been cleared by our side. We ask for its immediate adoption.