SHOULD STATE REGULATE `JUNK CALLS'? BY GEORGE W. GRAYSON

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: FRIDAY, January 3, 1992                   TAG: 9201030385
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-7   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium
SHOULD STATE REGULATE `JUNK CALLS'? BY GEORGE W. GRAYSON
DURING last year's General Assembly session, lobbyists torpedoed a bill designed to limit intrusions into the private time of Virginians: the proposed Virginia Telephone Privacy Act.
This bill, which flew through the House of Delegates before running into a buzz saw of opposition in the Senate, would have allowed individuals and families who do not want to receive unsolicited telephone calls to place their name in a state registry. Calling someone listed on this registry, maintained by the State Division of Consumer Affairs, would violate the Virginia Consumer Protection Act.
I introduced this legislation because of the escalating number of telephone intrusions facing local households. Often arriving during mealtime or later in the evening, these "junk calls" disrupt the privacy of the Grayson household, and I know our family is not unique.
Upon hearing of this bill, a working mother from Hampton wrote me: "It is a real imposition to have the telephone ringing with these calls when I am trying to prepare dinner or am working in the yard, after a day in the office. I need peace and quiet when I come home, and find these calls an invasion of privacy. . . . . I hope you can push through a bill which will get rid of these unsolicited calls."
Lest anyone conclude that Draconian penalties would afflict violators, let me remind you that our Division of Consumer Affairs relies heavily upon persuasion and mediation before seeking legal redress for offenses.
Telemarketing is a legitimate business. However, having purchased our telephones, consumers should have the right to say "thanks, but no thanks" to uninvited callers.
Foes of the legislation suggested taking the phone off the hook, letting it ring without answering, or relying on an answering maching.
Such options appeal to some, but the Grayson family doesn't want to miss calls from youngsters off at school or from elderly family members for whom busy signals and the answering machines are, to say the least, a colossal pain in the patoot.
Besides, even while resenting telephonic hawkers of aluminum siding and burial plots, I welcome calls from constituents at any time of the day or night.
To the lobbyists' argument that the Virginia Telephone Privacy At would throw telephone solicitors out of work, I say "NONSENSE!" In fact, such solicitors would be more efficient if they knew what numbers not to dial. Better to fish in fertile, not barren, waters.
Insurance corporations, roofing companies, securities firms and magazine-subscription agencies have computerized lists of prospects. Similarly, they can feed into their computers the numbers of those Virginians who prefer not to receive cold calls.
Consumers can have their names removed from certain national telemarketing lists via the Telephone Preference Service (TPS), 6 East 43rd St., New York, N.Y. 10017. Unfortunately, TPS's coverage is incomplete, and the service cannot penalize violators.
As former Sen. William Fears, the chairman of the key committee that considered my bill, said in his usual candid manner: "George, you've stirred up a hornet's nest with that damned telephone bill. All of the lobbyists are against it."
He was right. A battalion of lobbyists killed the bill (the vote was nine to four against) in the Senate committee. Only representatives of the Virginia Citizens Consumer Council and the Coalition on Aging spoke in behalf of the legislation. But neither of these organizations has a political action committee or makes campaign contributions.
Perhaps I am wrong, but I don't think that the high-powered lobbyists who defeated the bill represent a majority of Virginians. Nor do I believe that protecting individuals and families from so-called "junk" telephone calls will hurt business.
What do you think? Should I reintroduce telephone privacy legislation in the 1992 General Assembly? Let me know your views by writing me at P.O. Box 1969, Williamsburg, Va. 23187. As on other issues, I also welcome your phone calls at 804-253-0553 (office) or 804-253-2400 (home).

George W. Grayson represents Williamsburg, James City County, New Kent County and part of Henrico County in the House of Delegates.

by Archana Subramaniam by CNB