WASHINGTON : House Expected to Vote Soon on Proposal to Curb ‘Junk Faxes’

Junk mail has spawned what could be called Son of Junk Mail or Junk Mail II. It’s the junk fax.

The problem is so severe in some quarters that the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee has passed legislation to restrict the use of telephone facsimile machines as well as their audio counterparts, automatic dialing recorded message players.

The Telephone Advertising Regulation Act (H.R. 2921) is expected to come up for a vote on the House floor any day now.

“The bill is intended to protect the legitimate privacy rights of consumers and to protect the public safety,” said Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), who worked with the Federal Communications Commission and direct-marketing industry to draft the bill. “The legislation is not designed to impose unreasonable burdens on telemarketers or to ban the appropriate use of these new technologies.”

By next year, the number of fax machines in offices, homes and other places is expected to reach 5 million, according to the American Facsimile Assn. Lawmakers are concerned that many machines will be swamped by mass marketers selling everything from submarine sandwiches to fax paper.

The bill would authorize the FCC to establish a national clearinghouse that would keep lists of telephone subscribers who do not want to receive the electronic equivalent of junk mail. The service would be provided at no cost to consumers. Advertisers would have to pay to obtain the list.

The FCC would set penalties for advertisers who failed to abide by the list. The bill would also require the agency to set technical and procedural standards for fax and automatic dialing systems.

Markey, chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee’s subcommittee on telecommunications, wrote the bill, along with the ranking minority member, Rep. Matthew Rinaldo (D-N.J.). It combines two bills proposed by Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Marge Roukema (R-N.J.).

The Markey-Rinaldo version is “a reasoned approach” to the issue, said Mag Gottlieb, director of government affairs for the Direct Marketing Assn. “However, we are concerned any time Congress attempts to limit First Amendment commercial speech.”

The bill is not expected to meet serious opposition in the House. So far, there is no companion legislation in the Senate.

‘Right to Strike’ Battle Promises to Be Bitter

People in Congress worried that unions are losing one of their most effective tools--the right to strike--have proposed legislation to retain it. The effort may ignite a labor-business donnybrook.

Rep. William L. Clay (D-Mo.) has signed up 114 co-sponsors for his bill to prohibit employers from hiring permanent replacement workers during a strike. Sen. Howard M. Metzenbaum (D-Ohio) introduced companion legislation in the Senate and has 10 co-sponsors. The bills are highly controversial and staffers in both bodies say it is unlikely either will come up for a floor vote soon.

“There is currently no effective right to strike in this country,” Clay said at a hearing of the House labor-management subcommittee. “American workers find that, all too frequently, the result of exercising the fundamental right to strike is to lose their job.

“Once a strike was thought to be a means by which employees could seek to maintain or improve their wages and working conditions. Today, the strike is used by employers to get rid of a union. The method is simple. An employer demands that workers accept unreasonable contract concessions--in effect, daring the workers to strike. The employer then sits back to see if the employees bite. This makes a mockery of collective bargaining.”

Clay traces the problem to former President Ronald Reagan’s firing of air traffic controllers and hiring of permanent replacements in 1981. He says it was a “green light” for private employers to use similar tactics.

Not surprisingly, business and industry are in a fury over the legislation.

Pete Lunnie, director of employee relations at the National Assn. of Manufacturers, said strikes and the right to hire permanent replacements work as countervailing forces, and tinkering with the balance could damage the system.

Fred Krebs, manager of business and government policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, echoed Lunnie. “The right to strike is not unconditional,” he said. “It must be balanced with an employer’s right to stay in business.”

Organized labor is just as determined to back the measure, which Alan Reuther, assistant general counsel at the United Auto Workers, called “not just a labor issue, but a civil rights issue.”

Securities-Abuse Bills Clear House Panel

Markey and Rinaldo teamed up again on one of two pieces of legislation giving the Securities and Exchange Commission broader power to curb penny stock fraud and other illegal activities.

Both the Penny Stock Bill (H.R. 4497) and the Securities Law Enforcement Remedies Act (H.R. 975) recently passed the House Energy and Commerce Committee. They could arrive on the floor for votes before Congress’ summer recess. Similar bills are making their way through the Senate.

Penny stocks are speculative securities that usually sell for $5 or less on the over-the-counter market. They are often used to finance small, new companies, but have frequently been employed in all manner of investor scams.

Currently, the SEC has the authority to seek significant fines and other civil penalties only for insider trading violations. It can only warn other violators or, as a last resort, revoke their licenses.

Markey and Rinaldo, joined by Rep. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), introduced the penny stock bill to expand the SEC’s authority.

The proposal would encourage regulators to develop an automated stock quotation system to help investors track penny stock prices. It also would strengthen disclosure procedures and set limits on how much money could be raised for unspecified investments--so-called blind pool offerings.

The SEC, the Consumer Federation of America and the North American Securities Administrators Assn. support the legislation.

The other piece of the package is a bill introduced by Rep. John D. Dingell (D-Mich.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, that would expand the SEC’s authority to levy civil penalties in securities fraud cases.

Under the bill, the SEC could ask judges to impose fines in other fraud cases besides just insider trading. It also could ask judges to bar violators from serving as officers and directors of publicly traded companies.