 | |
| |
TechnologyDaily Mobile
'Robocall' Controversy In Rhode Island
by Michael Martinez
Legislation in Rhode Island to amend the state's rules against unwanted telemarketing to include political calls has raised constitutional concerns.
State Sen. William Walaska has crafted a bill that would curtail the use of automated "robocalls" during political campaigns, The Providence Journal reported Wednesday. The Democratic lawmaker said at a committee hearing this week that he wrote the bill after he received complaints from constituents during last year's elections about the intrusiveness of such calls.
His bill, S.B. 21, would create a political "do not call" list of telephone numbers that would be off-limits to robocalling. The measure would impose fines up to $1,000 per violation on those caught making unsolicited calls to registered numbers on the list, which would be maintained by the state Board of Elections.
The state Senate Judiciary Committee did not hold a vote on the measure this week, and the bill is being held for further study. According to the Journal, Walaska is considering revising his proposal to prohibit robocalls.
At this week's hearing on the bill, some expressed concerns about whether creating a political do-not-call list would violate the First Amendment. Political calls currently are exempt from the federal do-not-call list and are considered constitutionally protected speech.
Stephen Brown, executive director of the state's American Civil Liberties Union affiliate, told the panel that Walaska's proposal would risk free-speech violations for the sake of preventing robocalls that he considers a "mere nuisance." Representatives from the Rhode Island Federation of Teachers and Health Professionals and Ocean State Action also objected to the bill.
But Walaska said political robocalls are more than just an annoyance; for many of his constituents, they are "an invasion of their privacy, the sanctity of their home."
Other states are likely to examine the issue as well this year. North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper and Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon have asked lawmakers in their states to draft legislation on robocalling.
Florida Official Ponders E-Voting Receipts
Florida's chief election official this week told state lawmakers that he is examining potential legislative measures to require that e-voting machines produce verifiable paper trails.
The Palm Beach Post reported Wednesday that Secretary of State Kurt Browning told the state Senate Ethics and Elections Committee that he has the authority to impose such a requirement on local election officials. New Gov. Charlie Crist, a Republican, has indicated that he favors requiring voting machines to produce paper trails for audit and recount purposes.
E-voting glitches are at the center of the controversy over a disputed U.S. House race in November in Florida's 13th District. Republican Vern Buchanan won the seat by 369 votes, but Democrat Christine Jennings has challenged his victory in court. She also has called on the U.S. House Administration Committee to launch its own review of the matter.
The contested race was conducted on touch-screen machines that do not produce paper receipts. The controversy has prompted some lawmakers, including Crist, to consider whether such machines should be allowed in future elections, according to Browning.
"We're looking at that and our desire is to have something for the legislature to consider as we move into this process," said Browning, who was appointed to his post by Crist.
Committee Chairman Lee Constantine, a Republican, did not commit to backing potential paper-trail legislation. But he said his constituents have been satisfied with the equipment used in his district that would satisfy such measures.
"Clearly, the counties that have paper trails like mine are pretty happy with that," he said. "And those other supervisors of elections should start looking themselves at what makes their customers happy, which is the voters in their counties."
N.Y. Employee Scanners Draw Fire From Unions
A $180 million plan in New York City to install biometric scanners at workplaces to track city employees has drawn fire from several labor unions.
At a city council hearing Tuesday, several unions expressed strong opposition to the use of biometric scanners, which already are being used at the city's Design and Construction Department. According to The New York Times, the unions argued that the scanners were intrusive and unnecessary, and could be used for nefarious purposes.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg authorized the initiative as a means to make the city's workforce more efficient. Spokesman Stu Loeser told the Times that the new timekeeping system is likely to save the city a significant amount of money.
"Virtually every employee, including salaried employees in the mayor's office, has to file a timesheet, even those paid a flat salary," he said. "Use of scanners, which are not uncommon in the private sector, makes it easier for employees to file timesheets and saves the city personnel costs."
But according to Claude Fort, the president of the Civil Service Technical Guild, the new system actually is wasting taxpayer money. He told the city council the initiative also has been poor for the morale of city employees. "Not only has there been phenomenal waste and inefficiency resulting from poorly designed software, but the new system has actually cheated city employees out of pay and accrued time," he said.
In other privacy-related news, The Kansas City Star reported last weekend that 26 computer tapes from the Internal Revenue Service with information on Missouri taxpayers have gone missing.
Assistant Kansas City Manager Rich Noll told the Star that federal and state investigators are probing the missing tapes, which were delivered to City Hall last summer. IRS and city officials did not elaborate on what kind of personal information could be exposed by the loss of the tapes.
"We have no reason to believe there was any foul play," Noll said.
City spokeswoman Mary Charles said that the city never received that particular type of tape from the IRS before last summer, and that there is no evidence they ever reached officials at the city's Finance Department who were responsible for reviewing them.
"The tapes were never reviewed, so we don't know what's on there," she said.
NEW FEATURE
-Advertisement-
-Advertisement-
-Advertisement-
