E-Commerce To Ban Or Regulate, That Is The E-Gambling Question by Michael Martinez      Payment-processing experts on Friday insisted that technologies are available to effectively regulate Internet gambling, but another industry official countered that view and lawmakers who oppose e-gambling defended a new law against the practice.      Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., has introduced a bill, H.R. 2046, to repeal last year's law that prohibits financial companies from processing online bets. His legislation would establish a regulatory framework to allow Internet gambling.      At a hearing on the measure, Jeff Schmidt, CEO of the identity security firm Authis, said technologies do not exist to effectively implement such a regulatory regime. He said current tools for age verification and location identification are unreliable and easily manipulated.      But Michael Colopy, the senior vice president of Aristotle, said his firm is proof that the necessary technologies are available. Aristotle provides online age-verification services for a number of clients, including the Anheuser-Busch beer company and the Motion Picture Association of America.      "What we do everyday is evidence," he said.      Ohio Republican Steven LaTourette noted the conflicting testimony provided by Colopy and Schmidt. But Colopy insisted that his company's performance trumps Schmidt's research. "It's here," Colopy said of the technology. "It's effective. ... We should use it."      Panel ranking Republican Spencer Bachus of Alabama defended the new law against e-gambling. He said it does not prohibit any kind of gambling not already to be considered illegal. "There's no compelling reason to change the course Congress wisely charted last year," Bachus said.      But Florida Democrat Robert Wexler said the law is hypocritical because of its exemptions for gambling on horse races and in state lotteries. On Thursday, he introduced a bill, H.R. 2610, that also would exempt poker and games of skill.      Texas Rep. Ron Paul, also a Republican presidential candidate, expressed reservations about prohibiting online gambling. He said that last year's statute will only drive gamblers underground.      Asterion Payments CEO Jon Prideaux, who has provided consulting services for several credit-card companies, echoed Paul's concerns. He said gamblers would be attracted to licensed sites because they would know games at those places would be operated fairly.      "Internet gambling is a fact," he said. "We must deal with it."      The panel also heard testimony from Greg Hogan, an Ohioan whose son was imprisoned after he tried to rob a bank to pay off massive e-gambling debts. Hogan argued that the current law is necessary to protect young people from similar predicaments.      Frank expressed sympathy for Hogan's plight but said it is a dangerous idea for the federal government to try to protect people from themselves. He also blamed Republicans for enacting legislation that has made it easier for credit cards to target young people, many of whom have used the cards to gamble online.      But Frank ultimately said parents are responsible for making sure their children do not use their credit cards to place online bets. "Don't tell adults they can't do something because you can't keep your 9-year-old's hands off your credit card," Frank said.

Budget Bid To Fund Tech Advice To Hill Gains Some Ground by Aliya Sternstein      There is new hope among lawmakers who are trying to resurrect a now-defunct congressional agency that used to provide scientific and technological research to lawmakers.      Late last month, Reps. Michael Castle, R-Del., and Rush Holt, D-N.J., signed a "Dear Colleague" letter that urged the House Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee to revive the Office of Technology Assessment and pledge $10 million for the first year of renewed operations.      On Wednesday, the subcommittee approved a fiscal 2008 bill that would give the Government Accountability Office $2.5 million to conduct similar technology assessments, but the bill would not establish a separate OTA.      OTA was eliminated in 1995 when Republicans took control of Congress. Proponents of the move maintained that congressional staffers, think tanks and the National Academy of Sciences could serve the same purpose.      Past efforts to bring back OTA have failed, but Albert Teich, the science and policy programs director at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, said this year's party change in congressional leadership has generated more vigorous action to do so.      "OTA was closed down when the Republicans took the reins, ostensibly for budget reasons but in reality because of politics," Teich said. The Republicans viewed the office, which was established under Democratic rule in 1974, as too closely aligned with the majority party, he added.      Most members in Congress today were not around when OTA existed, so the clean slate may mean that "old animosities are no longer relevant," Teich said. On the other hand, he noted, newer members have no experience with OTA and have no real idea of what it can do for them.      On Friday, Holt said Congress subjected itself to what others have called "a self-imposed lobotomy" by killing OTA. He has sought to undo the move since he took office.      "Most recently on genetic non-discrimination ... we were falling back on old OTA studies that are still useful," Holt, a physicist, said in pointing out the agency's continued relevance. "It's not the scientists who need OTA. It's the non-scientists who need OTA -- especially."      Peter Blair, executive director of the National Academies' engineering and physical sciences division, said the return of OTA or something like it "is inevitable at some point" because of the growing portfolio of science and technology issues facing Congress.      David Goldston, the Republican chief of staff at the House Science Committee during the last Congress and now a scholar-in-residence at Princeton University, said the gap left by OTA's absence is sometimes exaggerated by people who oppose current policy decisions. "But there is no doubt that OTA would provide additional useful assistance as it did in its heyday," he said.      The Sunlight Foundation has been lobbying hard for a renewed OTA capable of delivering information that would help its ongoing efforts to make Congress more accessible to the public online. The foundation's Paul Blumenthal said, "The issues -- the Internet, alternative energies -- of today all require some kind of technological know-how and many members are in the dark."

On The Hill Techies Take Stock After Senate's Immigration Setback by Heather Greenfield      Key senators were making progress on language to help highly skilled workers gain visas when the Senate halted its consideration of the underlying immigration bill late Thursday.      Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., removed the bill, S. 1348, after a vote to limit debate failed with just 45 votes, well short of the 60 needed. Reid said he wants to bring the legislation back when it has more support, but he does not know when.    Related Coverage Techies Lobby For More Visa Changes Senate Immigration Talks Continue Worker Verification System Criticized REAL ID Link Spurs Opposition More stories ...      The move came before any vote on the amendment about highly skilled workers drafted by Sens. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., and John Cornyn, R-Texas. Their proposal would add an employer-based merit green-card system alongside the point system for visas in the main bill.      Senate Republican Conference Chairman Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., had called the amendment a "deal breaker" because it would reserve separate visas for the employer-based program and also exempt foreign students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities from being counted toward the H-1B visa cap for skilled workers.      But after meetings with staff of Kyl, Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and those offering the amendment, Kyl and Specter emerged with an amendment of their own. It is designed to ease employer concerns that the proposed point system alone might not deliver the pool of applicants they need.      Kara Calvert, government relations director for the Information Technology Industry Council, said the Kyl-Specter amendment would create a transition period for the current employer-sponsored green-card system, and the tech industry could accept that.      "The proposal that was offered was significant," Calvert said. "We appreciate the effort of Sen. Kyl to make this work for the tech industry."      Calvert said the point system would be new and create uncertainty among employers about whether the government formula to create a hiring pool would result in the skilled workers they need. Some have questioned whether a government formula can respond quickly enough if industry needs electrical engineers one month and software engineers months later.      Storme Street, vice president of government relations for the Electronic Industries Alliance, said that despite concerns about the underlying bill, it is the best opportunity for comprehensive immigration reform.      "I don't think stopping the process helps anyone," Street said. "We hope they keep talking and bring it back again."      Robert Hoffman, an Oracle lobbyist and co-chairman of the Compete America coalition, sees reason for optimism, saying that Thursday's setback simply means more work is needed to improve the bill. He said it is still unclear who ultimately would support the vote on limiting debate had more to do with the amendment process than the legislation.      "Pulling the bill is a good tactical move by the majority leader because it forces people to redouble their efforts on getting a bill done," Hoffman said. His hope is that "taking a step back will allow some serious discussions to go on."      Another reason for optimism, Hoffman said, is that the White House is committed to passing comprehensive immigration reform.

Campaigns Why Aren't The Candidates Talking About Health IT? by Aliya Sternstein      While many politicians have proclaimed information technology as the antidote to spiraling healthcare costs, health IT rhetoric has been largely absent during this presidential campaign. The reasons for the inattention vary but do not indicate a lack of interest, healthcare experts say.      Health IT briefly surfaced as a subject of discussion late in the 2004 presidential race. But Scott Wallace, president and CEO of the National Alliance for Health Information Technology, said: "As a political campaign issue, most people are not the slightest bit interested in healthcare IT. It's not that sexy of an issue."      He said that starting the broader discussion on healthcare reform is a grand achievement in itself. "This is really the first campaign where it's been a leading issue." As for the silence on health IT, Wallace said: "We shouldn't get discouraged because it isn't a central campaign theme 18 months out. Health IT is a tactical, operating issue, not a campaign theme."      Wallace added that candidates also are not talking about generic drugs and treating chronic illness, which are other factors related to health expenses. "'I'm for early chronic-care intervention' is not [a stance] that's going to get someone elected," he said.      David Merritt, a project director at The Center for Health Transformation founded by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., said that voters currently must dig for details on each candidate's healthcare agenda. But he noted that the official Web sites of the top Democratic candidates all cite health IT and electronic medical records in their white papers.      New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a Democratic presidential candidate, actually spoke at length on the issue May 24 at George Washington University. Aside from disease prevention, she said, the "second way to bring costs under control is to bring our healthcare system's recordkeeping into the 21st century, finally leaving behind paper records and outdated, obsolete, 20th-century information technology."      In the media, Merritt said, the candidates are first identifying the health system's problems. Then they are explaining their goals for fixing those problems and, lastly, they are talking about how they are going to achieve those goals. "The general news media I don't think pays a lot of attention to the 'how,'" which is where health IT comes into play.      At Tuesday's launch of a new advocacy campaign called Health IT Now, the campaign's co-chairman -- former Sen. John Breaux, D-La. -- said the candidates should be asked about their timelines for passing health IT legislation at all campaign forums.      But Paul Ginsburg, president of the Center for Studying Health System Change, said health IT is too complicated to address during the debates.      He predicted that talk of health technology will go in one of two directions: Either the differences in the contenders' IT agendas will be too complex for citizens to grasp, so the candidates won't discuss the matter; or later in the campaign, some candidates may cite health IT as a panacea for healthcare's problems and "oversell it."

Taxes Telecom Chief Calls Net Tax Ban 'Absolutely Critical' by David Hatch      ARLINGTON, Va. -- The top telecommunications adviser to the Bush administration said Friday it is "absolutely critical" that Congress temporarily or permanently extend the Internet tax moratorium.      The ban, set to expire Nov. 1, prohibits states and localities from taxing Internet access or imposing discriminatory fees on service providers. It was originally adopted in 1998 and was last extended in 2004. Bills have been offered in both chambers to maintain the prohibition.      "As the president has said, if you want something to grow, you don't tax it," said John Kneuer, the head of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which advises the White House on telecom and spectrum policy.      During a speech at a broadband policy conference here, Kneuer said continuing the moratorium would enable companies to recoup their investments in high-speed Internet infrastructure without facing "legacy" regulations.      Kneuer also rejected the view that the broadband marketplace is dominated by a telecom-cable duopoly, instead arguing that emerging technologies such as broadband over power lines will ensure multiple "pipes" into homes.      He painted a rosy picture of domestic broadband adoption, a theme struck at the same event Thursday by Republican FCC regulator Robert McDowell. Kneuer said total U.S. broadband lines have grown 2,246 percent in 5.5 years -- from 2.8 million on Dec. 31, 1999, to 64.6 million on June 30, 2006.      The optimistic outlook of Kneuer and McDowell is in stark contrast to concerns raised by Democratic FCC regulators and lawmakers in recent months that America is falling behind other industrialized nations in per-capita subscribers.      Echoing McDowell on another theme, Kneuer questioned the accuracy of worldwide broadband rankings compiled by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development that cast the United States unfavorably. He warned that the findings create "disincentives" for developing countries to model their broadband policies after the United States.      Kneuer said NTIA is working with the OECD to ensure that its rankings fully reflect Internet usage here. Consumer and market forces, he emphasized, are a more effective regulator than the government.      Discussing wireless issues, Kneuer coined the term "tech neutrality" to describe the need for licensees to be sheltered from regulations that might prohibit carriers from adopting new mobile technologies. "I don't think we give enough credit to the wireless platform as a competitor to the wireline systems," he added.      Regarding telecom networks run by municipalities, Kneuer said, "If you're going to put public capital in competition with private capital, you ought to have a really good reason to do that." Noting that some municipal networks have not met expectations, he emphasized that if localities decide to offer communications, they should not receive special regulatory treatment.      On a related note, NTIA on Friday issued a report encouraging emergency responders to consider teaming with commercial carriers to construct a nationwide emergency network. Public-private partnerships are being considered by the FCC for spectrum in the 700-megahertz band to be relinquished by analog television broadcasters as they transition to digital signals.

Intellectual Property Who's To Blame For Piracy In Developing Nations? by Winter Casey      People in developing countries are not the biggest threat to intellectual property because they cannot afford to purchases either pirated goods or the legal products, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry.      IFPI said last month that piracy is not a result of poverty. The group said it determined that "inconvenient" truth about music piracy from a study by Professor Zhiqiang Zhang of Nanjing University, which found that Chinese citizens who bought pirated products were mainly middle or higher income earners.      IFPI also noted a study in Latin America that it said showed "that high-income groups make up a significant share of pirate buyers while low-income groups are also heavy buyers of legitimate CDs." The reports were not made accessible to Technology Daily.      IFPI's view conflicts with past arguments about piracy in developing nations, including that people in those countries opt for piracy because they cannot afford the prices of legal goods.      Shahid Akhtar of the Asia-Pacific Development Information Program said in 2005 that "many developing countries are caught up in a vicious circle of poverty and piracy. They are too poor to buy proprietary software, resulting in piracy levels of 90 percent or more in some countries [of the Asia-Pacific region]. Then, countries cannot clean their act on piracy because they are poor."      But some experts argue that it is misleading to say that poor people in developing countries are the ones purchasing pirated products because they often do not have computers, players for compact discs or digital videodiscs, or even electric power. They said other factors, such as product accessibility and the legal and economic framework within countries, influence consumers' likelihood to buy legitimate goods instead of pirated ones.      Michael Ryan, a professor at George Washington University law school, said the middle class in many developing countries would be more likely to purchase pirated goods.      "You have to be able to afford to enabling technology for piracy to be interesting," said James Lewis, director of technology at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Given relatively the same quality and the lack of a significant legal deterrent, Lewis said, wealthier people will choose pirated products over actual goods.      Still, he said piracy always will be attractive in low-income countries until legal enforcement there improves and citizens earn more money to buy goods. With better IP enforcement, he added, buying pirated goods will not be as attractive or convenient as buying legal products.      Morgan Reed, executive director at the Association for Competitive Technology, said the discussion of piracy and poverty in the developing world revolves around a mixing of intellectual property issues, social class and even subject matter.      Companies always try to sell products at prices people can afford but when piracy is so high in some developing countries the infrastructure is not established to enable a strong domestic marketplace, said Recording Industry Association of America Executive Vice-President Neil Turkewitz. This phenomenon results in imported products that cost more, he said.

On The Hill Bills Include One To Tell Consumers About Digital TV by Theresa Poulson and Sandra Gonzalez      A House measure introduced this week would require retailers and distributors to educate consumers about the change from analog television signals to digital in an effort to ease the transition for consumers. It was one of numerous new technology-related bills.      The digital TV legislation, H.R. 2566, would require that signs be placed next to all analog displays in stores, stating that set-top boxes will be necessary for the TVs to receive programming after Feb. 17, 2009. The measure also would require broadcasters to air announcements about the change and a subsidy program for set-top boxes for more than a year before the transition.      Other tech-related measures introduced this week were:      -- H.R. 2610, which would permit online gambling skill games like poker, backgammon, chess and bridge; and H.R. 2607, which would establish a process for collecting revenue from online gambling (see separate story);      -- S. 1558, which would require federal agencies to notify individuals when breaches of their personal information occur; and H.R. 2568, which would require credit-reporting agencies to inform the Secret Service about certain credit-report irregularities that may indicate identity theft;      -- H.R. 2593, which would allow local experts and Homeland Security Department experts to decide whether fences, virtual fences, border barriers or other options are the best way to address border security while also protecting public lands and natural resources; and H.R. 2561, which targets terrorists at the border;      -- H.R. 2603, which would require Homeland Security to provide special rules for screening passengers and property on helicopters operating in high-risk flight areas;      -- H.R. 2569, which aims to extend the reach of rural, high-speed Internet access;      -- S. 1559, which would reauthorize telemedicine and distance-learning services in rural areas;      -- H.R. 2580, which would authorize a 3 percent bonus payment for physicians beginning in 2008 for health information technology implementation and protect them from anti-kickback laws for the use of health IT;      -- H.R. 2592, which would provide for one or more public-private partnerships in the ongoing effort to modernize how Food and Drug Administration-regulated products are developed, evaluated and manufactured;      --S. 1577, which would encourage employers to use state-based abuse and neglect registries to screen long-term care workers during hiring;      -- H.R. 2601, which would authorize the FTC to collect fees for enforcing the "do not call'' registry against unwanted telemarketing;      -- H. R. 2600, which aims to ensure that foreign goods are subjected to the same degree of taxation imposed on U.S. goods entering other countries;      -- H.R. 2631, which would develop technology to record and track the unique elements of nuclear material;      --S. 1581, which would establish a monitoring system to record the effects of increased ocean acidity on marine ecosystem; and S. 1584, which would fund and promote technologies to aid ocean and coastal mapping;      -- And H. Res. 455, which would support the goals and ideals of National Internet Safety Month.

Today's Feature: Executive Summary Technology company executives swarmed Capitol Hill this week to talk to lawmakers about the Senate immigration bill. Every Friday, read the Executive Summary by K. Daniel Glover.

E-briefs Crime:   Rep. William Jefferson on Friday pleaded not guilty to charges of seeking more than $500,000 in bribes while he used his congressional office to negotiate business agreements in Africa, AP reported. "I am absolutely innocent of the charges that have been leveled against me," Jefferson, D-La., said after his arraignment hearing. "I'm going to fight my heart out to clear my name." He was released on $100,000 unsecured bond, with the condition that his travels be limited to Washington and Louisiana and that he not have access to shotguns and rifles in his home. Jefferson was indicted Monday for 11 bribery schemes and 16 criminal counts, including racketeering, soliciting bribes, wire fraud, money laundering and obstruction of justice. Some of the charges are related to his assistance in securing technology business in Africa. He faces a maximum sentence of 235 years if convicted. Campaigns:   An online campaign for an online presidential debate has surfaced on the Facebook social network. Patrick Ruffini, who until recently was the e-campaign manager for Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani, has started a Facebook group called "Republicans for a Google/YouTube debate." So far, 65 members have joined the call for a Republican debate similar to one that YouTube and CNN will host for Democrats in Charleston, S.C., on July 23. Backers of the debate include David All, who runs his own e-strategy consulting firm for Republicans. Ruffini left the Giuliani campaign to start an online consulting firm for Republicans, too. In the Facebook posting, Ruffini asked why Democrats should have al the fun and noted that the group will encourage Republican candidates to reach an agreement with YouTube to have "an innovative, first-of-its-kind presidential debate."

President -- John Fox Sullivan, 202-739-8468 Editor in Chief -- Louis Peck, 202-739-8481 Editor -- K. Daniel Glover (bio) Assistant Editor -- Theresa Poulson Senior Writers -- David Hatch (bio), Heather Greenfield (bio), Andrew Noyes (bio) and Aliya Sternstein (bio) Special Correspondent -- Chris Strohm (bio) Staff Writer -- Michael Martinez Senior Business Affairs Manager -- Chris Hamby Business Affairs Associate -- Anne TeBeest Advertising Sales -- Alex Treadway National Journal's Technology Daily is published every weekday, except holidays, by National Journal Group Inc., 600 New Hampshire Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20037.   ©2006 by National Journal Group Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction or transmission in any form of this product by any means—from a retrieval service or any other electronic form or from a photocopy—in whole or part without permission is strictly prohibited. National Journal Group makes no representations or warranties with respect to and is not responsible for the content of World Wide Web sites linked to by this publication but not controlled by National Journal Group. Please read the details of our Privacy Policy. Editorial: 202-266-7197 Fax: 202-266-7094 Subscription Inquiries: 202-266-7264 Customer Service: 202-266-7230 or 1-800-207-8001