Internet Porn Bill Passes House
Rejected by the courts in an earlier effort to restrict Internet pornography, the House voted Wednesday to require companies to verify an adult's age before showing online material "harmful to minors."
"There are literally thousands of sites devoted to every manner of perversion and brutality," said Rep. Michael Oxley, R-Ohio, the bill's sponsor. "Unfortunately, the Web is awash in degrading smut."
Included within the bill, passed on a voice vote, was a far less controversial proposal to require companies on the Internet to obtain parental consent before collecting personal information from children on the Web.
It would require companies online to make "any reasonable effort" to get parental consent before asking children under 13 for their names or e-mail addresses. The bill is significant because it would mark the first federal privacy protection for people using the Internet, but it specifically would not affect information collected from adults.
The anti-porn legislation would require companies to verify a customer is over 16 by asking for a credit-card number, adult access code or "any other reasonable measures" before showing harmful material. Violators would face fines up to $50,000 and up to six months in prison.
"This will further erode the notion of freedom of speech," complained Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass.
The Senate voted 98-1 earlier Wednesday to attach a similar measure, sponsored by Republican Dan Coats of Indiana, to a bill that would impose a moratorium on any new state or local taxes while a federal commission sorts out tax options for electronic commerce.
Only Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., voted against attaching the measure to the Internet tax bill.
"We should think twice before giving the government the authority to regulate what is carried on the World Wide Web, however tempting it is to do that," Leahy said.
But a Senate vote on the tax issue was delayed until at least Thursday.
Votes on amendments brought the bill closer to a House-passed version, which would permit existing Internet taxes to continue and would permit the 19-member federal commission to examine issues such as taxes from mail-order sales.
Leaders of the House and Senate said the Internet tax measure is a priority, and President Clinton has said he would sign it.
If the Senate ultimately approves the tax bill with the Coats amendment, a conference committee would need to resolve differences between it and the two House bills the Internet tax bill and the separate Oxley decency bill before Congress adjourns on Friday.
Critics compare the legislation, which they describe as "CDA 2," to the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which the Supreme Court overturned last year as unconstitutional. It sought to ban anyone, not just commercial Web sites, from sending "obscene or indecent" material to minors.
"Thre may be some question about the bill's constitutionality," said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. "Fine, we'll let the courts decide that."
The administration has indicated it opposes the Internet decency legislation, although it is unclear whether Clinton would veto it. Clinton's top telecommunications adviser, Larry Irving of the Commerce Department, recommended that parents be given high-tech tools, such as software filters, rather than a "static, imperfect solution" such as a new law.
And the Justice Department warned that it "could require an undesirable diversion of critical investigative and prosecutorial resources."
The last effort by Congress to limit pornography on the Internet ironically resulted in the high hurdle confronted by lawmakers this year: The judges who threw out CDA declared the Internet "the most participatory form of mass speech yet developed" and said it is entitled to "the highest protection from governmental intrusion."
Earlier Wednesday, in New York, eight major Web companies announced a multimillion-dollar privacy initiative aimed at heading off broader new federal privacy laws.
The online campaign is aimed at educating consumers about privacy rights and encouraging companies to post policies about how they collect personal data. The industry wants to show Washington that further regulation isn't needed.
Written by Ted Bridis
©1998 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed