```

[House Report 110-188]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

110th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    110-188

======================================================================

 
                     TRUTH IN CALLER ID ACT OF 2007

                                _______
                                

 June 11, 2007.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Dingell, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 251]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Energy and Commerce, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 251) to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to 
prohibit manipulation of caller identification information, and 
for other purposes, having considered the same, report 
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill 
as amended do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Amendment........................................................     2
Purpose and Summary..............................................     3
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     3
Hearings.........................................................     4
Committee Consideration..........................................     4
Committee Votes..................................................     5
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     5
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............     5
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures     5
Earmarks and Tax and Tariff Benefits.............................     5
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................     5
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................     5
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................     7
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................     7
Constitutional Authority Statement...............................     7
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................     7
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................     7
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............     9
Additional Views.................................................    11

                               Amendment

  The amendment is as follows:
  Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Truth in Caller ID Act of 2007''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION REGARDING MANIPULATION OF CALLER IDENTIFICATION 
                    INFORMATION.

  Section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227) is 
amended--
          (1) by redesignating subsections (e), (f), and (g) as 
        subsections (f), (g), and (h), respectively; and
          (2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following new 
        subsection:
  ``(e) Prohibition on Provision of Deceptive Caller Identification 
Information.--
          ``(1) In general.--It shall be unlawful for any person within 
        the United States, in connection with any telecommunications 
        service or VOIP service, to cause any caller identification 
        service to transmit misleading or inaccurate caller 
        identification information, with the intent to defraud or cause 
        harm.
          ``(2) Protection for blocking caller identification 
        information.--Nothing in this subsection may be construed to 
        prevent or restrict any person from blocking the capability of 
        any caller identification service to transmit caller 
        identification information.
          ``(3) Regulations.--
                  ``(A) Deadline.--Not later than 6 months after the 
                enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall 
                prescribe regulations to implement this subsection.
                  ``(B) Consideration of related regulations.--In 
                conducting the proceeding to prescribe the regulations 
                required by subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, the 
                Commission shall examine whether the Commission's 
                regulations under subsection (b)(2)(B) of this section 
                should be revised to require non-commercial calls to 
                residential telephone lines using an artificial or pre-
                recorded voice to deliver a message to transmit caller 
                identification information that is not misleading or 
                inaccurate.
          ``(4) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection:
                  ``(A) Caller identification information.--The term 
                `caller identification information' means information 
                provided to an end user by a caller identification 
                service regarding the telephone number of, or other 
                information regarding the origination of, a call made 
                using a telecommunications service or VOIP service.
                  ``(B) Caller identification service.--The term 
                `caller identification service' means any service or 
                device designed to provide the user of the service or 
                device with the telephone number of, or other 
                information regarding the origination of, a call made 
                using a telecommunications service or VOIP service. 
                Such term includes automatic number identification 
                services.
                  ``(C) VOIP service.--The term `VOIP service' means a 
                service that--
                          ``(i) provides real-time voice communications 
                        transmitted through end user equipment using 
                        TCP/IP protocol, or a successor protocol, for a 
                        fee or without a fee;
                          ``(ii) is offered to the public, or such 
                        classes of users as to be effectively available 
                        to the public (whether part of a bundle of 
                        services or separately); and
                          ``(iii) has the capability to originate 
                        traffic to, or terminate traffic from, the 
                        public switched telephone network.
          ``(5) Savings provision.--Except for paragraph (3)(B), 
        nothing in this subsection may be construed to affect or alter 
        the application of the Commission's regulations regarding the 
        requirements for transmission of caller identification 
        information, issued pursuant to the Telephone Consumer 
        Protection Act of 1991 (Public Law 102-243) and the amendments 
        made by such Act.''.

                          Purpose and Summary

    The purpose of H.R. 251, the Truth in Caller ID Act of 
2007, is to prohibit people or entities from manipulating 
caller identification information with the intent to defraud or 
cause harm.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    Most companies that offer telephone service also offer a 
caller identification (caller ID) service that can provide 
their customers with the telephone number or the name of 
calling parties, or both. Some callers, however, are employing 
technology to alter the name or number that appears on the 
recipient's caller ID display, a practice known as caller ID 
``spoofing.''
    Caller ID spoofing can make a call appear to come from any 
phone number the caller wishes. For instance, the American 
Association of Retired Persons issued a ``scam alert'' when 
someone posing as a courthouse employee called a Sterling, 
Michigan, woman claiming that she had missed jury duty that 
week. The caller threatened that a warrant was being issued for 
her arrest and then asked her to confirm her Social Security 
number in order to verify her identity. This scam appeared even 
more real when the con artist used a caller ID ``spoofing'' 
product that allowed the con artist to display the name and 
number of the courthouse on the caller ID box.
    Today, caller ID typically works through the use of 
Signaling System 7 (SS7), which is the standard for connecting 
phone companies' networks worldwide. SS7 allows the call 
originator's local telephone exchange to send a Calling Party 
Number (CPN), which includes the number of the caller and 
whether or not the caller wants their number to be blocked. By 
Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) 
regulation, when a telecommunications carrier uses SS7 to set 
up a call, it must transmit the CPN and its associated privacy 
indicator for that call to the connecting carrier. By 
regulation, consumers also have the right to conceal their CPN 
by dialing *67.
    Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service providers are 
not currently subject to the same FCC caller ID regulations 
that apply to traditional telephony. The Commission has not yet 
established guidelines for VoIP providers to handle the 
transmission of caller ID information to a called party. 
Additionally, VoIP services can give the calling party far more 
control over the content and transmission of caller ID. VoIP 
customers are able to control the features of their phone 
service through their Web settings. Some VoIP companies offer 
customers the ability to change the caller ID information that 
is distributed when a call is made. Other VoIP companies 
restrict or block the ability of their customers to change the 
calling party's phone number.
    It has been possible for a number of years to ``spoof'' or 
manipulate caller ID information, although it required specific 
phone connections and expensive equipment. With advances in 
technology and the advent of VoIP, however, it has become 
easier for callers to transmit any caller ID information the 
calling party chooses. Moreover, there are a number of online 
Web sites that offer spoofing services, eliminating the need 
for any specialized hardware. Not only can these services mask 
the correct caller ID information, but many offer voice-
scrambling services that can, among other things, make the 
caller sound like someone of the opposite sex.
    Although these caller ID spoofing services promote 
themselves for use in ``prank calls'' or for ``entertainment 
purposes only,'' such services can be easily accessed and used 
by criminals, identity thieves, or others who wish to harm or 
deceive someone. Additionally, many business functions, from 
credit card verification to automatic call routing, opt to use 
caller ID for security purposes, which spoofing can thwart.
    There are, however, legitimate reasons to alter caller ID 
information. For example, the Committee received a letter from 
the National Network to End Domestic Violence that explained 
that many phones are set to refuse blocked or private calls. It 
therefore becomes important for domestic violence shelters to 
transmit caller ID information so a call is completed, but it 
may be necessary to alter the caller ID information to ensure 
the safety of the domestic violence victims. Moreover, 
informants to law enforcement tip lines or whistleblowers have 
additional reasons to keep their calling information private. 
And many doctors, lawyers, and psychiatrists have legitimate 
reasons to keep direct lines private, with no intention of 
misleading anyone.
    Although there are specific caller ID rules that govern how 
telemarketers may transmit caller ID information, current FCC 
regulations contain no broad mandate that all callers transmit 
accurate caller ID information. H.R. 251 remedies this problem.

                                Hearings

    The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet 
held a hearing on H.R. 251 on Wednesday, February 28, 2007. The 
Subcommittee received testimony from the following: Ms. Kris 
Monteith, Chief, Enforcement Division, FCC; Ms. Staci Pies, 
Vice President, PointOne Communications, on behalf of the Voice 
on the Net Coalition (``VON''); and Ms. Allison Knight, Staff 
Counsel, Electronic Privacy Information Center.

                       Subcommittee Consideration

    On Wednesday, February 28, 2007, the Subcommittee met in 
open markup session. Chairman Markey offered an amendment in 
the nature of a substitute that clarified the definition of 
VoIP for purposes of H.R. 251 as any real-time voice 
communications service using TCP/IP or a successor protocol 
that is capable of connecting calls to, or receiving calls 
from, the public switched telephone network. The amendment in 
the nature of a substitute was agreed to by voice vote. The 
Subcommittee forwarded H.R. 251 to the full Committee, amended, 
by voice vote.

                        Committee Consideration

    On Thursday, March 15, 2007, the full Committee met in open 
markup session. Mr. Green of Texas offered an amendment to 
direct the FCC to consider whether noncommercial calls made to 
residential lines using an artificial or recorded voice should 
be required to transmit caller ID information that is not 
misleading or inaccurate. The Committee agreed to Mr. Green's 
amendment by voice vote. The Committee ordered H.R. 251 
favorably reported to the House, amended, by voice vote.

                            Committee Votes

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires the Committee to list the record votes 
on the motion to report legislation and amendments thereto. 
There were no record votes taken on amendments or in connection 
with ordering H.R. 251 reported. A motion by Mr. Dingell to 
order H.R. 251 favorably reported to the House, amended, was 
agreed to by voice vote.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    Regarding clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Subcommittee on 
Telecommunications and the Internet held a legislative hearing 
and made findings that are reflected in this report.

         Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

    The objective of H.R. 251 is to prohibit people or entities 
from manipulating caller ID information with the intent to 
defraud or cause harm.

   New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures

    Regarding compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of 
the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee finds 
that H.R. 251 would result in no new or increased budget 
authority, entitlement authority, or tax expenditures or 
revenues.

                  Earmarks and Tax and Tariff Benefits

    Regarding compliance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, H.R. 251 does not contain any 
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff 
benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of rule XXI.

                        Committee Cost Estimate

    The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared 
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to 
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                  Congressional Budget Office Estimate

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following is the cost estimate 
provided by the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974:

                                                    March 20, 2007.
Hon. John D. Dingell,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 251, the Truth in 
Caller ID Act of 2007.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Susan Willie.
            Sincerely,
                                                   Peter R. Orszag.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 251--Truth in Caller ID Act of 2007

    Summary: H.R. 251 would amend the Communications Act of 
1934 to prohibit caller identification services (known as 
Caller ID) from transmitting misleading or inaccurate caller 
identification information with the intent to defraud or cause 
harm. Prohibitions under the bill would apply to both 
traditional telephone and voice over Internet protocol (VOIP) 
services. Caller ID allows consumers to see the names and 
telephone numbers of incoming calls. The Federal Communications 
Commission (FCC) would be required to develop regulations to 
implement the new restriction.
    Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO 
estimates that implementing the bill would cost about $5 
million over the 2008-2012 period. Enacting the bill also would 
affect federal revenues by increasing collections of fines and 
penalties, but CBO estimates that any such increase would not 
be significant.
    H.R. 251 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact is shown in the following table. The costs of 
this legislation fall within budget function 370 (commerce and 
housing credit).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
                                                                       2008     2009     2010     2011     2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Estimated Authorization Level......................................        1        1        1        1        1
Estimated Outlays..................................................        1        1        1        1        1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the 
bill will be enacted by the start of 2008 and that spending 
will follow historical patterns for similar FCC programs.
    Based on information from the FCC and subject to the 
availability of appropriated funds, CBO estimates that 
implementing the bill would cost $1 million annually in each 
subsequent year to issue and enforce the new regulations.
    Enacting the bill would likely increase federal revenues as 
a result of collection of additional civil penalties assessed 
for violations of the new law and regulations. Collections of 
civil penalties are recorded in the budget as revenues. CBO 
estimates, however, that any additional revenues that would 
result from enacting the bill would not be significant because 
of the relatively small number of cases likely to be involved.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 251 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or 
tribal governments.
    Comparison with other estimates: On February 15, 2007, CBO 
transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 740, the Preventing 
Harassment through Outbound Number Enforcement (PHONE) Act of 
2007, as ordered reported by the House Committee on the 
Judiciary on February 7, 2007. That bill would establish a new 
federal crime for the fraudulent use of caller ID information 
but would not require new FCC regulations. CBO estimated that 
implementing H.R. 740 would have no significant cost to the 
federal government. Enacting H.R. 740 could affect direct 
spending and revenues, but CBO estimated that any such effects 
would not be significant.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Susan Willie; Impact 
on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Theresa Gullo; Impact 
on the Private Sector: Fatimot Ladipo.
    Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                       Federal Mandates Statement

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act.

                      Advisory Committee Statement

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee finds that the 
Constitutional authority for this legislation is provided in 
Article I, section 8, clause 3, which grants Congress the power 
to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the several 
States, and with the Indian Tribes.

                  Applicability to Legislative Branch

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

             Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation

Section 1--Short title

    The short title of the bill is the ``Truth in Caller ID Act 
of 2007.''

Section 2--Prohibition regarding manipulation of caller identification 
        information

    Section 2 adds a new subsection (e) to section 227 of the 
Communications Act. New subsection (e)(1) makes it unlawful for 
any person, in connection with any telecommunications service 
or VoIP service, to cause any caller ID service to transmit 
misleading or inaccurate caller ID information with the intent 
to defraud or cause harm. The Committee intends a common law 
definition of the term ``fraud,'' meaning an intentional 
misrepresentation of material existing fact made by one person 
to another with knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of 
inducing the other person to act, and upon which the other 
person relies with resulting injury or damage. Further, the 
Committee intends that ``the intent to defraud or cause harm'' 
standard set out in section 227(e)(1) includes all types of 
harm that may result from such caller ID ``spoofing,'' 
including financial, physical, and emotional harm.
    The Committee notes that the inclusion of the ``intent to 
defraud or cause harm'' language is intended to prohibit the 
use of caller ID technology for harmful impersonation. Such 
language is included in the section to ensure that Congress 
does not inadvertently prohibit the conduct of an individual or 
an entity who is not intending to defraud or harm the recipient 
of the call, but instead may be protecting privileged 
communications or ensuring the safety of an individual. For 
example, a domestic violence shelter may alter caller ID 
information in order to return a call to a victim in a way that 
will protect the shelter's confidential location and not alert 
the victim's abuser that she has contacted a shelter program. 
Because the shelter in this example is not intending to defraud 
or harm the recipient of the call, the shelter would not be in 
violation of the section.
    Commission regulations currently provide that any caller 
shall be able to block their caller ID information from 
reaching the end user. New subsection (e)(2) is designed to 
ensure that nothing in the bill prevents or restricts any 
person from blocking caller ID information.
    The Committee intends that this bill will not confer or 
authorize any new powers for any intelligence or law 
enforcement agency. This bill does not prohibit any lawfully 
authorized investigative, protective, or intelligence activity 
of a law enforcement agency of the United States, a State, or a 
political subdivision of a State, or of an intelligence agency 
of the United States.
    New subsection (e)(3)(A) requires the FCC to prescribe 
regulations implementing new subsection (e) within 6 months of 
enactment. Subparagraph (B) of this subsection, which was added 
by the Green amendment, requires the Commission, as part of 
that proceeding, to re-examine certain Commission regulations 
originally adopted after enactment of the Telephone Consumer 
Protection Act of 1991 (the ``TCPA''). The TCPA contains a 
general prohibition, found in section 227(b)(1)(B), against 
initiation of any telephone call to any residential phone line 
using an artificial or pre-recorded voice without express prior 
consent of the called party. The TCPA, however, also contained 
authority for the Commission, found in subsection (b)(2)(B)(i) 
of section 227, to exempt from the prohibition ``calls that are 
not made for a commercial purpose.'' The Commission's 
regulations implementing section 227 contain this exemption. 
The intent of the Green Amendment to H.R. 251 is to require the 
Commission to consider re-examining this exemption for non-
commercial entities in circumstances where the caller ID 
information is misleading or inaccurate.
    New subsection (e)(4) contains the definition of ``caller 
identification information,'' ``caller identification service'' 
and ``VoIP Service.'' VoIP Service is defined as a service 
offered to the public that provides real-time voice 
communications capable of placing calls to, or completing calls 
from, the public switched telephone network (PSTN) through end-
user equipment that uses TCP/IP protocol, or a successor 
protocol, with or without a fee.
    New subsection (e)(5) contains a savings clause indicating 
that, other than new section 227(e)(3)(B), nothing in the bill 
shall affect FCC regulations issued pursuant to the Telephone 
Consumer Protection Act of 1991.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

    In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                       TITLE II--COMMON CARRIERS

PART I--COMMON CARRIER REGULATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SEC. 227. RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT.

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) Prohibition on Provision of Deceptive Caller 
Identification Information.--
          (1) In general.--It shall be unlawful for any person 
        within the United States, in connection with any 
        telecommunications service or VOIP service, to cause 
        any caller identification service to transmit 
        misleading or inaccurate caller identification 
        information, with the intent to defraud or cause harm.
          (2) Protection for blocking caller identification 
        information.--Nothing in this subsection may be 
        construed to prevent or restrict any person from 
        blocking the capability of any caller identification 
        service to transmit caller identification information.
          (3) Regulations.--
                  (A) Deadline.--Not later than 6 months after 
                the enactment of this subsection, the 
                Commission shall prescribe regulations to 
                implement this subsection.
                  (B) Consideration of related regulations.--In 
                conducting the proceeding to prescribe the 
                regulations required by subparagraph (A) of 
                this paragraph, the Commission shall examine 
                whether the Commission's regulations under 
                subsection (b)(2)(B) of this section should be 
                revised to require non-commercial calls to 
                residential telephone lines using an artificial 
                or pre-recorded voice to deliver a message to 
                transmit caller identification information that 
                is not misleading or inaccurate.
          (4) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection:
                  (A) Caller identification information.--The 
                term ``caller identification information'' 
                means information provided to an end user by a 
                caller identification service regarding the 
                telephone number of, or other information 
                regarding the origination of, a call made using 
                a telecommunications service or VOIP service.
                  (B) Caller identification service.--The term 
                ``caller identification service'' means any 
                service or device designed to provide the user 
                of the service or device with the telephone 
                number of, or other information regarding the 
                origination of, a call made using a 
                telecommunications service or VOIP service. 
                Such term includes automatic number 
                identification services.
                  (C) VOIP service.--The term ``VOIP service'' 
                means a service that--
                  (i) provides real-time voice communications 
                transmitted through end user equipment using 
                TCP/IP protocol, or a successor protocol, for a 
                fee or without a fee;
                  (ii) is offered to the public, or such 
                classes of users as to be effectively available 
                to the public (whether part of a bundle of 
                services or separately); and
                  (iii) has the capability to originate traffic 
                to, or terminate traffic from, the public 
                switched telephone network.
          (5) Savings provision.--Except for paragraph (3)(B), 
        nothing in this subsection may be construed to affect 
        or alter the application of the Commission's 
        regulations regarding the requirements for transmission 
        of caller identification information, issued pursuant 
        to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 
        (Public Law 102-243) and the amendments made by such 
        Act.
  [(e)] (f) Effect on State Law.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(f)] (g) Actions by States.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(g)] (h) Junk Fax Enforcement Report.--The Commission shall 
submit an annual report to Congress regarding the enforcement 
during the past year of the provisions of this section relating 
to sending of unsolicited advertisements to telephone facsimile 
machines, which report shall include--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

             ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE JOE BARTON

    I do not intend the definition of ``Voice over Internet 
Protocol (VOIP)'' Service in new section 227(e)(4)(C) to be 
used in other contexts. This bill is designed to address the 
rise in spoofing caused, at least in part, by the increased 
ease with which individuals and entities can alter caller ID 
information using VoIP and similar technologies. The inclusion 
of this definition here to address that problem is in no way 
intended to suggest that I endorse use of this definition for 
other purposes, especially since the definition was 
specifically tailored to include one-way VoIP services to 
prevent such services from evading the prohibition on spoofing.

                                                        Joe Barton.

                                  

```