Idaho phone companies hope to stop "Do Not Call" list
BOISE, Idaho- Phone companies aim to lift Idaho's 13-year-old restriction forbidding them from cold-calling existing customers, arguing it's crippling their ability to market high-speed Internet.
But Attorney General Lawrence Wasden is already criticizing the push, arguing residents who joined Idaho's million-number "Do Not Call" list shouldn't have to fear erosions of their privacy.
Land-line companies Frontier Communications and Century Link are lobbying for the changes during the 2013 session.
Under Idaho's 2000 "No-call" law that halted most unwanted phone solicitation, most businesses were allowed to continue calling existing customers to sell things.
But phone companies were forbidden.
Today, Frontier and Century Link say they need to call customers to sell new products to stay viable.
Idaho cable communications companies who compete with the telecoms for Internet customers meet this week to discuss the deregulation gambit.
The AP contributed to this report.
But Attorney General Lawrence Wasden is already criticizing the push, arguing residents who joined Idaho's million-number "Do Not Call" list shouldn't have to fear erosions of their privacy.
Land-line companies Frontier Communications and Century Link are lobbying for the changes during the 2013 session.
Under Idaho's 2000 "No-call" law that halted most unwanted phone solicitation, most businesses were allowed to continue calling existing customers to sell things.
But phone companies were forbidden.
Today, Frontier and Century Link say they need to call customers to sell new products to stay viable.
Idaho cable communications companies who compete with the telecoms for Internet customers meet this week to discuss the deregulation gambit.
The AP contributed to this report.
I do not want the no call list to be removed. Â If it is there should rules that limit the number of calls allowed and the time of day they would be allowed - also a place one could contact to report abuses.
I have a business line and a phone line at my house. Â The business line goes nuts all day/night with phone solicitors which take up precious business time. Â There are many other ways to sell products other than making phone calls. Â This should be considered an invasion of privacy for ALL phone lines.
The company I deal with has my email address and there is no reason for them to have more than one means of communicating with their customers. Any announcements of new products can me sent to me electronically. There is no reason to allow them any further access to me.
I would like to see this situation tightened up a step more. Today the telephone companies charge a fee for blocking calls from callers who hide their phone numbers. Since this is an invasion of our privacy, the PUC should stop phone companies from charging to preserve our privacy. Let us choose for free to block, or not block, calls from foreign VoIP (Voice offer Internet Protocol) call centers, and from businesses in the US who hide their calling number. That would give the citizens a definite phone number that could be reported to Do Not Call for those who do not believe the law will stop their advertising calls.
Â
Cold calling was rampant before Do Not Call legislation. Today the Do Not Call situation has eliminated 99% of cold calls for those who subscribe to that service. You do have to be willing to lodge a complaint with Do Not Call for those few who think the law does not apply to them, but for the most part it does work. Registering an on-line complaint against scofflaws only takes a couple of minutes and mostly you do not hear from them again.
Â
I for one would not like to go back to the open anarchy of having unwanted advertising phone calls disrupting my dinner, my sleep, and my work. After all, I am paying for that phone service...not the advertisers who without some sort of limits would insist on using it as their own advertising conduit...at my expense.
I hope it makes it out of committee. It will see which politicians has been bought.