GEC C.S.H.B. 2128 75(R)BILL ANALYSIS BUSINESS & INDUSTRY C.S.H.B. 2128 By: Janek 4-15-97 Committee Report (Substituted) BACKGROUND Currently, telephone solicitors can block their identity on caller identification devices. PURPOSE HB 2128 would require telephone solicitors, based in Texas, to reveal on caller identification devices that they are a telephone solicitor. It would require that a code name be given to solicitors that would appear on caller ID boxes. RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency or institution. SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS SECTION 1. Amends the Public Utility Regulatory Act, Section 3.302, by making an exception to the per-call and per-line blocking requirements through the addition of new subsection (e). Subsection (e) would prohibit a provider of Caller ID from offering per-call or per-line blocking to a telephone solicitor, and would require that the caller identification information of the solicitor indicate him as a solicitor. SECTION 2. Public Utility Regulatory Act of 1995 is amended by making telecommunications providers notify their customers with caller ID and provide them with the "identification of telephone solicitor" code. Per-line blocks by solicitors must be removed by January 1, 1998. SECTION 3. Effective Date of this Act is September 1, 1997. SECTION 4. Emergency Clause. COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE SECTION 1. Subsection (e) would now prohibit telemarketers from using any method to per-call block or per-line block their identity from a caller identification device rather than prohibiting the providers from offering per-call blocking and per-line blocking to the telemarketer. Also, subsection (e) of the original bill would no longer require an "ID code" be given to telemarketer but require the phrase "telephone solicitor" or "solicitor" to appear on the ID devise. SECTION 2. The original bill required the provider to distribute the "ID code" of the telemarketer to their customers who had caller ID services. The substitute no longer required this section since the responsibility of caller ID subscription was put on the telemarketer. The remaining sections of the substitute were then renumbered.