BRIAN P. BILBRAY
50TH DISTRfCT. CAUFORNIA
2410 RAYBURN House OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, DC 20515
(202) 225-0508
FAX (202)225-2558
DISTRICT OFFICE,
380 STEVENS AVE., #212
SOLANA BEACH, CA 92075
(858) 350-1150
FAX (858) 350-0750
QIougrt!Hi of fqt 1[uiltb ~faft!i
Bousr of 18rprrslulatiurs
:musl1ingfon. iQ: 20515-0550
August 21, 2012
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND COMMERCE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND POWER
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
COMMUNICATION AND TECHNOLOGY
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATION
HOUSE REPUBLICAN
POLICY COMMITTEE
IMM'GAATION REFORM
CAUCUS. CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Julius Genachowski
Chairman
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554
Dear Chairman Genachowski:
The Communications Innovators Petition for Declaratory Ruling in CG Docket No. 02-278 was
filed earlier this summer and I would like to inquire on its status. While I am not commenting
specifically on the substance of the petition, I believe that it raises several interesting issues that
merit consideration by the Federal Communications Commission.
As you know, Congress passed the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) to protect
consumers from aggressive telemarketing practices, including the use of autodialing equipment
to make unsolicited calls to random telephone numbers. As the Commission recognized for
more than a decade, the TCPA was not intended to restrict businesses from placing informational
and other non-telemarketing calls to their customers and accountholders, including on their
wireless telephones. Nor did Congress intend to restrict the use of technologies such as
predictive dialers - innovative equipment that dials specifically programmed contact numbers
and enables company representatives to provide important, timely informational calls to
consumers accurately, efficiently, and cost-effectively.
Unfortunately, the FCC decided in 2003 that some predictive dialers fall within the TCPA's
definition of an autodialer and are subject to the same restrictions as the autodialing equipment
used by telemarketers. It failed to explain, however, what specific types ofpredictive dialing
teclmologies are considered autodialers. With this decision, the FCC created confusion that is
harming both consumers and businesses.
Predictive dialers are used today by many businesses to place non-telemarketing informational
calls and provide critical, time-sensitive information to consumers. They are accurate and
efficient devices that enhance compliance capabilities, eliminate human error, and maximize live
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
representatives' productivity. They restrict caBs to certain numbers, to certain individuals, at
certain hours, and to a certain number ofcalls, thus ensuring compliance with the myriad of state
and federal laws and regulations that govern companies' contacts with consumers.
We need to do everything that we can to promote American innovation and job growth. The
FCC's prior predictive dialer decisions seem to unnecessarily constrain innovative technologies
and burden U.S. businesses. I would like to encourage the FCC to take the opportunity to clear
up any confusion there may be surrounding the legitimate use of autodialers, while at the same
time taking the opportunity to promote innovation.
I look forward to learning the status of the Communication Innovators petition and thank you for
your consideration.
Z
Brian Bilbray
Member ofCon