Friday, May 9, 2003 | 11:21 a.m.
CARSON CITY -- The battle to win consumers hearts continued Thursday as a Senate panel replaced a Democratic telemarketing registry bill with a Republican's version.
Shortly after Marcus Conklin, D-Las Vegas, proposed a do-not-call list that residents can join to rid them of pesky telemarketing calls, Sen. Randolph Townsend, R-Reno, countered with a do-call list that restricts telemarketers to a registry of those who want the calls.
On Thursday Conklin's Assembly Bill 232, which had passed the Assembly, was gutted in Townsend's Senate Commerce and Labor Committee and replaced with the language contained in Townsend's Senate Bill 255.
Meanwhile, the Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee was expected to amend Townsend's bill Friday afternoon to replace it with the language in Conklin's original.
Besides the semantics of do versus don't call, Townsend's measure, which has moved to the Assembly, allows telemarketers to skirt the provisions if they have an existing business relationship with the person they are calling.
Conklin has said no to any exemptions throughout the weeks in which his proposal moved from Assembly committee to the floor and over to the Republican-held Senate.
Townsend said he thinks Conklin should be happy with the changing language.
"I told Marcus that he could have his bill, with his number and name on it at the end of the day," Townsend said. "He should take the victory and leave here happy."
But since Conklin doesn't see the consumer protection issue the same way Townsend does, he said Thursday that he still thinks he will win the battle later in the session.
"This is going to go to conference committee and we'll work it out there," Conklin said.
Conference committees are established when one house amends a bill that has already passed the other house, and the initial house of origin refuses to accept the change.
Townsend said he thought his measure was better for consumers because they don't have to do a thing to get rid of calls. Only those who want the calls have to put themselves on a list.
Conklin said his was better because, while residents might have to get onto a registry, they wouldn't be subject to calls from any company with whom they do business, including banks and credit cards.
"Consumers want to stop getting calls," Conklin said. "They don't want to still have a loophole."
Conklin also said his original bill adopted language already proven in court in Indiana.
Townsend said that while Conklin has worked hard on the issue, there is no point in having two competing registry bills, and that if Conklin wants the credit for the measure, he will have to agree to the Senate's version.
Meanwhile, testimony on both Conklin's and Townsend's bills from several witnesses doubted the impact either measure would have stopping calls that originate in other states.
archive
