There’s an interesting story on MSNBC.com about the so-called “no-call lists” for telemarketers that revolves around a possible challenge to the FCC that could overturn state bans. From MSNBC:
Theyre back. Or they might be, those pesky telemarketing calls, after nearly two years of peaceful, interruption-free dinners. That’s the warning a consumer protection group is about to issue.
Legal wrangling threatens to disrupt that dinnertime quiet, according to the Electronic Privacy Information Center, which plans to present its concerns to the Federal Communications Commission later this month. Telemarketing groups are quietly mounting a campaign that would open the door to a floodgate of new calls, EPIC says, pointing to a series of requests filed with the FCC, essentially asking the agency to invalidate state laws regulating the practice.
Telemarketers deny they are trying to pry open the door to a wave of new calls. Industry representatives contend they simply want a single, national rule to follow.
If this battle generates more publicity (and if the arguments continue, it will — this is a hot button issue that the public can easily understand and the media will love to opine on), Democrat Rutt Bridges stands to gain significantly in his campaign for governor.
One of Bridges’ major selling points is that he and his Bighorn Center were behind the creation of Colorado’s No-Call List, and anything that brings that subject up again will help raise Bridges’ profile. If this story grows, the local media will flock to Bridges as the guy who was behind Colorado’s no-call efforts, and that should only be positive press (after all, nobody actually likes telemarketers). It’s hard for Bridges to just bring up the no-call list out of the blue on the campaign trail because it happened years ago, but this story will do it for him.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: harrydoby
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: harrydoby
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: JohnNorthofDenver
IN: Who Will Win Colorado’s Tightest Congressional Races? (Poll #3)
BY: kwtree
IN: The Pro-Normal Party Coalition (feat. Adam Frisch)
BY: kwtree
IN: The Pro-Normal Party Coalition (feat. Adam Frisch)
BY: Conserv. Head Banger
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: Conserv. Head Banger
IN: Who Will Win Colorado’s Tightest Congressional Races? (Poll #3)
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: JohnNorthofDenver
IN: Who Will Win Colorado’s Tightest Congressional Races? (Poll #3)
BY: Dave P
IN: The Pro-Normal Party Coalition (feat. Adam Frisch)
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
Convenient timing for Bridges if this does stay in the news. Does Peggy Lamm also have roots in Bighorn that go back that far? She could also be a beneficiary…
I can see the benefits for RB if the no-call lists get opened up for debate as he will get his mug on TV talking about it. That’s important for any candidate.
But, let’s be serious, from a policy standpoint the no-call list is some pretty weak stuff. Maybe it’s me, but while I appreciate the gesture, I just don’t see how the fact that I can eat a peaceful dinner should translate into me thinking Rutt will be a good governor. Bring something more to the table, big guy!
Personally – I’d also like to do away with those darned pesky political roto-dials. But that’s just me.
I don’t know about you, but the no-call list was Really Wonderful Stuff to me when it passed. To me, it’s a sign of someone really thinking about the way people like to be and implementing a practical solution.
The No-Call List is a simple, low cost to implement and maintain, voluntary solution that propogates the people’s wishes to the companies that might violate those wishes. The government is only involved in enforcement and centralization, but makes no other incursions into what would otherwise be a private contract between callers and their targets. What a great, common-sense approach. That really is the kind of solution I like to see from government.
This may help get Bridges some ink, however it will also bring up Bighorn’s many failures. The think tank has been around for at least five years and that’s all they have done.
Another one that will come up is their attempt to end the caucus system. Now, will Bridges opt to go the convention route, the one he tried to abolish? If he doesn’t believe in the system, then Ritter, who looks weak in the convention, would have an easy confirmation, upsetting the abortion rights majority and leading to an expensive primary. Maybe Bridges will change his view about the caucus in an attempt to keep Ritter off the primary ballot.
Bridges and the crew opposed extending the telemarketing ban to political phone calls when the bill was debated in the Legislature. Convenient.
BHC-
The reason the No-Call list wasn’t extended to political calls is for First Amendment reasons. A court would have struck it down had it covered political calls.
As for the “no accomplishments” comment, Bighorn Action was very involved in the passage of SB-198 at the legislature this year. Those who follow the proceedings down there know that this was very important election reform legislation, and it grew out of Bighorn’s FairVote Colorado election watch project.
The previous two postings brought to you by the Big Horn Center!
Hey it is time for all the divisive talk to end —
Rutt Bridges should be the nominee for Governor — the no-call list is a good example of the leadership he may be capable of — with the Reps in a Civil War it is time to end the division