LEGISLATIVE PANEL HAS HANG-UP OVER PHONE TELEMARKETING BILL

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: FRIDAY, January 31, 1992                   TAG: 9201310178
SECTION: VIRGINIA                    PAGE: B-3   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: GREG SCHNEIDER STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: RICHMOND                                LENGTH: Medium
LEGISLATIVE PANEL HAS HANG-UP OVER PHONE TELEMARKETING BILL
After venting their hatred of dinner-time phone calls from salespeople, after telling how their constituents beg for relief from telemarketers, a group of legislators on Thursday killed an attempt to solve the problem.
Why? At least partly because a dark-suited clutch of real estate, sales, insurance and investment executives asked them to.
"This is an example of an issue for which there is a lot of support at the grass roots back home, but there is this barrier of lobbyists and special interests between Joe and Jane Citizen and their legislator," said Del. George Grayson, D-Williamsburg, who brought the bill to the House Committee on Corporations, Insurance and Banking.
Interest groups represented by the lobbyists who spoke up against Grayson's bill gave the 20 committee members $81,386 last year, according to official financial disclosure forms. Committee member Clifton Woodrum, D-Roanoke, received $3,007.
The groups carried the day with the committee "because these people represent jobs," said Del. William Robinson, D-Norfolk.
"I liked the [bill's] concept, myself," Robinson said. "But given the choice between jobs and inconvenience, I'll accept the inconvenience."
Robinson and Woodrum were among 17 committee members who voted against Grayson's bill. Two members voted for it.
The concept was to set up a system that would have allowed Virginians who don't want unsolicited telephone sales calls to register with the state. If a marketing company continued to call, the first two calls would generate stern letters from the attorney general.
After the third phone call, the offending telemarketer could be fined up to $1,000.
"The anger of consumers at being reached at home by these unsolicited sales calls runs deep and broad," Jean Ann Fox of the Virginia Citizens Consumer Council told the committee. "We do not pay for our residential phone service to subsidize the marketing ability of those companies who want to sell us their goods and services."
Spokesmen for investment companies, the Virginia Association of Realtors, the Virginia Retail Merchants Association, the insurance industry and several telemarketing companies all warned of dire economic consequences if they were limited in their telephone sales pitches.
"We think in this time of recession it's another unnecessary burden on business in Virginia," said Charles M. Guthridge of the state Direct Marketing Association.
Del. George Heilig Jr., D-Norfolk, described how during his close race for re-election last year he heard from some voters who cared about medical costs and some who were worried about education. "But every one of them wanted to stop these unsolicited phone calls," he said.
So after voting to kill the bill that would have let people stop the calls, Heilig had some advice for the victorious lobbyists:
"I would urge the direct marketing people to try and restrain themselves."
Keywords:
GENERAL ASSEMBLY

by Archana Subramaniam by CNB