| Comment Number: | OL-104647 |
| Received: | 11/29/2004 3:22:50 PM |
| Organization: | self (private citizen) |
| Commenter: | Robert Shafer |
| State: | DE |
| Subject: | Trade Regulation Rule on Telemarketing Sales |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 310 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Since the institution of the Do Not Call list, we have received many fewer unsolicited calls. We now, regularly, sit through an entire dinner in the evening without interruption from a phone solicitor. The current law (regulation, rule, whatever) seems just about right. I cannot think of a single reason for changing it. You must have it right - half the people in the US have signed on. Just think of it: More people have signed onto the Do Not Call list as voted in the last election (or nearly so). How many people have called to complain about inadequacies in the current Do Not Call system? What were the complaints? Private citizens pay for phone service and should be saved from bothersome, intrusive, calls in the name of free enterprise. If phone service were provided free as a government entitlement, then, it might be appropriate for free enterprise to insert itself. I can only imagine that the parties who are stumping for a change are the parties who want to make the calls. We who don't want the calls - the vast majority of Americans - are pleading to and relying on our government for protection from those few who would, in the least, cause inconvenience; and, in the worst, commit fraud on and take advantage of unsuspecting innocent or aged call recipients. Whatever the result of this comment period and the changes proposed, I certainly do not want three percent of my calls to be unsolicited propositions. By the way, your request for comments is nearly impossible for a regular person to face adequately, because you refer to a Federal Regulation without instructing how to find it (include an internet link to the pertinent regulation??). Your language is, also, extremely difficult to follow - (e.g. what in the world is meant by, ...additional call abandonment safe harbor...???. Everyday English could surely have conveyed the meaning much better.