S1846 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE March 29, 2000 The Presiding Officer (Mr. L. CHAFEE) Enhance legal certainty for electronic sig- 3. Enhance Legal Certainty for Electronic appointed, from the Committee on natures and records and avoid unnecessary Signatures and Records. Commerce, Science, and Transpor- litigation by authorizing regulators to pro- The legislation must provide clear inter- vide interpretive guidance. pretive authority to the regulatory agencies tation, Senators JOHN MCCAIN, CONRAD Avoid unintended consequences in areas responsible for implementing the statutes BURNS, , SLADE GORTON, outside the scope of the bill by providing modified by the legislation. Failure to pro- KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, SPENCER ABRA- clear federal regulatory authority for vide such authority will create significant HAM, ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, DANIEL K. records not covered by the bill’s ‘‘consumer’’ business uncertainty about the requirements INOUYE, JOHN D. , IV, provisions. for compliance with the law, which in turn JOHN F. KERRY, and ; Avoid facilitating predatory or unlawful might lead to litigation. Agencies may also From the Committee on Banking, practices. be unable to stop abusive practices and pre- Housing, and Urban Affairs for items Attached is a more detailed description of serve consumer confidence in on-line trans- within their jurisdiction, Senators these principles. actions without such authority. This author- ity would not give agencies the ability to , ROBERT F. BENNETT, and The conference committee has the oppor- tunity to write the ground rules for the tran- override any of the bill’s requirements, only PAUL S. SARBANES; to clarify how they apply in specific cir- From the Committee on the Judici- sition of our economy from paper-based transactions to electronic transactions. This cumstances. ary for items within their jurisdiction, transition offers great potential benefits for 4. Avoid Unintended Consequences in Areas Senators ORRIN G. HATCH, STROM THUR- both business and consumers, but must be Outside the Scope of the Bill. MOND, and PATRICK J. LEAHY conferees done in a way that preserves basic consumer The legislation must provide clear federal on the part of the Senate. protections and ensures the confidentiality regulatory authority for records not covered by the bill’s consumer provisions, including f and security of such transactions. Sincerely, authority to exempt requirements from the bill’s provisions if necessary. The broad DIGITAL SIGNATURE LEGISLATION , , Tom scope of the legislation may have unintended Daschle, , Max Cleland, Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask consequences for laws and regulations gov- John Edwards, Harry Reid, Daniel K. unanimous consent that the following erning ‘‘records’’ outside its intended focus Akaka, Ernest F. Hollings, Ron Wyden, letter, signed by 45 members of the on business-to-consumer and business-to- John F. Kerry, Tom Harkin, Charles E. Democratic Caucus, be printed in the business transactions. For example, the bill Schumer, Frank R. Lautenberg, Bar- RECORD. Moreover, I would like to could affect rules on the posting of work- bara A. Mikulski, Joseph R. Biden, Jr., place safety notices. Protections must be thank my colleagues, Senator SAR- , J. Robert Kerrey, provided against such unintended con- BANES, ranking member of the Banking Richard J. Durbin, , Carl Committee, and Senator LEAHY, rank- sequences of the legislation. Levin, John B. Breaux, Daniel K. 5. Avoid Facilitating Predatory or Unlaw- ing member of the Judiciary Com- Inouye, Mary L. Landrieu, Max Bau- ful Practices. mittee, for their assistance in the prep- cus, Richard H. Bryan, , The legislation must provide adequate pro- aration for the conference on S. 761, Jack Reed, Tim Johnson, Evan Bayh, tection against predatory or unlawful prac- the digital signature bill. Joseph I. Lieberman, Jeff Bingaman, tices. There being no objection, the mate- Russell D. Feingold, , Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am Chuck Robb, Byron L. Dorgan, Paul rial was ordered to be printed in the pleased that my colleagues on the Record, as follows: Wellstone, , Daniel Pat- rick Moynihan, , Herb other side of the aisle have worked out U.S. SENATE, Kohl, Robert Torricelli, Blanche L. their problems and enabled the Senate, Washington, DC, March 28, 2000. Lincoln, , Robert C. Byrd. Members of the Conference Committee on at last, to appoint conferees on S. 761. Electronic Signature Legislation United BASIC CONSUMER PROTECTION PRINCIPLES FOR I co-authored S. 761 as it passed the States Congress. ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE LEGISLATION Senate, and I look forward to working DEAR CONFEREE: We are writing to express 1. Ensure Effective Consumer Consent to as a conferee to ensure that the final our strong support for legislation that will the Replacement of Paper Notices with Elec- conference report respects the prin- ensure the electronic marketplace functions tronic Notices. ciples that this body endorsed when it effectively for both businesses and con- The final bill must include effective con- passed that legislation by unanimous sumers. We all supported S. 761, the ‘‘Millen- sumer consent provisions that provide the consent last year. The letter to con- nium Digital Commerce Act,’’ as it passed following protections: the Senate on November 19, 1999. As that bill Consumer consent must involve a dem- ferees dated March 28, 2000, signed by proceeds to conference, we continue to be- onstration that a consumer will actually all 45 Democratic Senators, reminds us lieve that it is important to remove unin- have the capacity to receive and read elec- of those principles. tended barriers to electronic commerce. We tronic notices. I am only one conferee among 17 but must provide certainty regarding the legal- Consumers must be notified of their rights, working with the other 6 Democratic ity of electronic transactions which spur including any right to receive notices on Senate conferees and the 10 Republican economic growth and provide many benefits paper, a description of the types of records Senate conferees. I will endeavor to en- to consumers. covered, and their right to revert to paper We also want to ensure that any new law courage electronic commerce with bal- records (or clear explanation that the option ance, fairness, and due regard for con- would provide consumer protections equiva- will not be available because of the purely lent to those currently required for paper on-line nature of the business). sumer protection. transactions, and would not facilitate preda- Consumer consent must be reconfirmed if a The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- tory or unlawful practices. The electronic change in technology by business results in a ator from Utah. world should be no less safe for American material risk that a consumer will be unable f consumers than the paper world. to receive electronic records. According to a recent Commerce Depart- Consumers must be ensured that electronic ELIAN GONZALEZ ment report entitled Falling Through the Net, delivery of notices will have substantially more than 70 percent of American house- Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise this equivalent reliability as paper delivery. holds do not have access to the Internet. In morning to voice my deep concern over Consumer privacy must be protected by re- enacting legislation to facilitate electronic the developing situation in Miami in- commerce, we must ensure that we do not quiring that the provider of the electronic volving this young boy, Elian Gonzalez. widen the ‘‘digital divide,’’ to the disadvan- record shall take reasonable steps to ensure I do not rise today to make legal or confidentiality and security. tage of the majority of Americans. policy arguments regarding the events We must ensure that consumer protections 2. Ensure that Electronic Records are Ac- curate, and That Relevant Parties Can Ac- that have transpired thus far, although established over several decades are not in- I have strongly held views on those advertently made ineffective by the transi- cess and Retain Them. tion to electronic transactions. We believe The legislation must require that, in order matters. Rather, I rise to implore—yes, that the legislation produced by your con- to meet record delivery and retention re- implore—the Justice Department and ference committee must incorporate the fol- quirements under existing consumer protec- the Clinton Administration to exercise lowing principles in order for us to support tion laws, businesses must take reasonable restraint in how they proceed. it: precautions to preserve the accuracy and in- For reasons I fail to understand, this Ensure effective consumer consent to the tegrity of electronic records. In addition, all Administration yesterday significantly parties entitled to a copy of a notice or dis- replacement of paper notices with electronic ratcheted up the stakes in this matter, notices. closure by law or regulation should be able Ensure that electronic records are accu- to access and retain an accurate copy of that and unnecessarily turned this into a rate, and relevant parties can retain and ac- record for later reference and settlement of crisis situation by threatening to in- cess them. disputes. voluntarily and forcibly remove this March 29, 2000 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S1847 boy from the place he calls home and It should be fair to all. Any single make that 28 percent, but even if we to forcibly remove him from the family person making $35,000 a year marrying can do the 15 percent, it is certainly a that has cared and sheltered him for someone making $35,000 a year should step in the right direction, saying to four months. not automatically go into a higher tax people they should not be penalized be- And why? The Justice Department bracket. In fact, under today’s Tax cause they chose to get married. The had previously indicated a willingness Code, that is exactly what happens. It penalty is not small. The average is to allow the Miami family to pursue its is one of the most egregious oversights about $1,400 more that people pay. If legal avenues in federal court. This of our tax system that we must ad- they are making $28,000 a year or family is appealing the recent decision dress. $40,000 a year and have to pay $1,400 of the district court. That is not news, It is estimated that 21 million mar- more in taxes, that is a lot of money, and should hardly come as a surprise to ried couples pay a marriage penalty; money that could be saved for the first the Department. In fact, it is my un- about 48 percent of people in this coun- downpayment on a house. It is money derstanding that the family has agreed try who are married pay a penalty for that could be put on car payments, to the Justice Department’s request to being married. The question is, What mortgage payments, or a family vaca- try and expedite the appeal. can we do to correct that inequity? tion. So why has the Administration man- This is not just a tax cut. It is a tax This is the time in people’s lives ufactured this crisis and issued these correction. when they need the money the most, threats and ultimatums? Why make Yesterday, Senator ROTH revealed his when they are a young couple, just be- these threats regarding this arbitrary, plan that will go to the Finance Com- ginning. They do not have a nest egg self-created and self-imposed deadline mittee for markup, hopefully, tomor- yet. To tax them $1,400 more a year is of Thursday morning at 9:00 a.m.? row. It is a very solid beginning. His a heavy penalty. There is no reason for I know that my colleagues have dif- plan, first and foremost, does some- it. We should not make the choice for ferent views on the matter of whether thing that will affect every single mar- people that if they get married they Elian Gonzalez should be returned to ried couple: It doubles the standard de- must pay more taxes. Cuba or allowed to stay in our country. duction. The alternative minimum tax is also But I do not stand before you today to Today, the standard deduction is reformed in Senator ROTH’s plan. The debate that matter. $7,350 for a married couple. It is $4,400 alternative minimum tax is a tax that Rather, I would hope we could all for singles. One would think a married is levied on people. An alternative min- join in calling upon the Department of couple would get $8,800. That is not the imum tax is levied perhaps because too Justice and the Clinton Administration case. They get $7,350. Regardless of the much of their income is tax free. This to calm down, exercise restraint, and tax bracket, there is a marriage tax has begun to hit more and more people. stop acting to increase the tension of The alternative minimum tax has penalty from the standard deduction. this delicate situation unnecessarily begun to hit people who make $75,000 a Senator ROTH’s bill doubles the stand- through arbitrary deadlines or threats year as married couples. This keeps ard deduction next year. of force. them from having the $500-per-child Second, the bill starts with the low- I fail to see how these threats serve tax credit fully given; it keeps them est tax bracket, the 15-percent bracket. any useful purpose. Hasn’t this young from getting the Hope scholarship Over a 6-year period, starting in 2000, boy been through enough? Why does money fully given; it keeps them from that bracket will be doubled for mar- this Administration need to forcibly having an adoption credit fully given. remove him from his home while the ried couples. This is an $8,650 increase It takes away the value of those cred- appeal process continues to run? Has that allows people to continue paying its. Elian become an enemy of the United in the 15-percent level for $8,650 more. We say to people: You get a $500-per- States of America? If not, why is the Basically, that means if someone today child tax credit because we want you to Administration treating him like a is making up to $43,000 as a married have more of the money you earn, but dangerous drug lord or a mass mur- couple, they are in the 15-percent if you make over $75,000 a year, we will derer? bracket. We raise that to $52,500. As a take part of that credit away. We want Again, I implore this Justice Depart- married couple making about $26,000 a to make those types of tax credits, the ment and this Administration to calm year, they will stay in the 15-percent nonrefundable tax credits, whole for down and exercise restraint. We need bracket and will not have that penalty. people, regardless of where they are in to find a way to diffuse this situation, It is important for people to know the system. We don’t want the mar- not to further inflame it. And, we need that everyone pays up to the $52,000 in riage tax penalty to encroach on that, to act in accordance with the values of the 15-percent bracket. Even if you go as well. We are trying to exempt those our country—restraint, respect for law, up to the 28-percent bracket or the 36- nonrefundable tax credits from the and common sense. We should not be percent bracket, you will also get that AMT. led to extremes merely to appease a 15-percent bracket relief. We also increase the earned-income foreign government. We will be fair and It was my hope to double the 28-per- tax credit for low-income couples, so if deliberate. But, we should not engage cent bracket, as well, because this is a person chooses to go to work and get in ridiculous, overwrought measures. where most people get hit the hardest. off welfare, which is what we are en- After all, this is not Cuba. This is the A policeman who marries a school- couraging them to do, we don’t want to of America, and we have teacher gets hit in that 28-percent punish them by taking away their a young boy here. He ought to be treat- bracket. They are making approxi- earned-income tax credit. ed with dignity and with respect by a mately $30,000 each. They would not be It is ironic that today we say to a government that does not act as a fully covered under the bill that will go married couple: You will pay more in bully with no restraint whatsoever. to markup. taxes than if you had stayed single. We I thank the Chair. There will be opportunities to in- have a higher tax burden in our coun- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- crease that bracket to 28 percent, try today in peacetime than any time ator from Texas. which is what we hope to do. We want since World War II. We are trying to f to go up to about $120,000 in joint in- take away some of that tax burden on come to do away with that penalty for hard-working Americans. We find with MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY married couples. We will take the 28- many couples that both work because Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I percent bracket up to about $126,000. A the tax burden is so high. They are try- rise today to talk about the marriage 28-percent tax bracket is almost a third ing to do extra things for their chil- tax penalty. We are trying not so much of what a person makes, so with sala- dren. In order to meet all of their needs to give a tax cut to married couples ries of $40,000 or $50,000, it is a pretty and the extra requirements they have but to make a tax correction. It is not big hit, especially if you have children for giving their children a good edu- the business of Government to say that and are trying to do the extras for cation, they are having to go to work. when you are married your taxes their education. That second income is penalizing that should be higher. The Tax Code should We have the 15-percent bracket dou- spouse who decides to leave the home be blind. bling, starting in 2000. We want to and go into the workplace.