Automated campaign phone calls under scrutiny

Washington -- A barrage of recorded campaign phone calls from the likes of Bill Clinton, George Bush, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Martin Sheen had already infuriated Cleveland-area voters in 2004 before campaign volunteer Shaun Dakin got around to dialing their numbers.

Dakin was in Cleveland to work on a phone bank for John Kerry in the election's final weeks. What he heard from the Clevelanders he called wasn't pretty, but it made the former Freddie Mac executive rethink the effectiveness of "robocalls," an increasingly popular campaign tactic in Ohio and around the country.

"A lot of profanity was used," recalls Dakin, who now runs an organization striving to create a "National Political Do Not Contact Registry" similar to the one that limits calls from commercial telemarketers.

"People were sick and tired of being bothered at home. Direct mail, you can throw away. You can turn off the TV. But phones ringing in the home really bother people and invade their privacy."

Dakin's Cleveland-inspired effort is part of a growing backlash against automated campaign phone calls that is prompting nationwide clamp-down measures.

While political consultants in Ohio and around the country argue that robocalls are a cheap, effective campaign tool and are political communication explicitly protected by the Constitution, others say regulation is needed because robocalls have become abusive, intrusive and deceptive.

They cite cases in which caller IDs have been masked or in which voters are called repeatedly, or on their cell phones, or in the middle of the night, as with a recorded call from Cuyahoga County Commissioner Tim Hagan in March that went to more than 5,000 people between 11 p.m. and 3 a.m. because of faulty call-center programming.

Some want Ohio

to join in restraints

Twenty-three states have enacted laws to regulate such calls. Their approaches range from an outright ban to requiring calls to disclose the name of the organization that's paying for them, to a do-not-call registry.

State Rep. Thom Collier, a Mount Vernon Republican, wants Ohio to join the list of states that regulate the calls. He has introduced a bill in Columbus that would allow Ohioans to put themselves on a political "Do Not Call" list that would be administered by Ohio's attorney general.

"Ohio is going to be robo-mania in 2008," predicts Collier. "It is only going to get worse in every election cycle. Anything we do to alienate people is not good for candidates, not good for America and not good for the image of elected officials, particularly in this presidential campaign."

Not everyone in Ohio hates the calls.

American Association of Political Consultants executive director Angela McMillen, who formerly held the same title with Summit County's Republican Party, says she has ordered numerous robocalls on behalf of Ohio candidates and found them to be an effective campaign tool.

"They are really good for candidates who are challengers," McMillen says.

"They are a really low-cost way for candidates to get their messages out to people. They cost as little as 5 cents apiece. They can go to likely targeted voters these candidates choose. When done responsibly, they are an effective tool that candidates can use."

McMillen's group endorses measures that would require automated callers to reveal their actual caller ID, be absolutely clear about who's sponsoring such calls and ban robocalls between 9 p.m. and 8 a.m.

Robocalls are increasingly popular because they're inexpensive and effective, agrees Liz Welsh, who heads the Louisville, Ky.-based political consulting firm Executive Communications.

She says they work especially well immediately before elections.

"If we don't have cost-effective means of getting the word out, then candidates or issues that may not be particularly well funded are put at a harsh disadvantage," Welsh says.

Bills in Congress

would regulate calls

Several bills to limit robocalls have been introduced in Congress, including a plan by California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Arlen Specter to ban robocalls between 9 p.m. and 8 a.m.; require callers to list correct caller identification numbers and to identify themselves when the call starts; and ban organizations from robocalling any household more than twice a day.

"The Supreme Court has stated that the privacy of citizens in their homes is an interest of the highest order,' and this bill provides a reasonable and measured approach to protecting that interest," Specter said.

The U.S. Senate and House of Representatives have held hearings on the issue.

California Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren, who introduced the House counterpart of Feinstein's bill, cites studies that show roughly two-thirds of American voters got robocalls in the weeks before the 2006 election and about 40 percent got between three and nine calls.

"It is a travesty that people can sign up for the do-not-call registry for everything but political calls," North Carolina GOP Rep. Virginia Foxx told a House of Representatives hearing that Lofgren held on the issue.

"The public hates it when the Congress and politicians make different rules for us than we do for business and industry."

But conservative attorney James Bopp Jr. described the calls as "a direct cost-effective means of communication that is essential to less-well-funded speakers such as nonprofit advocacy groups and non-incumbent candidates," and he told Lofgren's subcommittee that restrictions would "deprive citizens of an easy, effective and unobtrusive means of communication."

While Lofgren's office believes legislation to regulate robocalls is not likely to pass in this Congress because there's little time left before elections, Feinstein spokesman Howard Gantman says his boss wants to push the bill through the Senate in September.

"We are hopeful we can still do something this year," Gantman said.

"It will be tough, but we are hopeful."

To reach this Plain Dealer reporter:

seaton@plaind.com, 216-999-4212