"Do Not Call" Means Poorest May Lose Jobs

Cato Institute ^ | various | Various

[LowCountryJoe]

According to The Los Angeles Times, "Last summer, the federal government announced a national registry for consumers who want to block telemarketers from calling them. Americans rushed to sign up.

"Of the nation's 166 million residential numbers, 51 million are now off-limits to telemarketers. Despite ongoing court challenges, the list went into effect last month.

"The crackdown might be welcomed by consumers, but not by telemarketers like Millican, many of whom survive on the economic fringe. The nation has lost 2.6 million jobs in two years, and the 'do not call' list is expected to put hundreds of thousands more people out of work."

In "Like It Or Not, Free Speech Protects Telemarketers, Too", Cato's Robert Levy, senior fellow in constitutional studies, argues that "when government sets the rules, it must not discriminate based on the content of the calls. That's what the First Amendment means. Free speech is not subject to plebiscite, no matter how many millions sign up for no-call. [Supreme Court] Justice William Brennan got it right: 'If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.'"

[js1138]

These folks are so uncreative. All you need to do to get people on an opt-in is to offer a lottery. Not only would people sign up to receive calls, but they would have the target intellectual capacity.

[TheBigB]

Not one response yet from LCJ...I smell Troll!

[seowulf]

I bought one thing from Sears 12 years ago and had to put up with 3 years of telemarketers calls for extended service warranties. I've never bought another thing from them. If their products are so poor that I need an extended warranty, I don't want any.

[lovecraft]

If someone doesn't want the calling just say "thanks very much, bye!"

That got a little old after the 10th or so call of the evening...

I also got tired of seeing my caller ID having 36 calls to my home while I was at work...I began to wonder if it was telemarkerters or a some burgular "casing" my house to see when I was or was not at home.

[Strider]

Not to mention the savings realized by not calling people who will not entertain telephone solicitations. Think of it as market research.

That's a good point. By eliminating people who aren't going to buy anything, these companies should become more profitable.

And, speaking of market research, displaced telemarketers could get jobs with market research companies. Market research interviewing is a high turnover business. Anyone with reasonable phone skills can find employment in market research, even when the economy is slow.

[Krodg]

I put my name on the list and I still get calls....now they are coming from Toronto, Ont!

[Naspino]

WOW!!! THIS IS GREAT NEWS!!! In the Presidential debates when the Democrats start their Hoover/Jobs/Millions/Lost tirade Bush should respond with a chuckle and say "Yeah, we put millions of telemarketers out of work and we'll keep on doing it..."

Enough said. Bush wins 90%-10%.

[kidd]

I was just thinking the same thing.

I, as a rule, will not purchase anything from a telemarketer. But there must be people that do, otherwise there wouldn't be so many of them.

Now the telemarketers can be more efficient in their calling.

I have proof of that as well. Last year, I would receive about one sales call a night. I didn't sign up for the no-call registry until last week. Since the no-call registry law went into effect, I've been getting three to four sales calls a night.

Clearly the telemarketers recognize that those who did not sign up have a better sales potential.

[Holly_P]

Democracy ends at my front door. Once inside, my house becomes a dictatorship

My Gramps told me that while I am at his house the first amendment doesn't apply to me and because he suspended that one he finds it prudent to also suspend my second amendment rights.--The old dictator!

[ironman]

There are still 115 million numbers they can call all they want. Seems like plenty to keep the dialers busy.

[LowCountryJoe]

'Troll'? What kind of slam is that? retty week if you ask me. I imagine that very few of you that responded -so far- even bothered to read my attached commentary? Oh, sure, deny it. But based on the opposition that I've read so far, no one has touched on the points I made regarding the government cost to administer and enforce. This isn't going to be free to taxpayers! Free market solutions that currently exist. Just like one of you pointed out by bringing up 'spam controls'. And last but not least, further 'protections' offered by our 'leaders'.

I'm beginning to feel like on of the billygoats in here and SOME of YOU are the trolls; whatever that means.

[Lady Composer]

RE:In a related story, laws against theft force pickpockets to find other jobs.

LOL! Or, laws against solicitors if there is a clearly posted "No Solicitation" sign!!!!

[nothingnew]

Wish I could put Durango Credit and Collections on the no call list...heh heh heh.

FMCDH

[Semper Paratus]

Only 1/3 off limits? When I did tele-marketing, I was expected to get one prospect per 100 of not very well qualified cold calls. Taking 1/3 of those not wanting to be called ever may actually improve the odds.

[sirchtruth]

That got a little old after the 10th or so call of the evening...

Yeah, that would get a little too invading.

If you're getting that many calls I can see why you would want to be on the list. I guess in that case it would make sense since you would find no other time to do anything else but answer the phone all night.

[Naspino]

And last but not least, further 'protections' offered by our 'leaders'.

Who is our quote leader end-quote? I have a leader without quotes.

[lovecraft]

If you're getting that many calls

Wasn't just me...my parents, my friends...EVERYBODY I knew were getting that many calls. I switched to a cell phone only and so did many of my friends...

I haven't had a home phone line in over 3 years because of those jokers....

[Jack of all Trades]

Suppose for a moment that I have your home telephone number. Would I be exercising my first amendment rights by setting up an automatic dialer to continually ring your phone so that I could express my opinion to you? Oh I won't actually be on the phone though, I'll just record a few random thoughts for your enjoyment. Not good? Well how about every five minutes, or only once an hour then? Hey, you drive a hard bargain! Once a day it is then! How about 6:30p.m.? What? You don't want me to do this? Well I'll just give the number to ten of my neighbors who'll start with the continual ringing again.

That would be harassment wouldn't it? Where between continual and once a day or once a month does it change from harassment to OK? How many times can I forward your number to new callers? What efforts to conceal my identity as a caller are OK?

Telemarketing, the way that it has been done in the past ten years or so, IS HARASSMENT.

[af_vet_rr]

I pay for my phonelines, I value my time at home. If telemarketers want to pay me for my phone and my time (and it would cost a lost, let me tell you) then they are free to call and chat.