|
|
| Cell Phone Jamming Bill |
| By TR Daily, August 6, 2009 |
| Published: 08/11/2009 |
|
Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (D.) and District of Columbia Department of Corrections Director Devon Brown today praised the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee for approving legislation (S 251) that would allow federal, state, and local correctional facilities to petition the FCC for waivers to allow them to jam mobile phone signals. “We’re absolutely elated,” Mr. Brown told TR Daily. “It brings us one step further as a correctional community by allowing us to fulfill our mission to ensure the public’s safety and better manage our correctional facilit[ies]. We appreciate all the lawmakers who really understand the gravity of this problem and are taking responsible action…” Both District of Columbia and Maryland officials have been pressing the FCC and lawmakers to permit demonstrations of cell-jamming technology at their jails and prisons as a way to stop inmates from using cellphones. In February, the FCC denied the D.C.’s request for special temporary authority (STA) to host such a test despite granting an STA a month prior. Former FCC Chairman Kevin J. Martin had directed the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau to grant the STA despite a long-standing precedent under the agency’s rules and the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, that the operation of any devices that interfere with wireless signals is banned. The Act prohibits non-federal government entities from using any jamming equipment. In Maryland, Gov. O’Malley and Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D.) have sent a letter to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration asking for permission to hold a 30-minute demo at the Maryland Correctional Adjustment Center in Baltimore, which houses federal inmates awaiting trial. The lawmakers say the demonstration will inform Congress about available technology to combat illicit cellphone use. In April, a federal jury sentenced a Baltimore drug dealer to four consecutive life terms for using a cellphone inside a city jail to order a hit on a murder witness. Maryland’s efforts to thwart inmate cellphone use led to 847 phones being confiscated in 2008, mostly with the help of specially trained dogs. But despite the state’s efforts, Gov. O’Malley and Sen. Mikulski say X-ray scanners, metal detectors, and dogs continue to be defeated by criminal resourcefulness. “The legislation would provide us the tools to use technology to block illegal inmate cellphone calls from within the walls of our prisons,” Gov. O’Malley said in a statement today. “The use of cellphone by inmates constitutes a significant threat to public safety in Maryland’s neighborhoods…” While S. 251 has garnered widespread support from state lawmakers and prison officials, some have questioned whether a new version of the legislation will give the wireless industry too much input into the process and allow it to drag on longer than necessary. The version of the bill approved by the Senate committee yesterday adds language requiring correctional facilities to consult with public safety and commercial licensees. Before prisons or jails even petition for a waiver, they must first file - no less than 30 days before filing a petition - a notice of intent, after which they would have to consult with public safety and commercial licensees on ways a jamming system can be installed to minimize interference. Correctional officials would also have to provide public safety and commercial licensees access to their facilities so they could take measurements and conduct tests “to determine signal strength and the potential for interference with their transmissions or service.” South Carolina Corrections Director Jon Ozmint told TR Daily last week that if the wireless industry is given too much influence over FCC actions, having the Commission consider all available technologies capable of preventing unauthorized cell phone calls in prisons - another new provision in the bill - could not only lengthen the process but drive up costs as well. Overall, Mr. Ozmint said the legislation is “workable.” In D.C., Mr. Brown shares these concerns, but tries to look at the bigger picture. “Without this legislation, we would not have any means to utilize the jamming technology,” he said. “We’re now close to overcoming this problem.” When asked about the wireless industry’s alternative proposals to cell jamming, Mr. Brown reiterated his position that jamming is a more effective way to curb illicit cellphone use by inmates. “If you can jam it, you don’t necessarily have to be concerned about detecting the location [of the phone]. The main goal is to stop the transmission,” he said. “It’s been proven. Australia has used the technology for over five years, as have other countries. This is the most effective means. That’s not to say that there’s not others; you still want to get that phone. But I think [jamming] is the most effective way.” In July, prison and jail chiefs from more than two dozen states and two cities submitted a petition asking the FCC for permission to jam cellphone signals inside state prisons and local jails. In filing the petition, the South Carolina Department of Corrections, along with correctional officials in 26 states, Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia, urged the Commission to initiate a rulemaking to allow state and local law enforcement authorities, including those working in jails and prisons, to jam mobile phones to protect public safety. Since the petition was filed, Texas, Oregon, Ohio, Kentucky, and New Jersey have signed on, bringing the total number of states to 30, the S.C. DOC said today. “Clearly the intent of the legislation is to provide prisons the ability to jam the signals of cell phones being used by inmates,” Mr. Ozmint said in a news release announcing the addition of the five states. “The ultimate test will be whether the FCC allows us to jam, or whether it hamstrings the process by kowtowing to the whims of the wireless industry.” A House jamming bill (HR 560) introduced by Rep. Kevin Brady (R., Texas) in January at the same time Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R., Texas) introduced S 251 has 43 cosponsors. An aide to the congressman said today that the House Energy and Commerce Committee hasn’t made any plans to mark up the bill, noting that the panel has been busy with health care. The aide said Rep. Brady has asked the House Judiciary Committee to hold a hearing, but he said that one hasn’t been scheduled yet. - Paul Barbagallo, paul.barbagallo@wolterskluwer.com |
MARKETPLACE search vendors | advanced search
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
|
Comments:
No comments have been posted for this article.
Login to let us know what you think