Debbie Dingell: “we are attempting to accomplish a laudable goal in this legislation. Parents are clamoring for ways to protect their…”

“we are attempting to accomplish a laudable goal in this legislation. Parents are clamoring for ways to protect their kids from the onslaught of pornographic material on the Internet, and Congress has a responsibility to assist them in whatever ways it can. However, we have been down this road before, and our most recent attempt was met with a resounding rebuke from the Supreme Court. The Communications Decency Act was declared unconstitutional by a unanimous vote, and I harbor serious concerns that this bill will meet the same fate. While the notion of regulating materials which are deemed 'harmful to minors' sounds appealing, it raises many practical concerns. Who decides what materials are 'harmful to minors?' Should the standard be community-based, or national? If local judgments about the suitability of materials differ around the country, how can a global medium such as the Internet respond to these different views? For example, will the Internet sale of mainstream movies and sound recordings be subject to the most conservative community's view of what is harmful to minors, exposing itself to civil and criminal penalties in the process? If a chill is placed on the sale of these materials, what will be the practical effect on the growth of electronic commerce? These questions and many more should be addressed before we rush to adopt an easy fix to a complex problem.”