House votes to accept Electronic Signatures

On November 9, by a vote of 356 to 66, the House passed the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (HR 1714@ a bill designed to promote nic commerce and establish a common standard for the use of electronic signatures.

Supporters said the bill struck the right balance between permitting new types of electronic transactions and protecting consumers.

"If consumers do not feel comfortable, it they do not feel at ease with this new technology, then they are going to lose confidence in the growing electronic commerce of our country and the world, and that is certainly a result no one wants," said Rep. Billy Tauzin (R.-La.).

Opponents, mainly liberals, said that the bill would allow consumers to be fleeced.

The high-tech community should not lot Itself be hijacked by security firms or banks or the insurance Industry, whose history with respect to consumers has not always been what we would wish It to be," said Rep. John Conyers (D.-Mich.). "The on-line community should be in the forefront of consumer protection. Instead they are being dragged back by special Interests:'

The bill "creates a uniform nation-wide Legal standard for the use and acceptance of electronic signatures and electronic records in interstate commerce;' said Rep. Vito Fossella (R.-N.Y.). "it allows parties the freedom to set their own rules for using electronic signatures and electronic records In interstate commerce. Any contra or agreements developed electronically by the agreeing parties have full legal effect."

Liberal Rep. Jim Moran (D.-Va.) said thai opposition to the bill, from Democrats, was wrong and shortsighted. "Digitized signatures work. People find them to be not only easier to use but, in fact, entirely consistent with the economy in which they are operating. This will show that the congress can be ahead of the curve, that Congress can play a constructive role, that the Congress can be leading instead of impeding. Instead of always having to play catch-up like we had to do with the Financial Services Modernization Act:,

Rep. John Dingell (D.-Mich.) said the problem wasn't the concept of electronic contracts. "it Is about the notices which follow after Omit notices of waste on a real estate contrac% notice of failure to comply with requirements for Insurance, failures of the electronic media to deliver."

Rep. Tom Davis (R.-Va.) said the bill protected consumers. "Consumers are absolutely free to choose or not to choose to enter into an electronic transaction. Nothing requires any party to use or accept electronic records or electronic signatures. The bill simply offers consumers the option to engage in electronic transactions. If a consumer does choose to conduct an on-line transaction, that consumer is protected by the underlying federal or state laws governing the transactions."

Rep. Mike Oxley (R.-Ohio) warned that it was easier to solve the problem earlier. "If Congress cannot respond quIckly to the changes In the marketplace and update the applicable laws, the inevitable result will be more harm than good. The longer we wait to act, the more m entrenched the various factions will become, maldng it mom difficult for legislation with each passing day," A"yes" vote was a vote to create a federal standard for recognizing electronic signatures. A "no" vote was a vote against a federal standard for electronic signatures and a vote In support of the President's position.

Copyright Human Events Publishing, Inc. Nov 26, 1999
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved