Not exactly, but damn close. 45 other state AG's wrote a letter to the top communications carriers asking them to offer blocking services to their customers. Our boy, Mark Brnovich, declined to join in. The Daily Star reports.
... Brnovich does not believe it is the role of an attorney general to tell phone companies what services they should offer — even if 45 of his colleagues do not view the issue that way.
The letter to the five companies said the attorneys general are "on the front lines of consumer protection for millions of Americans harassed by unwanted and unwelcome robocalls."
"Though our offices work diligently to prosecute those who violate state and federal laws intended to prevent such calls, our enforcement efforts alone cannot stop the problem," states the letter to the executives of AT&T, Sprint, Verizon, T-Mobile and CenturyLink. "The better solution is to stop intrusive calls before they ever reach the consumer."
Telephone companies had balked at even offering the service, testifying in 2013 to a congressional committee that they believed it would be illegal.
Last month, however, the Federal Communications Commission clarified its rules, clearly stating that phone companies can offer services to block unwanted calls. That resulted in the letter from the AGs this week urging the five major companies to act.
"Your organizations are now poised to offer your customers the help they need," the letter states. "We urge you to act without delay."
[AZ AG aide Ryan] Anderson, however, said it would be inappropriate for his boss to weigh in. In fact, he suggested that it was the other 45 who are in the wrong.
Once again crAZy leads by example. I would jump on blocking technology in an instant to stop those deceptive robocalls - the ones that now say "directory assistance" on my caller ID. But our AG thinks it would be bad for bidness, I guess.
Thanks, AG Brnovich, for supporting the rights of telemarketers to invade my privacy.