Sweepstakes Legislation Could Be Delayed Until 2000 - House delays passage of mail sweepstakes legislation - Brief Article

Circulation Management, Nov, 1999

At press time, the House Subcommittee on the Postal Service had approved its own version of sweepstakes legislation (HR-170), and the full House Government Reform Committee was expected to take up the bill by late October. Industry associations had anticipated that sweeps legislation would pass Congress during this session. However, Stephen Altobelli, director of public affairs for the Direct Marketing Association, said in mid-October that it was looking increasingly possible that a bill would not pass before Congress adjourns on November 10th.

The House bill largely mirrors the Senate's Deceptive Mail Prevention and Enforcement Act, passed in August. Both bills require that promotions state that no purchase is necessary to win and that purchasing does not increase the odds of winning, and that they disclose all rules and the odds of winning, as well as the identity of the promotion's sponsor. However, the House bill requires the more specific legal standard of "clear and conspicuous" disclosure of these facts, whereas the Senate bill merely called for "prominent" disclosure, according to Altobelli. The House bill, like the Senate bill, also requires sweeps marketers to establish an opt-out system for consumers or guardians wishing to have names removed from mailing lists. The House version would allow marketers 60 days to remove names, versus the 35 days required in the Senate bill, but would permit individuals to sue sweeps marketers for failing to remove names in a timely fashion.

And, despite the efforts of Magazine Publishers of America, the DMA and the Promotion Marketing Association, the House bill does not preempt states from enacting their own mail fraud and sweepstakes legislation. A clause that would have accomplished that was stricken from the bill shortly before the postal subcommittee's vote, as a result of vociferous opposition from the National Association of Attorneys General. The publishing and direct marketing industries continue to assert that it is impractical, and ultimately counterproductive to consumer interests, for direct marketers to attempt to adhere to a patchwork of state laws.