Good intentions do not always make good law. That's certainly the case in a steamrolling congressional crusade to curb sexual excesses on the Internet.
To shield kids from computer porn, Congress is charging toward passing the toughest restrictions ever proposed for computer communications. They include new criminal penalties and fines for transmission of "indecent" material to minors over computer networks.
House conferees agreed Wednesday to those provisions as part of a sweeping change in telecommunications law. Senate conferees have not yet signed on. Nor should they.
The price of this crackdown, politically popular though it may be, is just too high.
Here's why:
It casts too wide a net. Because of the broad definition of "indecent" under existing federal standards, many unintended targets could be left vulnerable to prosecution. On-line services that made good-faith efforts to prevent transmission of such material would be protected. But any web site operator who published "indecent" material, such as one of the "seven dirty words," could be prosecuted if the posting were viewed by a kid.
With this as a standard, a parent theoretically could be liable for allowing a teenager to pass along bawdy jokes to friends on the Internet. A school librarian could be liable for allowing a student on-line access to Ulysses or Catcher in the Rye, according to the American Council on Education.
Such restrictions no doubt will intimidate free speech on the Internet and create a snarl of legal challenges.
The net's not big enough to hold the catch. The Justice Department, charged with enforcing this proposal, easily could be inundated with reports of violations. It can't investigate everyone's idea of "indecent material." And even if it could, it would be a waste of law enforcement personnel badly needed for more serious crimes in our communities.
The safety net is already there. Existing federal obscenity and pornography laws can and have been used to curb excesses in computer communications. The FBI proved that last September with its underscore sting operation "Innocent Images." At least 15 suspects were arrested and more than 120 homes searched in a nationwide investigation of child pornography transmissions over America Online. Other computer culprits have been arrested and prosecuted under existing laws.
All this adds up to new risks where new law is unneeded.
The problem isn't really new. And neither is the cure. Today, parents of the computer generation worry that net-wise kids will download porn. But their parents worried they'd pick up Playboy and Penthouse at a magazine stand. Then, the enforcement tools were zoning laws, monitoring by local police and a sharp parental eye. Today, the tools are technology, monitoring by on-line companies (if parents choose) and that same sharp parental eye.
The computer industry already offers plenty of help. Parent-controlled blockers and screens to eliminate access to objectionable Internet sites already exist, and more sophisticated devices are on the way.
Don't think any will be fail-safe. The reality is that many kids know more about their family computers than any parent and some government agencies, just as kids of yesteryear had a knack for finding "nudie" magazines.
The government may have the best of intentions, but it's the parents' right and responsibility to decide what their children are ready to deal with -- on TV, in the bookstore and on the Internet.