Breaking News

(CNET) — Republican politicians on Thursday called for a sweeping new federal law that would require all Internet providers and operators of millions of Wi-Fi access points, even hotels, local coffee shops, and home users, to keep records about users for two years to aid police investigations.

The legislation, which echoes a measure proposed by one of their Democratic colleagues three years ago, would impose unprecedented data retention requirements on a broad swath of Internet access providers and is certain to draw fire from businesses and privacy advocates.

“While the Internet has generated many positive changes in the way we communicate and do business, its limitless nature offers anonymity that has opened the door to criminals looking to harm innocent children,” U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican, said at a press conference on Thursday.

“Keeping our children safe requires cooperation on the local, state, federal, and family level.”

Joining Cornyn was Texas Rep. Lamar Smith, the senior Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, and Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, who said such a measure would let “law enforcement stay ahead of the criminals.”

Two bills have been introduced so far–S.436 in the Senate and H.R.1076 in the House. Each of the companion bills is titled “Internet Stopping Adults Facilitating the Exploitation of Today’s Youth Act,” or Internet Safety Act.

Each contains the same language: “A provider of an electronic communication service or remote computing service shall retain for a period of at least two years all records or other information pertaining to the identity of a user of a temporarily assigned network address the service assigns to that user.”

Translated, the Internet Safety Act applies not just to AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, and so on–but also to the tens of millions of homes with Wi-Fi access points or wired routers that use the standard method of dynamically assigning temporary addresses. (That method is called Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol, or DHCP.)

“Everyone has to keep such information,” says Albert Gidari, a partner at the Perkins Coie law firm in Seattle who specializes in this area of electronic privacy law.

The legal definition of electronic communication service is “any service which provides to users thereof the ability to send or receive wire or electronic communications.” The U.S. Justice Department’s position is that any service “that provides others with means of communicating electronically” qualifies.

That sweeps in not just public Wi-Fi access points, but password-protected ones too, and applies to individuals, small businesses, large corporations, libraries, schools, universities, and even government agencies. Voice over IP services may be covered too.

Under the Internet Safety Act, all of those would have to keep logs for at least two years. It “covers every employer that uses DHCP for its network,” Gidari said. “It covers Aircell on airplanes– hose little pico cells will have to store a lot of data for those in-the-air Internet users.”

In the Bush administration, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales had called for a very similar proposal, saying that subscriber information and network data should be logged for two years.

Until Gonzales’ remarks in 2006, the Bush administration had generally opposed laws requiring data retention, saying it had “serious reservations” about them. But after the European Parliament approved such a requirement for Internet, telephone and VoIP providers, top administration officials began talking about the practice more favorably.

After Gonzales left the Justice Department, the political will for data retention legislation seemed to ebb for a time, but then FBI Director Robert Mueller resumed lobbying efforts last spring.

This tends to be a bipartisan sentiment: Attorney General Eric Holder, a Democrat, said in 1999 that “certain data must be retained by ISPs for reasonable periods of time so that it can be accessible to law enforcement.” Rep. John Conyers, the Democratic chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said that FBI proposals for data retention legislation “would be most welcome.”

Smith, who sponsored the House version of the Internet Safety Act, had previously introduced a one-year requirement as part of a law-and-order agenda in 2007.

A 1996 federal law called the Electronic Communication Transactional Records Act regulates data preservation. It requires Internet providers to retain any “record” in their possession for 90 days “upon the request of a governmental entity.”

Because Internet addresses remain a relatively scarce commodity, ISPs tend to allocate them to customers from a pool based on whether a computer is in use at the time. (Two standard techniques used are the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol and Point-to-Point Protocol over Ethernet.)

In addition, Internet providers are required by another federal law to report child pornography sightings to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which is in turn charged with forwarding that report to the appropriate police agency.

The Internet Safety Act is broader than just data retention. Other portions add criminal penalties to other child pornography-related offenses, increase penalties for sexual exploitation of minors, and give the FBI an extra $30 million for the “Innocent Images National Initiative.”

More than 5,500 removed between May 1, 2008, and Jan. 31, 2009

RALEIGH, North Carolina – Facebook has removed more than 5,500 convicted sex offenders from its social networking Web site since May, Connecticut’s attorney general said Thursday.

Richard Blumenthal said the world’s largest social networking site, which claims to have more than 175 million active members, reported to his office that 5,585 convicted sex offenders were found on the Web site and removed between May 1, 2008, and Jan. 31, 2009.

“The message in this number is Facebook has an equal stake in solving this problem of protecting children,” said Blumenthal, who along with North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper has led an effort remove sex offenders from the social networking web sites.

“They have an equal stake in the predator problem and its solution.”

Earlier this month, rival networking site MySpace announced it had removed 90,000 sex offenders in a two-year period.

Last year, the attorneys general got both sites to implement dozens of safeguards, including finding better ways to verify users’ ages and putting limits on older users’ ability to search the profiles of members under 18.

Chris Kelly, Facebook’s chief privacy officer, said the convicted sexual offenders on the site were found through user reports, working with local law enforcement agencies and using the national sex offender registry.

He said Facebook’s focus on members using their real names and identities helps discourage sex offenders, and even more is being planned to prevent them from registering. Earlier this month, Facebook officials said policy dictated that no convicted sex offender be allowed to keep a Facebook page.

Kelly said the company has pitched a proposal to attorneys general around the country to develop a real-time system cross-checking available outlets and “block any registration from the get-go.”

“Our policy has been to remove convicted sex offenders when they are reported or identified through any means,” Kelly said.

Georgia’s Rules That Keep Some Convicted Felons Far From Children Create Challenges for Compliance, Enforcement

CEDARTOWN, Ga. — After two years of fitful searching, Christopher Noles and his family finally found a modest three-bedroom house in rural Georgia. The bedrooms are cramped, the kitchen plumbing leaky. There isn’t a neighbor in sight.

But the lonely old house is a last refuge. Mr. Noles is one of nearly 16,000 sex offenders convicted in Georgia who, under state law, can’t live or work within 1,000 feet of a church, school, day-care center, skating rink, park, swimming pool or any other place where children gather. Failing to register an address could mean 30 extra years in prison for a convicted sex offender.

The crime that placed Mr. Noles, now 31 years old, in Georgia’s database of sex offenders was having sex in August 1996 with his girlfriend. He was then 17, while she was 14. Both said the sex was consensual, and they later wed. But state law at the time said it was statutory rape for either an adult or a minor to have sex with someone under the age of 16. After the girl became pregnant, a family member reported the liaison to police. Mr. Noles pleaded guilty and spent three months at a prison boot camp.

He thought he paid his debt to society. But under a 2006 Georgia law, Mr. Noles and nearly every person convicted of any of dozens of crimes considered sex offenses must be listed on a publicly available database. They must keep police notified of their address at all times and can never reside or work near any banned area.

An additional requirement prohibits any convicted sex offender from volunteering at church. Mr. Noles says he skips all church activities — including a play in which his 11-year-old daughter performed at Pleasant Valley South Baptist Church in Silver Creek, Ga. “I’d rather be able to tuck my kids into bed every night than to have to dream about them from prison,” he says.

Laws cracking down on sex offenders enjoy broad public support across the U.S. All states require offenders to report to law enforcement, but Georgia’s statute is considered to be among the toughest such laws in the U.S. for its living restrictions and sentences. The law has set off messy conflicts between politicians and others who argue sexual criminals should be aggressively tracked and isolated and those who say lawbreakers — especially juveniles and nonviolent offenders — deserve a second chance.

Among the most vocal critics of the laws are police. Some sheriffs say the crackdown on sex offenders forces them to divert substantial resources from investigating active criminals to monitoring and tracking offenders who aren’t threatening. Enforcing the additional restrictions from the 2006 law cost sheriffs’ offices about $5 million in 2007, says the Georgia Sheriffs’ Association.

Some states also object to a recent federal law requiring states to impose strict standards for registering sex offenders, arguing it’s too costly and no more effective than their own state laws.

“Oh, my God, it’s overwhelming,” says Capt. Ronald Applin, who works in the Fulton County sheriff’s warrant-service division that tracks down anyone deemed too close to children for comfort. Monitoring more than 1,500 sex offenders in the state’s most-populous county requires four deputies full time, he says.

It’s not clear whether the laws have had any effect on the frequency of sexual offenses in Georgia. Only 90 of the 15,800 people listed as sex offenders are classified by law-enforcement officials as dangerous “predators,” which the state defines as someone who is at risk of perpetrating a future sexual offense. The number of rapes in the state increased slightly between 2006 and 2007, but the laws haven’t been in effect long enough to establish clear statistical patterns, experts say.

Law-enforcement officials say the law has forced many sex offenders to move. According to an analysis by The Wall Street Journal of records compiled by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, more than 8,400 of the sex offenders on the registry, or 68%, moved between June 2006 and November 2008 — far higher than in previous periods. More than a hundred left the state entirely.

Still hanging over those listed on the Georgia registry is a provision approved as part of the 2006 law forbidding them from living within 1,000 feet of a school bus stop. But enforcement of that requirement was stayed by a federal judge in response to a lawsuit filed by several sex offenders. If the measure ultimately goes into effect, the vast majority of Georgia would be legally uninhabitable to anyone on the registry, according to sheriffs across the state.

Defenders say residency restrictions are one of the few ways society can protect itself from repeat sex offenders. “Nothing is going to be 100% effective unless every single offender goes to jail,” says Monica Lukisavage, a day-care operator in Stevens Point, Wis., whose daughter was abducted at age 13 by a neighbor in 1995, held in captivity for three months and repeatedly raped and beaten. “But these restrictions are a step in the right direction.”

Laura Ahearn, executive director of Parents for Megan’s Law and The Crime Victims Center, based in New York, says employment and residency restrictions are necessary, because therapists and treatment organizations can’t guarantee a sex offender won’t re-offend. “Residency restrictions can give the community more security and safety when they know offenders are being monitored,” she says.

More than 30 states, including California, Michigan and Ohio, already ban sex offenders from residing in certain areas, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Several states have also dramatically tightened their registry requirements.

Georgia first imposed residency restrictions in 2003, banning sex offenders from living near schools, day-care centers and parks. But the issue only exploded onto the public radar in February 2005, when 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford was kidnapped from her family’s home in Homosassa, Fla. The girl was raped and killed by being buried alive just 150 yards from her home.

Stirred by the Lunsford case, Georgia State Rep. Jerry Keen introduced sweeping revisions to strengthen the Georgia registry law. The changes banned offenders from working near those locations and added churches, swimming pools and school bus stops.

But soon there were signs that the newly strengthened law might have gone even further than intended. Law-enforcement officials were required to order hundreds of people to move. The requirements make no distinction between the most heinous sex offenders — such as child rapists — and those who had consensual sex with an underage girlfriend. More than 800 of those on the Georgia list committed their offenses before they turned 19 years old, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis. Since then, exceptions have been added to Georgia’s statutory-rape laws reducing the charges against minors having sex.

Generally, offender names are on the list for life or can’t be removed until at least 10 years after probation. It’s unclear how many of the nearly 16,000 offenders tried to have their names removed since the law went into effect, but the petitioning process is difficult. Between 2006 and 2008, 70 records were deleted from the registry based on court orders, according to the Georgia Bureau of Investigation. In 2007, Georgia’s Supreme Court ruled that the new 1,000-foot restrictions violated property rights. But state lawmakers circumvented the court’s decision by allowing offenders who had long owned their property to remain in their homes.

Former Polk County Sheriff’s Office Maj. Mike Sullivan says the proximity-based employment and residential restrictions create a false sense of public safety. None of the 78 offenders he was tracking before he retired committed their crimes on victims they lived or worked near, he says. Instead, he worries that the residency laws destabilize past offenders by forcing them to move or lose their jobs and that pushing sex offenders to cluster together in the few livable areas of the state could ultimately encourage illegal behavior.

At the time the 2006 law took effect, Mr. Noles, then a truck driver, was busy dropping off loads at Davenport Lumber Company in Rockmart, Ga. After getting divorced from his first wife of seven years, he was raising his newborn son with his second wife, Rita. The sheriff told him to stop delivering to the lumber company because its grounds bordered a church. It made no difference that Mr. Noles didn’t work on Sundays, rarely was at the lumber yard and had letters from his boss begging a probation officer to let him stay, citing a clean, two-year work history. For the last two years, he has been unemployed the majority of the time, scraping by as a freelance construction worker.

“I’ll do any job I can, but the law is forcing me out of the county,” he says. “And there just aren’t that many job opportunities out here.”

It took two years of scavenging real-estate ads and dozens of nights in motel rooms for the Noles family finally to locate and rent a home that didn’t violate the sex-offender statute. Mrs. Noles says she is tired of repeatedly uprooting her life to comply with the law. Now, with many acres of wide pastures surrounding the new home, she is hopeful. “This time, it’s for real,” she says. “We’re staying.”

K. Esther Szabo was a small child when the recession of the early 1970s sent her family’s fortunes into a tailspin. Her father, an economist, struggled to find work, and her mother worried about paying the bills. The family eventually filed bankruptcy.

The tensions at home put a permanent mark on Ms. Szabo. To help her family, she started working at age 8, doing chores for neighbors, and has been working ever since. When a personal-finance class in college introduced her to the idea that calamities like the one that crippled her family could be avoided with careful planning, she found the idea “mind-blowing,” she says. She now co-owns a Los Altos, Calif., financial-planning firm.

In this current recession, we may be creating a new generation of Ms. Szabos. Economic downturns leave enduring marks on the career prospects and aspirations of children. Some youngsters will face lasting setbacks, while others will emerge more focused and motivated, based on studies of past recessions. The outcome depends partly on a child’s age, on the example set by parents, and on whether young people can be empowered somehow to help their families through the crisis.

College students may be among the hardest-hit. Graduates who entered the job market in the recession of the early 1980s made significantly less money for at least a decade, compared with those who graduated in more prosperous times, says a study by Yale University’s Lisa Kahn. Another study, a 21-year look at 39,000 father-son pairs published last year in the Journal of Labor Economics, found sons whose fathers were laid off had annual earnings 9% lower than comparable youths whose fathers kept their jobs. Recession-era grads also tended to remain stuck in lower-prestige jobs, even after the economy recovered, Dr. Kahn found. While the reasons aren’t clear, some may have invested too much in their original jobs to try to move to a more prestigious job and start anew when the economy picked up. Others may have felt loyalty to the employers that harbored them in hard times.

Small children, too, are vulnerable psychologically in ways that shape their aspirations. Glen Elder, a professor of sociology at the University of North Carolina, found in studies of the Great Depression that the self-image of small children of that era was shaped by the morale of their same-sex parent. Amid the traditional gender roles of the time, young boys suffered most, from seeing their fathers deprived of work and a sense of identity, says Dr. Elder, author of “Children of the Great Depression.” Because preschoolers and pre-teens were too young to understand the causes or to help out financially, they risked growing up with “a lack of initiative, of confidence, of self-efficacy,” he says.

Those who fared best, Dr. Elder says, were teenagers when the downturn hit — young enough to avoid the worst blows, but old enough to work for pay. “They were in an opportune time … to pick up some of the lessons of the period,” he says. Depression-era hardships also led youths from hard-hit families to grow up faster; many committed to a vocation shortly after high school, earlier than offspring of more prosperous families.

Past isn’t necessarily prologue, of course. Also, applying the lessons of the past will be hard; kids today who try to find work face tall hurdles, with teen employment hitting new lows, says Andrew Sum, director of Northeastern University’s Center for Labor Market Studies.

Nevertheless, parents are already finding lessons in the current troubles. Based on a study of 77 white-collar layoff victims published last year in the journal Social Forces, jobless parents are urging children to equip themselves to survive hard times, by developing transferable skills or learning to be entrepreneurs.

With luck, many youngsters will take the cue. “It’s a joy for me,” says Ms. Szabo, the financial planner, “when I help people see they don’t have to be a victim” of a bad economy. A big reward, she adds, is seeing anxious customers leave her office with renewed confidence in their plans for the future.