Many sides to prepaid phones debate

In Hauppauge last week, it was a microcosm of the national debate over whether the government should clamp down on prepaid cellphones as a way to combat gangs and drug dealers who use the conveniences to ply their trade.

The pioneering local measure, which was voted out of committee last week to allow a vote of the full legislature Tuesday. Sponsor Legis. Kate M. Browning (WF-Shirley) said the law is needed to combat the drug crime connected to these untraceable devices throughout her district and the rest of the county. "Drug dealers are using these phones to sell drugs to our kids and they are getting away with it," she said.

Browning's bill would require prepaid cellphone purchasers to provide two forms of identification and store owners -- from delis to big box stores -- would keep a record so police can track the phones' use.

But as often happens on controversial proposals, nothing is quite that simple. And Browning's bill has created an unexpected alliance of the industry, domestic violence victims and civil liberties advocates. Meanwhile Browning, who comes from the labor-based and progressive Working Families Party, has backing from police brass, Parents of Meghan's Law, PBA officials and alcohol and drug counselors.

The companies that make and sell phones, of course, oppose the measure. "These requirements would drive most retailers from carrying the product," said Amy Kramer, an AT&T regional vice president, citing the "burdensome" paperwork rules that retailers are "ill-equipped" to carry out. Those rules, she added, would harm poor families for whom "prepaid phones are a lifeline . . . allowing them access to a cellphone and to control the cost."

But the most potent pleas came from three domestic violence victims who testified at committee that prepaid cellphones were a crucial link to escape abuse. They added the identification rules could make it more difficult to buy a phone and easier for a stalking spouse to track them down. "In my case, a cellphone made all the difference," said Erika Brooks of Central Islip.

However, Jeff Reynolds of the Long Island Council on Alcohol and Drug Dependence, said at an earlier hearing the phone records are crucial to track drug crime. "The average dealer is now a kid in a cul-de-sac . . . who drives his parents' BMW into Brooklyn, picks up drugs . . . and brings them back. The job comes with a prepaid cell . . . a great perk."

Deputy Insp. Gerald McCarthy, commander of the major crime bureau which sought the law, said without records "investigations stall, cases get cold, families of victims don't get closure and the criminals get emboldened." But Phil Castaldo, a 7-Eleven franchisee, said the tracking is worthless. "If a person is smart enough to buy or sell illegal drugs they're smart enough to buy a cellphone," he said. "Tracking this is like tracking crow bars from hardware stores."

Amol Sinha, Suffolk director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, said the bill fails to preserve people's constitutional rights. "Under this proposal, those who buy prepaid cellphones will be presumed guilty or at least suspect," he said.

A leading foe, Legis. Tom Cilmi (R-Bay Shore), agreed, saying flea markets sell machetes and liquor stores sell alcohol, which can be connected to crime, but no one seeks records of those sales. "How many stores have to go empty before we wake up?" he asked.

Browning said Mexico has adopted a tracking law and state and federal bills are pending, but the industry opposes any regulation because "they are just making too much money." She added the industry has stirred up domestic violence groups with misinformation.

"It's probably close," said Presiding Officer William Lindsay (D-Holbrook), assessing the prospects of passage. But he conceded the battle lines over the bill are "bizarre" even for the freewheeling legislature. "It's very strange," he said. "And it could only happen in Suffolk County."