James Trout's Robocalls: Violate Federal Law?

Maplewood resident Jeff Wiggs was upset about a robocall left on his answering machine on Aug. 3.

In the call, an automated voice stated that Gina Mitten is forcing minority populations out of her district to allow room for strip malls, Wiggs said. Wiggs, who lives in the 2500 block of Florent Avenue, said the robocall failed to identify who paid for it.

“It seemed like a very bogus thing with no one even announcing who they were for,” he said.

Mitten was running for state representative against James Trout in the 83rd District, which includes Maplewood, Rock Hill, and parts of Webster Groves and Richmond Heights. Both candidates are Democrats.

Mitten is a city council member in Richmond Heights, which is home to the which was the subject of the robocall.

She .

Did the Trout campaign break a federal law?

Jim Ross works with the Trout campaign and said that Trout wasn't required to identify who paid for the call. When asked for details, Ross deferred to the Missouri Ethics Commission.

A subsequent call to the ethics commission was referred to the office of Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster. Nanci Gonder, the attorney general's press secretary, quoted a statement from the attorney general’s office as her answer to the question.

“The Federal Consumer Protection Act says that any call delivering a pre-recorded or artificial voice message must include the following: the message must state clearly and at the beginning of the call the identity of the party initiating the call, and then the message must include the telephone number or address of the party initiating the call so that the person receiving the call will have a fair opportunity to demand not to receive further calls.”

This federal act covers Missouri races, Gonder said.

Why wouldn't the Trout campaign identify who paid for the call?

A question to Ross about why a candidate would choose not to identify himself on a robocall first brought an unrelated response regarding Trout’s opponent.

When pressed, Ross said, “There’s nothing required. Why would I put on a direct mail piece my social security number?” as an example of information not required that he would choose not to include.

“You have to ask the Missouri Ethics Commission the rules for that one,” he said.

See related on Patch: