Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Federal Trade Commission should investigate the publication of the video game "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas' to determine if the publisher deceived the Entertainment Software Ratings Board to avoid an 'Adults-Only' rating.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 376) expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Federal Trade Commission should investigate the publication of the video game ``Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas'' to determine if the publisher intentionally deceived the Entertainment Software Ratings Board to avoid an ``Adults-Only'' rating, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material on the same.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, last week I was appalled to hear about the release of the new version of the video game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas having a back door to porn embedded in its files. That kind of material would have certainly earned it an ``Adults-Only'' rating rather than the ``Mature'' rating that it has been marketing. I cannot imagine how a good player in the video game industry could make an honest mistake of something like that, so you have to wonder just what they are trying to do.

We have had hearings on rating video games as well as music and movies in our committee, and I believe fully that parents are the first line of defense for controlling what their kids watch. Up until now, parents have been able to trust the Entertainment Software Ratings Board, ESRB, to give them credible information about exactly what is in a video game. I want to make sure that that remains the case.

According to the Federal Trade Commission, the FTC, parents are involved in the purchase and rental of games more than 8 out of 10 times, better than 80 percent, making it indisputably clear that parents are the gatekeepers when it comes to deciding what games they bring into their homes.

The facts about consumer awareness and use of the ESRB ratings: 78 percent of parents are aware of the rating system, up 8 percent in the last 2 years; 61 percent of parents are aware of content descriptors, up 53 percent in the last 2 years; 70 percent of parents regularly check the rating before making a purchase. If this company purposely hid that information or material to make a sham of the ratings, it is nothing less than deceptive advertising and it ought to be punished, in this case severely.

My resolution, coauthored by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), calls on the Federal Trade Commission to investigate Rockstar Games to see if they intentionally deceived the ratings board to avoid the Adults-Only rating, and, if they determine that such deception or fraud has taken place, that they apply the very toughest of penalties or sanctions. The video game industry has gone into great detail to define their ratings, but I want parents to feel confident that the labeling of the video games that they allow their kids to play or purchase is reliable and that bad actors do not get away with deceptions like this.

Mr. Speaker, if these ratings were willfully violated, they ought to be punished, and a firm should not be allowed to profit from that outrageous circumstance when those rules are followed by so many families when they buy or see the video games in their homes. This resolution calls for that.

Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record a letter that I sent earlier this week to the Chair of the FTC signed by more than 75 Members of Congress, the cover letter signed by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), the

gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and myself, asking that the FTC take every action that they can if, in fact, the material shows that it was wrong in terms of getting the ``M'' rating.

Congress of the United States,

Washington, DC, July 21, 2005.

Hon. Deborah Platt Majoras,

Chairman, Federal Trade Commission,

Washington, DC.

Chairman Majoras: We write to express our profound concern

regarding the sexually explicit material contained in the

rated ``M'' video game ``Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.'' We

ask for your attention to this matter and to determine if the

publisher, Rockstar Games, intentionally deceived the

Entertainment Software Rating Board to avoid an ``Adults-

Only'' rating. We believe that they may have and the toughest

penalties need to be applied.

The recent release of ``Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas'' was

widely anticipated by consumers, but an ``Adults-Only''

rating would have severely limited its sales in retail

outlets. It appears that the publisher has blatantly

circumvented the rules in order to peddle sexually explicit

material to our youth, and they should be held accountable.

We stand in agreement that parental involvement is the most

important line of defense in determining the type of content

suitable for children, and the ratings system empowers

parents to do just that. Unfortunately, this latest incident

of deceit has severely degraded the integrity of the ratings

system. How can parents trust a system in which game makers

do an end-run around the process to deliver pornographic

material to our kids?

We appreciate the ESRB's swift action in investigating the

matter and revoking the M rating and ensuring any further

sales of ``Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas'' will be under an

AO rating. But this action should have never been necessary

had Rockstar Games complied with industry standards from the

outset.

We respectfully request that you investigate this matter,

and if Rockstar Games is found to have intentionally deceived

American consumers, we ask that severe sanctions are imposed

to the greatest extent under the law. This type of

profiteering from peddling smut to minors must not be

tolerated. A company cannot be allowed to profit from deceit.

We appreciate your attention to this matter and look

forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Fred Upton, Ed Markey, Joe Barton, John Dingell, and 75

other Members of Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am a dad. I have got two teenagers. My son has an X Box game. We are very careful in terms of the games that come into our house, both when we go to the store to purchase them as well as what both he and my daughter watch. It is my clear understanding, and the gentlewoman from Minnesota and my colleagues here know it is our understanding, that this particular video game never should have had an ``M'' rating. It always should have been an ``Adults-Only.'' Had it had an ``Adults-Only,'' it would not have been on the shelves of a number of different major retail stores, whether they be Best Buy, Sears, Wal- Mart, et cetera. It was appropriate that they immediately remove those games from their shelves.

It is not appropriate. We are thinking that we are taking the right steps to send that message for all families across this country. Not only did we get the letter that was signed literally in about 10 minutes by more than 75 Members of this House in a bipartisan approach, but I have called the FTC to talk with them as well to make sure that if, in fact, they did violate the standard that they ought to use every sanction that they can to go after this particular manufacturer.

But this resolution spells it all out as well. And I would urge my colleagues to support this resolution because that indeed will send the message not only to this particular gamemaker but to use all the strength that the FTC has for those who violate those standards that we ought to seek sanctions appropriately to go after them so they do not profit from despicable games like this that no 13-year-old ought to be exposed to, let alone families across the country.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, with consideration of H. Res. 376, which expressed the sense of the House of Representatives that the Federal Trade Commission Should Investigate the Publication of the Video Game ``Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas'' to determine if the publisher intentionally deceived the Entertainment Software Ratings Board to avoid an ``Adults-Only'' rating, I would like to enter a recent article from the Los Angeles Times into the Record. This article highlights the conflict of interest that is inherent in a voluntary rating system. The real question is: Can you trust this industry?

[From the Los Angeles Times, July 21, 2005]

Hidden Sex Scenes Spark Furor Over Video Game

(By Alex Pham)

The oversight board that puts parental ratings on video

games took the unusual step Wednesday of slapping its

strongest warning on a bestselling title as the game maker

admitted putting explicit, interactive sex scenes on the

disc.

Retailers began pulling copies of ``Grand Theft Auto: San

Andreas'' from their shelves after the Entertainment Software

Ratings Board revoked the game's ``Mature'' rating and raised

it to ``Adults Only.'' Publisher Take-Two Interactive

Software Inc. said it planned to rework ``San Andreas''--the

top-selling video game of 2004--and reissue it later this

year.

The ratings board is similar to the Motion Picture Assn. of

America's rating board. A ``Mature'' rating is analogous to

an R movie rating, and ``Adults Only'' is equivalent to NC-

17. Most retailers refuse to sell ``Adults Only'' games.

Executives at New York-based Take-Two had denied for weeks

that company programmers were responsible for the graphic sex

scenes, which can be unlocked with software that was widely

available on the Internet. But Wednesday they acknowledged

that the game's designers had created the scenes, dubbed

``Hot Coffee.''

``The editing of any game is a highly technical process,''

said Take-Two spokesman Rodney Walker. ``We liken it to a

painter who paints one painting and paints over it on the

same canvas.''

Walker's explanation did little to mollify critics, who

point to the ``Grand Theft Auto'' series to highlight the

issue of violence and sexuality in video games. The games

celebrate nihilistic killing, and Take-Two has reveled in its

image as the bad boy of a $25-billion global game industry

that's trying to gain respectability to match its profits.

``It looks like Take-Two Interactive purposefully conned

the video game industry rating board and parents across the

country,'' said Washington state Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson. ``

`San Andreas,' as a top-selling game in the country, now is

in the hands of thousands of children who can practice

interactive pornography. There should be legal consequences .

. . so [the company doesn't] laugh all the way to the bank.''

``San Andreas,'' which retails for about $50, has sold more

than 12 million copies worldwide since its launch in October.

``Mature'' rated games are intended for players older than

17. Many retailers keep such games under lock and key and

have policies requiring clerks to check the identification of

buyers.

Wal-Mart Stores Inc., which accounts for as much as 20% of

video game sales in the United States, began removing ``San

Andreas'' from its shelves Wednesday, as did Best Buy Co.

``Our policy is not to carry any adult titles on our

shelves,'' said Wal-Mart spokeswoman Karen Burk, who said

buyers ``can certainly bring the product back'' for a refund.

Take-Two said it would make a patch available for

downloading so that customers could block the sex scenes.

Word of the scenes began spreading over the Internet last

month after Dutch programmer Patrick Wildenbourg began

distributing software that he said unlocked them.

Many video games have secrets to which players gain access

as they progress. They might, for instance, win extra powers

or reach hidden levels.

``Hot Coffee,'' by contrast, is an interactive sex game,

featuring oral sex and intercourse.

Wildenbourg, who removed his software from the Internet on

Wednesday, declined to comment.

As late as last week, Take-Two had insisted that the sex

scenes were ``the work of a determined group of hackers who

have gone to significant trouble to alter scenes in the

official version of the game.'' Hackers, the company said,

created the scenes by ``disassembling and then combining,

recompiling and altering the game's code.''

The scenes prompted an outcry from game critics, including

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), who last week called

for a federal investigation into ``Hot Coffee.''

The Entertainment Software Ratings Board began a review to

determine whether the scenes were part of the game's original

code and warranted a re-rating of ``San Andreas,'' versions

of which play on Sony Corp.'s PlayStation 2, Microsoft

Corp.'s Xbox and personal computers.

``After a thorough investigation, we have concluded that

sexually explicit material exists in a fully rendered,

unmodified form on the final discs of all three platform

versions of the game,'' said Patricia Vance, president of the

ratings board. ``Clearly the [original] rating was incorrect,

and it needed to be corrected.''

Take-Two's Walker said Wednesday that the sex scenes were

never meant to be seen by the public and that they were

revealed only when an outside programmer, called a

``modder,'' wrote software to unlock them.

``The mod community scratched the painting, revealing the

earlier work,'' he said.

Analysts estimated that modifying and remarketing ``San

Andreas'' would cost Take-Two about $40 million in lost

sales. Shares of Take-Two fell 11% in after-hours trading.

``It was a very poor exercise of judgment and a very costly

one,'' said Michael Pachter, a video game industry analyst at

Wedbush Morgan Securities in Los Angeles. ``It's an

embarrassment for management because obviously a maverick

developer in their studios decided to put this stuff in

there. I can only fault the management team for not putting

systems in place to vet their games.''

Take-Two is no stranger to controversy. Previous

installments of ``Grand Theft Auto'' have been adored by

hard-core gamers but excoriated by parent groups and

lawmakers for their depictions of violence and sex.

In one, players could have sex with a prostitute and then

beat her to death and take back their money. That game was

rated ``Mature'' because players did not see the sex.

Instead, they saw a parked car rock back and forth.

Some lawmakers criticized the ratings board for failing to

detect the sex scenes in its initial evaluation of

``San Andreas'' last year. Although the system is

voluntary, most game publishers seek a rating from the

organization, which evaluated more than 1,000 titles last

year.

``It should not have taken this long,'' said Rep. Joe Baca

(D-Rialto). ``This is evidence that the voluntary ratings

system does not work.''

Video game industry executives tried to assure parents that

the ``San Andreas'' incident was an anomaly.

The ratings board ``has been in business for 11 years, and

there has never yet been an incident of this kind,'' said

Doug Lowenstein, head of the Entertainment Software Assn.,

the industry's trade group. ``You're looking at well over

10,000 games rated. If you look at that track record, you can

say parents have every reason to be confident in the ratings

system.''

Some consumers weren't completely reassured.

``As a parent I've lost some confidence in the [ratings

board's] ability to police the industry,'' said Dennis

McCauley, editor of GamePolitics.com. ``But [the board] did

take a big step today, and I have to give them credit for

that.''

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak on House Resolution 376. I would like to commend the resolution's author, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton). I agree with the previous remarks made by him.

Let me start by commending an organization, however, I have worked with over the past 3 years, the National Institute on Media and the Family, and its founder Dr. David Walsh, for uncovering and exposing this video game scandal. Dr. Walsh and the Institute on Media and the Family have for years been calling for an independent rating system on interactive video games. They have been national leaders on calling on retail stores across the country to ensure age-specific ratings are enforced. I agree, and I support an independent rating system and retailer responsibility.

The video game industry has a scandal on its hands, and parents across America have been given a wake-up call. Video games can be fun, but they can also be very powerful tools for exposing children to violence, sex and inappropriate material. Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas is not a video game. It is a violent and sexually explicit tool to train virtual victimizers in crime and sexual violence, and this was before the current pornographic scenes were exposed.

In a review of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas on Amazon.com, it is described as ``even more bloody, violent and sadistic than its popular predecessors, offering up an enormous 3-D city in which nearly any criminal act is possible. Players are free to steal cars, beat up the local population for their money or weapons, to make time with prostitutes, or to simply roam to their heart's content.'' That was a review before the pornographic scenes were made known.

Dr. Walsh has been, as I said, outspoken on this issue. Even before the pornographic scenes were exposed, Dr. Walsh, and I quote him as saying, this was not an appropriate game for our children, this violence training tool was rated ``M'' for mature, meaning the material was suitable for persons age 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual conduct, and/or strong language. The shooting of police officers, the killing of senior citizens for sport and winning points for sleeping with prostitutes and then killing them is not a game for 17-year-olds. It is disgusting, and it is a vile example of an industry with enormous potential being hijacked.

However, I would like to applaud two Minnesota-based retailers, Best Buy and Target, for their responsible and prudent decision to remove this so-called ``game'' from their shelves. I strongly support the intent of this resolution.

I would also like to enter for the Record two editorials, one from the Minneapolis Star Tribune and one from the New York Times, calling on action because of this game.

[From the Minneapolis Star Tribune, July 25, 2005]

Grand Theft/Absent Porn, Still Not for Teens

Take-Two Interactive and Rockstar Games must have thought

they were pulling a fast one on parents. Hidden in the

bestselling video game ``Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas''--

activated by an Internet download and a code--are scenes that

allow players to engage in virtual sex acts.

But the inside joke eventually went public. And people

didn't laugh.

Last week, the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB)

slapped an AO (adults only 18-plus) rating on the popular

video game. Immediately, Wal-Mart, Target, Best Buy and

several other retailers pulled it from their shelves.

Rockstar, the game's developer, which for weeks blamed

``outsiders'' for the sexually explicit modifications, now

admits that the retail version was produced with them on the

game. It has now ceased production of that version and will

produce one minus the pornography.

Before someone is tempted to nominate either company for a

Good Citizenship Award, keep in mind what will remain on the

game. ``Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas'' is definitely not

``Ms. Pacman.'' An amazon.com review describes it as ``even

more bloody, violent, and sadistic than its popular

predecessors, offering up an enormous 3-D city in which

nearly any criminal act is possible. Players are free to

steal cars, beat up the local population for their money (or

weapons), make time with prostitutes, or simply roam to their

heart's content.''

The ``toned-down'' version will be rated Mature, making it

available for anyone 17 or older.

The violence in ``Grand Theft Auto'' is not an aberration.

Take-Two is excited about its upcoming release, ``Bully.''

Take-Two says ``you'll laugh and cringe as you stand up to

bullies, get picked on by teachers, play pranks on malicious

kids, win or lose the girl, and ultimately learn to navigate

the obstacles of the fictitious reform school, Bullworth

Academy.'' Given its track record with other games, it is

safe to assume gunplay will be featured prominently in

``Bully.'' We wonder if the folks in Littleton, Colo., or

Cold Spring, Minn., will laugh.

This all alarms David Walsh, president and founder of the

National Institute on Media and the Family. His research

shows that the teen brain is still a work in progress,

struggling to manage sexual and violent impulses. These

games, which are marketed toward teens, should not be in the

hands of teens, he believes.

We agree. The rating system for video games simply doesn't

work. The ESRB was established by the Entertainment Software

Association. Advising the ESA is an executive from Take-Two

Entertainment, which owns Rockstar, which makes of ``Grand

Theft Auto.'' It's comparable to letting the defense attorney

serve as the jury foreman.

This industry repeatedly has shown it can't be trusted to

monitor itself. There is too much money to be made from young

people by keeping ratings standards relaxed, and there are no

penalties for companies that skirt the rules.

Parents aren't off the hook. They need to take more of an

interest in the kinds of games their children are playing.

But a truly independent oversight body is necessary. By

evaluating and rating these games, a proper oversight panel

would help arm parents with the information they need to

ensure the video games their children are playing are age-

appropriate.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 376, to ask the FTC to look into the misrating of the ``Grand Theft Auto'' video game.

I have been working on this issue for the last five years, since 2000, and have been working also with Representative Wolf and others to ensure that members and the public understand the importance of this issue to our children. It's good to know that other members are becoming aware of the problem and together we can work in a bipartisan effort and make a difference.

Through our hard work, and that of those who are with us, the ESRB, the Voluntary Industry Rating Board, has now changed the rating of ``Grand Theft Auto'' from an M to an AO. That is not enough, because there are literally dozens of games out there that have the same type of offensive content, and the burden is now on the industry to explain why all of those games should not be rated AO, also.

But we will not wait for the industry. We must take action now. We must step up the pressure. For this reason, we have asked the FTC to scrutinize all video games, including ``Grand Theft Auto'', to make sure they are properly rated. We appreciate the continued expression of support by the Congress. Together we can make a difference.

My legislation, the Software Accuracy and Fraud Evaluation Rating Act or Safe Rating Act (H.R. 1145), would empower parents, by calling upon the FTC to look at all video game ratings.

Parents are the gatekeeper for what their children watch or play, but how can they do that, if the ratings are not accurate? How can they do that if the ratings are confusing? We must empower parents!

The decision to rate ``Grand Theft Auto--San Andreas'' as adults only represents a small victory for those of us who have been calling on the video game industry to clean up its act.

However, the industry's self-regulation is a case of the fox guarding the hen house--and American children are at risk because of this.

Although the ratings board has decided in July of 2005 that San Andreas should be rated adults only, it has already been sold for at least 18 months, earning millions of dollars for its producer. In fact, it was the best-selling game of 2004! And that means that millions of American children have played it, being exposed to graphic violent and sexual content.

Parents are confused by the ratings and angry that their kids are being exposed to filth and violence.

I hear from concerned parents in my district in California and from all over America.

The most important step we should take now is to pursue an investigation by the Federal Trade Commission into the video game rating system as my legislation calls for.

I have recently met with the FTC chairwoman Deborah Majoras to press for changes in how the games are reviewed and rated.

This is a $25 billion worldwide industry that makes much of its profits by targeting teenage and younger boys.

The industry can give a game an M rating with a wink because it knows that any kid can buy a game even if it has an M rating.

There are several problems with the M Rating:

The wording on the label (in the small print on the back of the package) does not give parents a full and honest understanding of what is really in the game.

The M rating is confusing because the criteria that the industry uses to determine an M rating is almost identical to what it uses for the adults only rating.

Kids are buying these games! This month CBS News reported the results of a recent study: Despite the warning labels, 50 percent of boys age 7-14 have bought a game rated-M, for mature audiences, and a stunning nine out of ten of the boys have played them.

These games are harmful to children. Playing a violent or graphic video game hurts a child even more than watching a violent movie or TV show or listening to an obscene song because the child is role playing. The child assumes the identity of a criminal or a gang member.

Too many video games glorify and reward violent and criminal behavior. Why don't the video games feature heroic characters? Instead of having a child act like a cop-killer, why not make him a police officer? Instead of someone who kills, why not make him a lifesaver, like a fireman or a doctor?

It's time that the video game industry acted responsibly. It's time to take a hard look at their ratings. We must support this legislation on the floor today, and I urge all members to give their full support to my bill, H.R. 1145, to have the FTC look at the ratings of all video games.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to explain why I was not present during votes on July 25 and July 26, 2005 during the first session of the 109th Congress. Due to the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commissioner Anthony Principi's visit to the Reno Air Guard and Hawthorne Army Depot, I was unable to return to Washington, DC for votes.

I first would like to explain how I would have voted on July 25, 2005 during rollcall votes Nos. 417, 418, and 419. The first vote was on H.J. Res. 59, the second was H. Con. Res. 181 and the third was H. Res. 376. I respectfully request that it be entered into the Congressional Record that if present, I would have voted ``yea'' on these rollcall votes.

If present on July 26, 2005, I would have also voted during rollcall votes Nos. 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 430, and 431.

The first series of rollcall votes Nos. 420, 421, 422, and 423 were on H.R. 3200, H.R. 3283, a Motion to Instruct Conferees on H.R. 2361, and H.R. 2977. I respectfully request that it be entered into the Congressional Record that if present, I would have voted ``yea'' on these rollcall votes.

The second series of rollcall votes Nos. 424, 425, 426, and 427 were on the Kind of Wisconsin Substitute Amendment on H.R. 525, a Motion to Recommit with Instructions on H.R. 525, Final Passage of H.R. 525, and finally on H.R. 2894. I respectfully request that it be entered into the Congressional Record that if present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall votes Nos. 424 and 425, but would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes Nos. 426 and 427.

The third series of rollcall votes, Nos. 428, 429, 430, and 431 were on the Pence of Indiana Amendment to H.R. 22, the Flake of Arizona Amendment to H.R. 22, a vote on the Final Passage of H.R. 22 and finally a vote on H.R. 3339. I respectfully request that it be entered into the Congressional Record that if present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall votes Nos. 428 and 429, but would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes Nos. 430 and 431.

Thank you for your time and careful consideration of this important matter.