Special Message to the Congress on Obscene and Pornographic Materials.

To the Congress of the United States:

American homes are being bombarded with the largest volume of sex-oriented mail in history. Most of it is unsolicited, unwanted, and deeply offensive to those who receive it. Since 1964, the number of complaints to the Post Office about this salacious mail has almost doubled. One hundred and forty thousand letters of protest came in during the last nine months alone, and the volume is increasing. Mothers and fathers by the tens of thousands have written to the White House and the Congress. They resent these intrusions into their homes, and they are asking for federal assistance to protect their children against exposure to erotic publications.

The problem has no simple solution. Many publications dealing with sex--in a way that is offensive to many people--are protected under the broad umbrella of the First Amendment prohibition against any law "abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press."

However, there are constitutional means available to assist parents seeking to protect their children from the flood of sex-oriented materials moving through the mails. The Courts have not left society defenseless against the smut peddler; they have not ruled out reasonable government action.

Cognizant of the constitutional strictures, aware of recent Supreme Court decisions, this Administration has carefully studied the legal terrain of this problem.

We believe we have discovered some untried and hopeful approaches that will enable the federal government to become a full partner with states and individual citizens in drying up a primary source of this social evil. I have asked the Attorney General and the Postmaster General to submit to Congress three new legislative proposals.

The first would prohibit outright the sending of offensive sex materials to any child or teenager under 18. The second would prohibit the sending of advertising designed to appeal to a prurient interest in sex. It would apply regardless of the age of the recipient. The third measure complements the second by providing added protection from the kind of smut advertising now being mailed, unsolicited, into so many homes.

PROTECTING MINORS

Many states have moved ahead of the federal government in drawing distinctions between materials considered obscene for adults and materials considered obscene for children. Some of these states, such as New York, have taken substantial strides toward protecting their youth from materials that may not be obscene by adult standards but which could be damaging to the healthy growth and development of a child. The United States Supreme Court has recognized, in repeated decisions, the unique status of minors and has upheld the New York Statute. Building on judicial precedent, we hope to provide a new measure of federal protection for the young.

I ask Congress to make it a federal crime to use the mails or other facilities of commerce to deliver to anyone under 18 years of age material dealing with a sexual subject in a manner unsuitable for young people.

The proposed legislation would not go into effect until the sixth month after passage. The delay would provide mailers of these materials time to remove from their mailing lists the names of all youngsters under 18. The federal government would become a full partner with parents and states in protecting children from much of the interstate commerce in pornography. A first violation of this statute would be punishable by a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a $50,000 fine; subsequent violations carry greater penalties.

PRURIENT ADVERTISING

Many complaints about salacious literature coming through the mails focus on advertisements. Many of these ads are designed by the advertiser to appeal exclusively to a prurient interest. This is clearly a form of pandering.

I ask the Congress to make it a federal crime to use the mails, or other facilities of commerce, for the commercial exploitation of a prurient interest in sex through advertising.

This measure focuses on the intent of the dealer in sex-oriented materials and his methods of marketing his materials. Through the legislation we hope to impose restrictions on dealers who flood the mails with grossly offensive advertisements intended to produce a market for their smut materials by stimulating the prurient interest of the recipient. Under the new legislation, this form of pandering could bring a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment, and a fine of $50,000 for a first offense and 10 years and a fine of $ 100,000 for subsequent offenses.

INVASION OF PRIVACY

There are other erotic, sex-oriented advertisements that may be constitutionally protected but which are, nonetheless, offensive to the citizen who receives them in his home. No American should be forced to accept this kind of advertising through the mails.

In 1967 Congress passed a law to help deal with this kind of pandering. The law permits an addressee to determine himself whether he considers the material offensive in that he finds it "erotically arousing or sexually provocative." If the recipient deems it so, he can obtain from the Postmaster General a judicially enforceable order prohibiting the sender from making any further mailings to him or his children, and requiring the mailer to delete them from all his mailing lists.

More than 170,000 persons have requested such orders. Many citizens however, are still unaware of this legislation, or do not know how to utilize its provisions. Accordingly, I have directed the Postmaster General to provide every Congressional office with pamphlets explaining how each citizen can use this law to protect his home from offensive advertising. I urge Congress to assist our effort for the widest possible distribution of these pamphlets.

This pandering law was based on the principle that no citizen should be forced to receive advertisements for sex-oriented matter he finds offensive. I endorse that principle and believe its application should be broadened.

I there/ore ask Congress to extend the existing law to enable a citizen to protect his home/tom any intrusion of sex-oriented advertising--regardless of whether or not a citizen has ever received such mailings.

This new stronger measure would require mailers and potential mailers to respect the expressed wishes of those citizens who do not wish to have sex-oriented advertising sent into their homes. These citizens will put smut-mailers on notice simply by filing their objections with a designated postal authority. To deliberately send such advertising to their homes would be an offense subject to both civil and criminal penalties.

As I have stated earlier, there is no simple solution to this problem. However, the measures I have proposed will go far toward protecting our youth from smut coming through the mails; they will place new restrictions upon the abuse of the postal service for pandering purposes; they will reinforce a man's right to privacy in his own home. These proposals, however, are not the whole answer.

The ultimate answer lies not with the government but with the people. What is required is a citizens' crusade against the obscene. When indecent books no longer find a market, when pornographic films can no longer draw an audience, when obscene plays open to empty houses, then the tide will turn. Government can maintain the dikes against obscenity, but only people can turn back the tide.

RICHARD NIXON

The White House

May 2, 1969