Editor's Note: It's about damned time.

By Andy Sullivan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Two congressmen launched an effort on Tuesday to outlaw "child modeling" Internet sites that depict children as young as five years old wearing bikinis and other suggestive outfits, saying they encourage child sex abuse.

Rep. Mark Foley, a Florida Republican, and Rep. Nick Lampson, a Texas Democrat, introduced a bill that would ban Web sites that charge money to view pictures or videos of children under 17 years old.

Web sites such as http://www.lilamber.com and http://www.stacystarlet.com do not contain nudity or pornography, and have not been linked to any cases of child abuse or abduction, the two said.

But the Web sites do exploit children and cater to child molesters, the congressmen said.

"These Web sites are nothing more than a way for pedophiles to get their fix," Foley said.

Customers can send in outfits for the children to wear, chat with them over the Internet and in some cases arrange to meet them in hotel rooms, he said.

"Someone's exploiting the kid where they're going to be used for someone else's sexual gratification," Lampson said.

An operator of several child-modeling Web sites said he did not traffic in child pornography, and said he did not want to speculate on why his customers visit the sites because he had never met them.

"I can say no one involved in our site would ever say we are exploiting these children, that is why they are happy to be involved," said the operator, who did not wish to be named.

The bill would ban Web sites that charge money to view pictures of children, without promoting any other products or services. Clothing stores that run advertisements using child models, for example, would not be affected.

Violators could face fines and up to 10 years in prison.

Foley said the FBI has launched a preliminary investigation of child-modeling sites.

An FBI spokeswoman did not return calls seeking comment.

PREVIOUS EFFORTS FAILED

Previous congressional efforts to curb online obscenity and pornography have been struck down by courts on free-speech grounds. Foley said his staff had met with legal experts to make sure the bill would pass constitutional muster.

A free-speech activist who has served as a legal consultant to several child-modeling sites said the bill was unnecessary because existing laws already ban pedophilia and regulate the modeling industry.

"If there are existing laws that criminalize behavior, enforce the laws," said Jeffrey J. Douglas, a California attorney who serves as president of the First Amendment Lawyers Association.

Free speech should not be compromised because of its potential impact on criminals, Douglas said.

"Otherwise the only thing appropriate for you and I to view or read is something that's appropriate for a pedophile to view or read," said Douglas, who recently helped to overturn a law on "virtual" child pornography.

Foley has sponsored a bill that would reinstate the virtual-porn ban. The two bills might be combined when a House subcommittee meets on Thursday, he said.