A proposed Connecticut privacy law is “probably one of the most important consumer protection bills that we'll be dealing with this year,” said Connecticut Senate President Martin Looney (D) at a livestreamed news conference Thursday. Sen. James Maroney (D) unveiled the Colorado-like SB-6, as expected, with a hearing March 1 (see 2202160042). It establishes consumers' rights and corporate responsibilities, Maroney said. People don’t realize how their data is being used, so SB-6 will let them know what’s being tracked and give them power to opt out, he said. Sen. Bob Duff (D) said he’s confident the legislature will pass and Gov. Ned Lamont (D) will sign SB-6. With congressional inaction and a “paralyzed” FCC, he said, “states can call the shots” in the tech space.
A federal judge mulled Thursday whether Maryland’s digital ad tax is in fact a penalty on big tech. At virtual oral argument, U.S. District Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby in Baltimore weighed jurisdictional issues on the challenge by U.S. Chamber of Commerce, NetChoice Internet Association and Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) (case 21-cv-00410).
Ohio lawmakers skipped a planned vote on a privacy bill Wednesday, but comprehensive measures continued to advance in other legislatures. Oklahoma and Indiana committees teed up privacy bills for floor votes.
NTIA could require states to include public utilities commissions as they decide how to use federal infrastructure funds, said Doug Kinkoph, associate administrator, NTIA Office of Internet Connectivity and Growth, at NARUC’s partially virtual conference Tuesday. Earlier in the day, the NARUC Telecom Committee axed overbuilding language from a proposed resolution about the coming billions of dollars.
State utility commissioners should get active in broadband funding talks, said NTIA and U.S. Treasury officials at the partially virtual NARUC conference Monday. Each state is to receive at least $200 million combined through Treasury’s Coronavirus Capital Projects Fund and NTIA's broadband equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program. State commissioners may no longer say broadband is “not my jurisdiction,” said former FCC and South Carolina Commissioner Mignon Clyburn: “I’m sorry, you can’t rest on that anymore.”
Cable and wireless industries opposed a Rhode Island net neutrality bill, at a livestreamed hearing Wednesday. The House Innovation, Internet and Technology Committee held the bill for further study, a common practice that doesn’t mean the panel won’t later take it up. HB-7187 would require ISPs to follow open-internet rules and allow state contracts only with companies that adhere. The bill isn’t needed because there have been no ISP net neutrality violations, said New England Cable and Telecommunications Association President Tim Wilkerson. Cox sees “no pressing need” and states are preempted, said Latham & Watkins lawyer Matt Murchison. CTIA Vice President-State Legislative Affairs Gerard Keegan also opposed HB-7187. The American Civil Liberties Union thinks net neutrality rules are critical, said Hannah Stern, ACLU-Rhode Island policy associate.
Georgia senators grilled tech industry officials opposing a social media bill that's like the Texas and Florida laws that were enjoined by federal district courts. At a livestreamed hearing Thursday, the Georgia Senate Regulated Industries and Utilities Committee mulled SB-393 to treat large social websites as common carriers and require anti-discrimination of content. Chairman Bill Cowsert (R) said the bill would be back on the agenda for the committee’s Tuesday meeting. The bill would stop social media from banning “lawful but awful content” like bullying, racism and hate speech, testified Servando Esparza, TechNet executive director-Texas and the Southeast. Cowsert asked about concerns about “canceling certain voices” due to having a “certain political bent.” Users feel platforms are violating their free speech, he said. “If you say something that the censors at Facebook don't like, then you get silenced.” SB-393 infringes on private businesses’ First Amendment rights, replied Esparza. Sen. John Kennedy (R) asked if platforms had standards for what can and can’t be on platforms. Guidelines “evolve constantly,” as they must, said the TechNet official: For example, nobody could have foreseen kids daring each other to eat Tide Pods. Conservatives and Republicans both do well on social media, said NetChoice Policy Counsel Chris Marchese. For a long time, conservatives didn’t get a fair shot on traditional media, but then former President Donald Trump did very well on social media, he said. Cowsert returned that Trump got kicked off. The Constitution protects businesses deciding what speech to allow, said Marchese. Sen. John Albers (R) complained that he lost his law firm job after Twitter allowed him to be wrongly “canceled” when some groups made false claims about him about a year ago. Marchese said he was sorry to hear that, but it was the First Amendment, not Twitter, that allowed it to happen.
Florida House Commerce Committee members backed a privacy bill containing a private right of action (PRA) unanimously and on a bipartisan basis at a livestreamed Thursday hearing. Possible litigation and compliance costs from the comprehensive bill aren’t concerning enough to vote no, said committee members. Bipartisan policymaking can still happen in state legislatures, unlike in Congress, said Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser (D) on a Freedom of Privacy Forum webinar later that day.
An Ohio House panel split by party as it narrowly advanced a comprehensive privacy bill Wednesday. The Government Oversight Committee voted 7-5 for HB-376 at the measure’s fifth hearing before the panel. All Democratic members voted no. Chairman Shane Wilkin (R) ruled as out of order an amendment by ranking member Richard Brown (D), who sought to remove a restriction on private lawsuits and language giving exclusive enforcement authority to the state attorney general. HB-376 can now be scheduled for a floor vote. In Connecticut, 19 Senate Democrats including Sen. Martin Looney and Majority Leader Bob Duff introduced a one-page privacy bill (SB-6) to raise funding to the attorney general’s office “to increase efforts to protect consumer personal information and data from unwanted sale and dissemination.” Edits to Virginia’s privacy law advanced Tuesday. The House Commerce Committee voted 21-1 for HB-1259, saying data about race, religion, sexual orientation, citizenship and certain other things is sensitive only “when used to make a decision that results in legal or similarly significant effects concerning a consumer.” The Finance and Appropriations Committee voted 13-2 for SB-534 to authorize the AG to pursue actual damages to consumers if a data controller or processor continues to violate the privacy law after the 30-day right to cure ends or if it breaches an express written statement it gave the AG. Also, it would clarify that political organizations are nonprofits exempt from the act. The AG may decide if a cure is possible, it said. And the bill would abolish the consumer privacy fund, placing all money collected by enforcement instead in a different state trust fund. The Florida House Commerce Committee plans a Thursday hearing on a comprehensive privacy bill (HB-9), resurrected from a failed 2021 bill, by Rep. Fiona McFarland (D). A New York state privacy bill advanced Tuesday (see 2202080051).
With federal broadband dollars on the way, Regulatory Commission of Alaska staff disagree with using Alaska USF (AUSF) to subsidize high-speed internet, said RCA Common Carrier Specialist David Parrish at a virtual commission meeting Wednesday. The commission could finalize an AUSF update rulemaking (R-21-001) by August under a staff memo outlining a tentative schedule, he said. Chairman Bob Pickett said he’s “looking forward to getting this process moving again.”