{"id":22422,"date":"2022-12-10T00:22:28","date_gmt":"2022-12-10T00:22:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/12\/10\/the-us-finally-has-a-chance-for-a-federal-privacy-law-it-should-take-it\/"},"modified":"2022-12-10T00:22:28","modified_gmt":"2022-12-10T00:22:28","slug":"the-us-finally-has-a-chance-for-a-federal-privacy-law-it-should-take-it","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/12\/10\/the-us-finally-has-a-chance-for-a-federal-privacy-law-it-should-take-it\/","title":{"rendered":"The US Finally Has A Chance For A Federal Privacy Law. It Should Take It"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>\n
<\/p>\n

\n

from the stop-playing-politics<\/i> dept<\/h3>\n

Strong privacy rights are a crucial first step to a healthy and productive online ecosystem. The European Union figured this out years ago, enacting the General Data Protection Regulation. In contrast, the U.S., the land of tech innovation, is tripping over its own feet at the finish line and hoping nobody notices we\u2019ll be without a consistent and consequential law protecting internet users for at least a few more years. It\u2019s well past time to put politics and personal gripes aside and bring up the American Data Privacy and Protection Act<\/a> (ADPPA) for a vote in the House of Representatives before the end of the year.<\/p>\n

We\u2019re a few weeks into the lame-duck congressional session, and any progress made in House ADPPA negotiations is at best secret, at worst non-existent. With so many disillusioned by the state of governing in the US, it would be easy to shrug this off as the usual gridlock.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But this impasse defies political logic\u2014we are well past the point of principled opposition, competing ideological stances, or genuine concern for internet users. It must be emphasized over and over again: the main debates that kept comprehensive federal privacy legislation from happening are mostly settled. Republicans agreed to a limited (but significant) private right of action, meaning that users have a right to sue companies for violating their privacy rights. Democrats have overwhelmingly agreed to a federal preemption clause that still preserves many state-level privacy laws, though not hypothetical future legislation.<\/p>\n

Beyond minor technical tweaks<\/a> that folks can easily sit down and hammer out, three major misconceptions about ADPPA continue to drive the conversation: the notion that ADPPA\u2019s provisions will leave Americans worse off on privacy in the future, the idea that ADPPA is soft on industry, and the implicit view that keeping the status quo is preferable to passing ADPPA. It\u2019s hard to overstate that federal legislators from California, bowing to bad faith arguments from territorial state privacy regulators, are the overwhelming drivers<\/a> of these concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n

When California\u2019s privacy leaders and congressional delegation could not continue to falsely claim that their state laws are stronger than the ADPPA (they are not<\/a>), they started hanging on to a different argument from the preemption debate: that states would not be allowed to \u201cinnovate\u201d and that users would be \u201cstuck\u201d with the protections Congress passed. This argument at least is rooted in reality\u2014the ADPPA will certainly bar states from enacting new comprehensive privacy laws. But it fails to engage with the content of the legislation before us and the stark reality of privacy protections in this country.\u00a0<\/p>\n

To be clear: ADPPA opponents claiming the mantle of potential<\/em> future innovation at the state level are doing so in defense of state laws that are universally weaker than ADPPA. If state lawmakers, including in California, want to increase privacy protections for their residents, the clear solution is to pass ADPPA now rather than be content with weaker protections that might<\/em> improve. The pledge of better choices in the future has always been an empty promise at both state and federal levels. To give up a real privacy bill for an empty promise defies logic.<\/p>\n

The remaining voices of dissent argue that ADPPA would benefit the tech industry, pointing to support from some companies as evidence. This fails to reckon with myriad reasons why companies might support regulation.\u00a0<\/p>\n

First, industry would naturally want regulators to address shady players operating on the margins who seriously violate individual privacy and poison the market with questionable business practices. ADPPA\u2019s limits on the invasive<\/a> third-party data broker industry are a good example of this. Second, many businesses (particularly major players) would rather abide by clear, uniform, stable federal rules\u2014even if they come at a cost\u2014than deal with operating in a chaotic environment with many different state laws. And it does come at a cost \u2013 ADPPA has some of the strongest boundaries<\/a> on the online advertising ecosystem in general, ensuring that current pernicious practices would have to change. What would actually be a gift to bad actors in industry is the underlying, unspoken consensus of those who are delaying the passage of ADPPA: keeping the status quo.<\/p>\n

The implicit perspective of those opposed to moving on comprehensive privacy legislation now is that the status quo is preferable to meaningful reform. With Republicans likely wanting to start from scratch<\/a> on privacy legislation from a position of power in the House, it will be a very long time before we\u2019re back this close to the finish line\u2014with no guarantee that anything approaching ADPPA\u2019s high standards will ever again come to a vote.\u00a0<\/p>\n

We\u2019d be stuck with the status quo for a while, a patchwork of state privacy law covering fewer than 1 in 5 people in the U.S. Having several different legislative frameworks to follow wouldn\u2019t be ideal for companies, but none of those bills are, in any way, stronger than ADPPA. Less powerful laws might be better than none\u2014but not for the millions who wouldn\u2019t fall under those protections. Talk about a gift to industry.<\/p>\n

A better future is possible for all, and it already cleared what looked like impossible odds. It shouldn\u2019t die now because members of congress don\u2019t want to do their job, which is simple: bring ADPPA up for a vote.<\/p>\n

David Morar is a policy fellow at the Open Technology Institute.<\/em><\/p>\n

\nFiled Under: adppa<\/a>, california<\/a>, pre-emption<\/a>, privacy<\/a>, privacy law<\/a>
\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n