H.R.2221 - Data Accountability and Trust Act Sponsor: Bobby Rush / 111th Congress

Title
111th Congress - To protect consumers by requiring reasonable security policies and procedures to protect computerized data containing personal information, and to provide for nationwide notice in the event of a security breach. hidemore...
Summary
To protect consumers by requiring reasonable security policies and procedures to protect data containing personal information, and to provide for nationwide notice in the event of a security breach. (by CRS)
Status
The bill was voted on in the House on December 8, 2009

Customize

Customize the interests supporting and opposing this bill

To remove an interest, click the Remove button next to its name below this box.

To add an interest, choose one from this list:

To add an interest, click Support or Oppose.

You can share your customized pages with other people by sending them the URL for pages about this bill. Other MAPLight.org users will not see your customizations unless they use the URL you send them. To save your customizations for your next visit, create a free New Account, then Sign In.

Done

Interests who did want this bill to become law included these interests and specific groups:

Interests who did not want this bill to become law included these interests and specific groups:

(None found)

Contribution data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics (OpenSecrets.org)

Comments RSS feed

DATA is not strong enough by Karen Chung, May 7, 2009 (8:34pm)

The Data Accountability and Trust Act (111th) would create a standardized data breach notification system. It would require companies working with electronic data to secure private information. In the case of a data breach, the bill requires the immediate notification of customers. The main concern about the bill is that it may preempt stronger state laws that are already in place. Also, because so many states have already enacted notification laws, H.R. 2221 should offer additional protections instead of the same.

Reply to this comment
Reply to this comment close
[ Tags ]
[ Tags ] close
[ Spam ]
[ Spam ] close

DATA should not create a high-water mark for security or privacy by CIPPguide, May 27, 2009 (9:31pm)

I’m unsure that HR 2221 will pass in it’s current state. It appears that this is not the first attempt for DATA (109th Congress 2005-2006, 110th Congress 2007-2008). I’m interested from a legal perspective, how a state such as Montana (where privacy is written into their Constitution) or possibly California could reconcile this forced repeal of security/privacy legislation.

Obama quoted Justice Brandeis in a May 20th, 2009 Presidential Memo surrounding the Federal system, where “a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.”

We at the CIPP Guide see the preemption of State’s Rights as a very big issue. The patchwork of privacy regulations in the US is not ideal, but having the Federal Government set the high-water mark nationally is not in the best interest of our citizens’ privacy or security.

http://www.cippguide.org

Reply to this comment
Reply to this comment close
[ Tags ]
[ Tags ] close
[ Spam ]
[ Spam ] close