Legislature(2009 - 2010)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/02/2010 09:00 AM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB190 | |
| SB284 | |
| HJR16 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 190 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 284 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 16 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 190-BIOMETRIC INFORMATION FOR ID
9:01:22 AM
CHAIR MENARD announced the first order of business to come
before the committee would be SB 190.
SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, sponsor of SB 190, said the purpose
of SB 190 is to update an existing law, passed unanimously in
2004, to protect our privacy rights. The existing law outlaws
the collection, analysis or storage of a law-abiding person's
genetic information or DNA without his or her written consent.
Advances in DNA technology have been of benefit to society,
medicine and law enforcement but also hold the potential for
misuse. DNA is now only one form of biometric information and
emerging technologies further threaten our privacy rights.
Physiological characteristics, unique to an individual, can be
used to obtain information about people without consent. For
example, facial recognition technology can track a person
anywhere they go. He pointed out that Great Britain has cameras
set up and tracks citizens all over the country; most Alaskans
would find that offensive. Senator Wielechowski said he was
motivated to sponsor SB 190 after being approached by an
individual who was refused admittance to the state accountancy
licensing exam because he refused to submit to fingerprinting.
This man offered his driver's license, social security card and
passport but was told this was insufficient identification.
9:04:33 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said it is offensive to treat law-abiding,
privacy-loving Alaskans like criminals. Once scanned,
fingerprint data is often handed over to private data management
firms, some of which sell personal data sourced from multiple
public and private databases. Adding only "fingerprints" to the
existing law protecting our DNA, would still allow companies to
collect retinal scan information, facial characteristic
information or other private data. Thus, the term "biometric"
was used in drafting the law.
CHAIR MENARD said she understood that some of the data
management firms are in Europe or East Asia.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI replied that is correct.
SENATOR FRENCH asked how the practice of taking photographs is
differentiated from unauthorized collection of biometric
information.
9:07:16 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said a facial biometric system is made up
of three components: a camera, a software program that
recognizes face geometry such as placement of the eyes and nose
and a system capable of classifying all those elements to
differentiate between people.
9:08:23 AM
CHAIR MENARD opened public testimony.
JASON GIAIMO, representing himself, said two years ago he went
to take the final part of the CPA exam. He was refused entrance
due to a lack of proper identification, even though he presented
his driver's license, passport and more. Only fingerprints, in
addition to other ID, were sufficient. Through research, he
found the fingerprints would have gone into a database that is
transmitted over the internet to a foreign data-mining firm
called Choice Point. Choice Point is the largest supplier of
information to over 7,000 different companies including the IRS,
FBI and Department of Homeland Security. He said big business is
masquerading as security.
9:12:25 AM
BRENDA NATION, American Council of Life Insurers (ACLI), said
the ACIL's first concern is the broad definition of biometric
information particularly in Version P on page 3, lines 3-4: "an
individual's unique behavioral and physiological
characteristics". She said ACLI does not understand how to
comply with this broad definition when collecting information
about a person wanting to purchase life or long-term care
insurance. Life insurers are required under federal and state
privacy laws and regulations to obtain written consent from an
individual before obtaining their personal, non-public health
information. Those regulations include prohibitions on
disclosure and business exceptions that allow ACLI to serve
their customers. Exceptions are also found in the current
statutory definition of DNA analysis which allows life insurers
and others to collect and retain certain information to serve
customers.
She said ACLI's second major concern is that under AS
18.13.010(c), and SB 190, a person is allowed to revoke their
written consent at any time. She said what information SB 190
protects or does not is unclear. For example, would the
information included in a person's health history, held by a
doctor, be considered biometric information? Without the ability
for the insurer and the doctor to share information, paying a
long-term care claim could be problematic.
9:16:18 AM
Similarly, should a person revoke his consent, an insurance
issuer would not know what information is biometric and should
be removed from the file, making it difficult to comply with the
law. She said she provided two suggested amendments to Senator
Wielechowski regarding the definition of biometric information
that would alleviate ACLI's concerns with SB 190.
SENATOR PASKVAN said he expected that an insurance provider
tracks a member with a plan number and a participant number
rather than with biometric information. He asked Ms. Nation what
she means by using biometric information to track a person in
relation to a payment for a medical procedure.
MS. NATION said ACLI members do not use things like
fingerprints, hand geometry, voice recognition, facial
recognition or retinal scans. ACLI's concern with the definition
of biometric information is the piece that reads, "information
that is based on an individual's unique behavioral or
physiological characteristics". The language is so broad that it
could potentially encompass other health information.
CHAIR MENARD asked Senator Wielechowski if he feels the
definition of "biometric information" is too broad.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said the intent of SB 190 is not to exclude
necessary health insurance information but to protect people's
personal, private information against current and future
technologies.
9:20:03 AM
He said he would not object to taking "behavioral and
physiological characteristics" out of SB 190 if the committee is
concerned about the interpretation of those words.
SENATOR PASKVAN suggested that the assembly of data by others
and collecting that information scientifically or by computer is
the troubling aspect.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI reiterated that the intent of SB 190 is to
protect Alaskan's privacy and new technologies must be
considered. He said removing "behavioral and physiological
characteristics including" out of SB 190 might solve any
problems. He said he is happy to work with Senator Paskvan and
Senator Menard's offices and the insurance industry.
9:23:12 AM
CHAIR MENARD opened public testimony.
JEFFREY MITTMAN, Executive Director, ACLU, said ACLU is
generally supportive of the SB 190. ACLU has one concern: On
page 2, lines 11-12 of SB 190 would amend AS 18.13.010(b)(6) to
read "for background checks as permitted or required by state
statute or by federal statute or regulation". ACLU's concern is
that that exception is so broad that it completely encompasses
the rule. ACLU hopes to work with Senator Wielechowski or the
drafter to ensure that necessary checks are allowed but not
against an individual's consent or knowledge. If such a revision
were made, ACLU would fully support SB 190.
9:26:02 AM
CHAIR MENARD closed public testimony.
CHAIR MENARD announced she would hold SB 190 in committee to
clear up some of the questions that were discussed.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|