HB 159-CONSUMER DATA PRIVACY ACT  5:48:35 PM CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 159, "An Act establishing the Consumer Data Privacy Act; establishing data broker registration requirements; making a violation of the Consumer Data Privacy Act an unfair or deceptive trade practice; and providing for an effective date." 5:48:49 PM CO-CHAIR FIELDS stated that amendments are being drafted. 5:49:19 PM REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN noted the complicated nature of the bill. 5:49:42 PM CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ opened public testimony on HB 159. 5:49:51 PM ROBERT WOODY, American Property Casualty Insurers Association(APCIA), noted that he works with a coalition of insurance trade associations, including the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies(NAMIC) and the American Council of Life Insurers (ACLI). He highlighted that insurance consumers are already protected by a strict privacy and regulatory regime by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA). In addition to protecting consumer privacy, he continued, Alaska's insurance regulation requires insurers to have a comprehensive written plan to protect the security and confidentiality of data against threats and unauthorized access. He said that GLBA was enacted over twenty years ago, and expressed that it is working well to protect consumers. He said that the goal of a GLBA exemption is to ensure that insurers and consumers are not subject to a "patchwork" of state and federal laws because it's difficult to understand and accommodate. He suggested that a single set of privacy rules would be simpler. He noted that the coalition submitted a letter to the committee [hard copies included in the committee packet] with a suggestion on the wording of the exemption, and he expressed that the coalition hopes the committee takes this into consideration. He said that the coalition is also concerned about the private right of action. 5:54:38 PM MAYA MCKENZIE, Technology Policy Council, Entertainment Software Association, testified in opposition to HB 159. She said that state privacy legislation should not conflict with existing children's privacy laws. She stated that while she doesn't support the bill, she supports some additional amendments. She suggested that the bill should clarify that a business shouldn't process data from a consumer under the age of 13, unless provided by the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). She shared her understanding that the proposed legislation deviates from COPPA's standard for determining age, and suggested that AS 45.48.845(b) be deleted from the bill. She expressed that failing to remove this section would create unnecessary confusion. Finally, she suggested an amendment to clarify that parental consent that is obtained, as provided by COPPA, would be sufficient consent under the bill. She said that this would ensure that existing practices would not "run afoul" of state law. 5:57:37 PM ANTON VAN SEVENTER, Council, State Privacy and Security Coalition, testified in opposition to HB 159. He shared his understanding that the bill contains "outlier requirements" that are found in no other state law and could lead to confusion. He highlighted the proposed requirement for businesses to comply with global privacy control, which he said would create technical impracticalities and would "undermine consumer choice." He shared his understanding that the global privacy control doesn't reflect the aims of the proposed legislation. He said the bill would prevent consumers from actively choosing to permit certain sites to collect or disclose information. He highlighted the "underlying" private right of action component of the bill, which he said have been shown to fail to compensate consumers, even when a violation has been shown. He expressed that the bill also includes "vague and overbroad" definitions, and suggested that the bill's language be clarified and updated. 6:00:25 PM ALYSSA DOOM, Computer & Communications Industry Association(CCPIA), testified in opposition to HB 159. She explained that CCPIA is a non-profit that represents small to large communication and technology firms. She emphasized that CPIA supports a uniform approach to technology legislation to promote regulatory certainty. She said that CCPIA has concerns about adopting legislation that is specific to each state, which she opined would contribute to the "patchwork" of laws. 6:02:12 PM DAVID EDMONSON, Vice President of State Policy and Government Relations, TechNet, testified in opposition to HB 159. He expressed that the technology industry is committed to consumer privacy and promoting consumer choice in determining how data is used. He said that TechNet supports a uniform standard and responsibilities for all Americans. He agreed that each state having its own laws will contribute to a steep compliance cost and consumer confusion. He expressed concern about the private right of action that is proposed by HB 159, which he said could cause "enormous liability." 6:04:45 PM CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ, after ascertaining that there was no one else who wished to testify, closed public testimony on HB 159. CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ announced that HB 159 was held over.