No Need for Privacy Laws, House Republicans Say

Subcommittee Chair Mary Bono Mack, R-Calif., said: “I'm still not certain legislation is necessary, still skeptical of the motives of both industry and government, and still leery that advancements like do-not-track and eraser button technology will work as intended. … Where is the public outcry for legislation?” Bono Mack asked. “Today I'm simply not hearing it.”

Bono Mack also scrutinized the White House consumer privacy bill of rights, which she said “could morph one day into another big government rules of the road.” The administration’s proposal, unveiled last month, offers a voluntary code of conduct that aims to protect privacy rights of online consumers while giving them more control over how their information is handled.

Full Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., said he too was “skeptical” about whether the government can regulate and keep up with the rapid pace of the Internet. “Consumers and the economy as a whole will not be well served by government attempts to wrap the Web in red tape,” he said.

But there are real harms if Congress fails to enact baseline privacy protections for consumers, Leibowitz said. If consumers believe their personal data are being misused by companies without their consent they will lose trust in the Internet, he said. That in turn would affect their proclivity to participate in online commerce, which would harm American businesses and the American economy.

"The problem isn’t just a U.S. problem,” said Strickling: “It is global.” The European Union has developed specific privacy rules that could restrict U.S. companies’ ability to grow and expand outside the U.S., he said. “If Congress were to enact these basic principles and sets of legislation that would help [American businesses] in other parts of the world.”

But Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said she was wary of adopting anything like the European model of privacy. “We live in a data-driven information age. What happens if we follow the European privacy model and take information out of the information economy … is you lose out on innovators who choose to work elsewhere.” Furthermore, Blackburn said she was concerned about whether a do-not-track system would “lead to disincentives in the system.”

The concept of do-not-track is only for third-party data collectors whose practices customers often are unaware of, Leibowitz told reporters after the hearing. “It’s not for first-party websites.” Leibowitz said he was “optimistic” that consumers would see an effective, voluntary do-not-track mechanism by the end of the year.

Subcommittee Ranking Member G.K. Butterfield, D-N.C., felt “strongly that a national baseline privacy law is the best way to ensure consumers have basic common sense and permanent control of the collection of their information,” he said. Both Leibowitz and Strickling agreed that they thought privacy legislation was needed to support the administration’s proposals. “Self-regulation has been erratic and we know that from the number of breaches we have seen,” Leibowitz said. “We absolutely support the passage of legislation to codify the baseline principles,” said Strickling.

The co-chairmen of the Congressional Privacy Caucus, Reps. Joe Barton, R-Texas, and Ed Markey, D-Mass., said they believed that greater emphasis must be placed on protecting children. “They have a right to be forgotten,” Markey said. “What they put online should not come back to haunt them in a college application.” Leibowitz agreed and said that many of the principles of Markey and Barton’s Do Not Track Kids Act (HR-1895) are consistent with the commission’s proposed changes to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act rule.