State templates may influence Mass. data privacy policy
BOSTON (SHNS) – Lawmakers restarted their work Wednesday to bolster data privacy protections for Bay Staters, and some Democrats clashed with an attorney representing major tech companies over the best set of regulations to curtail exactly what type of information can be collected and used.
Reps. Andy Vargas and David Rogers pitched their proposal (H 104), dubbed the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act, as a top priority for the Legislature to safeguard residents' sensitive information online, particularly as companies collect and sell data without consumers' full knowledge or consent. The bill would create 'data minimization' standards, which limit the information that companies can store and process based on 'what is reasonably necessary and proportional to their lawful purpose,' according to a legislative summary.
'Data minimization is just the notion that the company uses it only for the specific purpose the person's there — they don't gather all this other information and start selling it to other third parties,' Rogers told the Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity during its first hearing of the session. 'I mean, it's just common sense, it really is. It's not overreaching.'
The bill also installs protections for minors against targeted advertising, gives Bay Staters the ability to sue for data privacy violations, and imposes restrictions on processing sensitive information like geolocation, biometric or genetic data. Bay Staters would also gain more power over the information that companies and other entities collect about them, including requesting the data be corrected or deleted.
Andrew Kingman, who represents the State Privacy & Security Coalition, urged the committee to consider a different data privacy framework on the hearing agenda Wednesday. His coalition represents 35 companies and six trade associations, including Amazon, Google, Netflix and Meta.
Kingman praised a Rep. Kate Hogan bill (H 80), the Comprehensive Massachusetts Consumer Data Privacy Act, which he said uses a framework adopted by Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire and 15 other states.
He said the bill adds restrictions around reproductive health care and geolocation data, while deploying a data minimization standard that currently applies to 600 million consumers across the globe. It does not give consumers the private right of action, Rep. Steven Owens pointed out.
'A number of the other frameworks today would be novel, distinct — even from Maryland, which was brought up,' Kingman said, referring to a new state data privacy law.
'The data minimization provisions in some of those frameworks are very concerning because companies don't know what's expected of them or how to comply,' Kingman continued. 'They also unintentionally — clearly, but unintentionally — can have the effect of depriving marginalized populations of goods and services designed for them, and they can make it harder for Massachusetts businesses to reach their own customers than it is for those Massachusetts business to reach customers, again, in New Hampshire, Connecticut and Rhode Island.'
Kingman faced questions from Reps. Joan Meschino and Tommy Vitolo about which companies he represents and the apparent harm of Massachusetts taking a data privacy approach that differs from other states.
'So I push back strongly on the idea that you and your colleagues are incapable of reading MGL (Massachusetts General Laws) and understanding what we expect in our commonwealth, and reading the laws of the great state of North Carolina and figuring out what they want. I believe in you,' Vitolo said. 'I just wholeheartedly push back on this idea that we should have a single set of laws in this United States on issues that affect us personally and culturally. And it just might be that the great state of Massachusetts has a different idea on privacy than even my state that I was born and raised in, Connecticut.'
Committee co-chair Rep. Tricia Farley-Bouvier, who also filed a consumer data privacy bill (H 78), said the panel and Kingman will need to work together to iron out differences on data minimization standards. Kingman said Farley-Bouvier's bill, as well as the proposal from Vargas and Rogers, raises questions over whether companies can offer product recommendations based on purchasing history or provide security updates on apps.
'We look forward to continuing the conversation, to be able to give specific feedback so that we can together reach our shared goals,' Farley-Bouvier said.
In his opening remarks, committee co-chair Sen. Michael Moore decried the increasing frequency of data breaches and how personal data has been 'weaponized,' including to 'undermine women's health.'
'Congress should act to protect our residents, but we know they will not,' Moore said. 'The Legislature must act to establish real data protections that address these issues and protect our constituents because it is clear that (the) status quo cannot and will not work.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indianapolis Star
35 minutes ago
- Indianapolis Star
Why won't Republicans call on Joe Hogsett to resign?
It is shocking that only one out of six Republicans on the Indianapolis City-County Council have called on Mayor Joe Hogsett to resign following sexual harassment allegations that have rocked his office in recent months. Many constituents of Republican councilors are frustrated that their caucus has been more passive than council Democrats, three of whom are on record saying Hogsett should resign. It is hard to trust your leaders when they stay silent about a moral and ethical issue, especially involving one of their political enemies. If anyone should have the courage to speak up, it should be Republicans. Unlike their Democratic colleagues, Republicans don't have to worry about Hogsett continuing to be a power broker in their party for several years due to their trouble building an independent political machine. '[Calling on Hogsett to resign] could cause personal financial hardship to people,' Democratic Councilor Jesse Brown, the first to call on Hogsett to resign, told me. '[And he] is in good with all the biggest donors and he has a ton of money in the bank and so … he absolutely could you know levy those connections or that money to sink people's political careers.' Briggs: Hogsett's texts to women show Indianapolis mayor embodied toxic culture When I asked Republican Minority Leader Michael-Paul Hart why he hasn't called on Hogsett to resign, he said he didn't want to get political. He has focused his criticism on the investigation into Hogsett, rather than Hogsett himself. After all, many are starting to think the investigation was just a PR stunt aimed at clearing him of legal liability. 'I try to be as apolitical as possible because I think local government is just non-political … we're always talking about roads, water, trash, public safety,' Hart said. 'At the end of the day, we've got to focus on what we can control and what is symbolic.' Gov. Mike Braun expressed a similar sentiment when asked by WIBC-FM (93.1) host Nigel Laskowski about the scandal. 'What I'm more concerned about would be the potholes per linear mile,' Braun said June 18. I don't think fixing potholes, criticizing a political process and taking a moral stance against political leaders engaging in ethical violations should be mutually exclusive. However, Hogsett still controls the city budget and Council President Vop Osili appears to be positioning himself to succeed Hogsett. Either person could retaliate against Republicans who chose to make trouble and divert city funds away from their districts. Opinion: I was dragged out by sheriff's deputies. Indiana Democrats stayed silent. 'I try to remind folks all the time there's … 240,000 people that the six of us (Republicans) represent and I would certainly not want them to be disenfranchised,' Hart told me when I asked if he thought Hogsett would retaliate against Republicans. 'But I would hope that the mayor wouldn't punish the people of our districts for something of that nature.' Several councilors and their employers are also financially dependent on contracts with the city-county government, which Hogsett could push to terminate if councilors call on him to resign. Hart, for example, is employed as a director by SHI International, which has a six million dollar contract through 2027 with Indianapolis. The risk of retaliation, however, did not stop both Democratic and Republican leaders from calling on former Attorney General Curtis Hill to resign after he faced allegations of groping, and did not stop both Democratic and Republican leaders from condemning former Indiana Senate Minority Leader Greg Taylor after he faced allegations of sexual harassment. Taking the personal risk to call for greater ethical standards for political leaders may not fix the roads, but it will do something just as important. It will rebuild public trust in local leaders by providing some concrete evidence that they subscribe to a set of moral standards, and that they want our political system to be just and fair for both their constituents and employees.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
GOP tax bill would ease regulations on gun silencers and some rifles and shotguns
WASHINGTON (AP) — The massive tax and spending cuts package that President Donald Trump wants on his desk by July 4 would loosen regulations on gun silencers and certain types of rifles and shotguns, advancing a longtime priority of the gun industry as Republican leaders in the House and Senate try to win enough votes to pass the bill. The guns provision was first requested in the House by Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde, a Republican gun store owner who had initially opposed the larger tax package. The House bill would remove silencers — called 'suppressors' by the gun industry — from a 1930s law that regulates firearms that are considered the most dangerous, eliminating a $200 tax while removing a layer of background checks. The Senate kept the provision on silencers in its version of the bill and expanded upon it, adding short-barreled, or sawed-off, rifles and shotguns. Republicans who have long supported the changes, along with the gun industry, say the tax infringes on Second Amendment rights. They say silencers are mostly used by hunters and target shooters for sport. 'Burdensome regulations and unconstitutional taxes shouldn't stand in the way of protecting American gun owners' hearing,' said Clyde, who owns two gun stores in Georgia and often wears a pin shaped like an assault rifle on his suit lapel. Democrats are fighting to stop the provision, which was unveiled days after two Minnesota state legislators were shot in their homes, as the bill speeds through the Senate. They argue that loosening regulations on silencers could make it easier for criminals and active shooters to conceal their weapons. 'Parents don't want silencers on their streets, police don't want silencers on their streets,' said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. The gun language has broad support among Republicans and has received little attention as House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., work to settle differences within the party on cuts to Medicaid and energy tax credits, among other issues. But it is just one of hundreds of policy and spending items included to entice members to vote for the legislation that could have broad implications if the bill is enacted within weeks, as Trump wants. Inclusion of the provision is also a sharp turn from the climate in Washington just three years ago when Democrats, like Republicans now, controlled Congress and the White House and pushed through bipartisan gun legislation. The bill increased background checks for some buyers under the age of 21, made it easier to take firearms from potentially dangerous people and sent millions of dollars to mental health services in schools. Passed in the summer of 2022, just weeks after the shooting of 19 children and two adults at a school in Uvalde, Texas, it was the most significant legislative response to gun violence in decades. Three years later, as they try to take advantage of their consolidated power in Washington, Republicans are packing as many of their longtime priorities as possible, including the gun legislation, into the massive, wide-ranging bill that Trump has called 'beautiful." 'I'm glad the Senate is joining the House to stand up for the Second Amendment and our Constitution, and I will continue to fight for these priorities as the Senate works to pass President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill,' said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who was one of the lead negotiators on the bipartisan gun bill in 2022 but is now facing a primary challenge from the right in his bid for reelection next year. If the gun provisions remain in the larger legislation and it is passed, silencers and the short-barrel rifles and shotguns would lose an extra layer of regulation that they are subject to under the National Firearms Act, passed in the 1930s in response to concerns about mafia violence. They would still be subject to the same regulations that apply to most other guns — and that includes possible loopholes that allow some gun buyers to avoid background checks when guns are sold privately or online. Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, who supports the legislation, says changes are aimed at helping target shooters and hunters protect their hearing. He argues that the use of silencers in violent crimes is rare. 'All it's ever intended to do is to reduce the report of the firearm to hearing safe levels,' Keane says. Speaking on the floor before the bill passed the House, Rep. Clyde said the bill restores Second Amendment rights from 'over 90 years of draconian taxes.' Clyde said Johnson included his legislation in the larger bill 'with the purest of motive.' 'Who asked for it? I asked,' said Clyde, who ultimately voted for the bill after the gun silencer provision was added. Clyde was responding to Rep. Maxwell Frost, a 28-year-old Florida Democrat, who went to the floor and demanded to know who was responsible for the gun provision. Frost, who was a gun-control activist before being elected to Congress, called himself a member of the 'mass shooting generation' and said the bill would help 'gun manufacturers make more money off the death of children and our people.' 'There's a reason silencers have been regulated for nearly a century: They make it much harder for law enforcement and bystanders to react quickly to gunshots,' said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. Schumer and other Democrats are trying to convince the Senate parliamentarian to drop the language as she reviews the bill for policy provisions that aren't budget-related. 'Senate Democrats will fight this provision at the parliamentary level and every other level with everything we've got,' Schumer said earlier this month.
an hour ago
President Lee picks South Korea's first civilian defense chief in 64 years
SEOUL, South Korea -- South Korean President Lee Jae Myung nominated a five-term liberal lawmaker as defense minister Monday, breaking with a tradition of appointing retired military generals. The announcement came as several prominent former defense officials, including ex-Defense Minister Kim Yong Hyun, face high-profile criminal trials over their roles in carrying out martial law last year under then-President Yoon Suk Yeol, who was indicted on rebellion charges and removed from office. Ahn Gyu-back, a lawmaker from Lee's Democratic Party, has served on the National Assembly's defense committee and chaired a legislative panel that investigated the circumstances surrounding Yoon's martial law decree. Yoon's authoritarian move involved deploying hundreds of heavily armed troops to the National Assembly and election commission offices in what prosecutors described as an illegal attempt to shut down the legislature and arrest political opponents and election officials. That sparked calls to strengthen civilian control over the military, and Lee promised during his election campaign to appoint a defense minister with a civilian background. Since a 1961 coup that brought military dictator Park Chung-hee to power, all of South Korea's defense ministers have come from the military — a trend that continued even after the country's democratization in the late 1980s. While Ahn will face a legislative hearing, the process is likely to be a formality, since the Democrats hold a comfortable majority in the National Assembly and legislative consent isn't required for Lee to appoint him. Among Cabinet appointments, Lee only needs legislative consent for prime minister, Seoul's nominal No. 2 job. 'As the first civilian Minister of National Defense in 64 years, he will be responsible for leading and overseeing the transformation of the military after its mobilization in martial law,' Kang Hoon-sik, Lee's chief of staff, said in a briefing. Ahn was among 11 ministers nominated by Lee on Monday, with longtime diplomat Cho Hyun selected as foreign minister and five-term lawmaker Chung Dong-young returning for another stint as unification minister — a position he held from 2004 to 2005 as Seoul's point man for relations with North Korea.
