Privacy CRA's Advance Spurs More Democratic, Public Interest Outrage Ahead of Likely Signing

“This bill has been rushed through both the House and Senate at breakneck speed with one clear goal -- to get it signed into law before the American people know about it,” Doyle said. Capuano agreed, saying: “I cannot imagine why anyone would support this." Both spoke on the chamber floor before Tuesday’s vote. If the two House Democrats receive 100,000 signatures by April 28, the White House is expected to respond.

Some public interest groups vowed vengeance on GOP lawmakers who voted for the CRA action. Fight for the Future said after the House vote it would carry through on its plans for billboards targeting the Republican members (see 1703270064). Billboards “are just the beginning,” said Evan Greer, the group's campaign director. “People from across the political spectrum are outraged, and every lawmaker who votes to take away our privacy will regret it come election day.”

“Terrible for American ppl, great for special interests,” tweeted Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., Wednesday. “On #BroadbandPrivacy -- it's clear where GOP loyalties lie.”

Private Internet Access, a VPN provider, bought full-page ads in The New York Times and The Washington Post after the House vote. The ad asked Trump to veto the CRA resolution and said it’s his chance to show whether he's for corporations or the people. Adam McElhaney, a self-described privacy activist and engineer living in Chattanooga, Tennessee, raised many tens of thousands of dollars through a website and grassroots campaign “to help me purchase the histories of those who sold you out,” he said of targeting Hill Republicans. “I want to put it online and searchable so you can see exactly what they do and who they are. Help me lobby our legislators.” He didn’t say how he would buy individuals’ histories, which ISPs at no point have said would be made available for such purchase. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee emailed supporters Tuesday, saying the “GOP voted to sell your browsing history (without permission)” and targeted Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., who wrote the CRA resolution: “One of our top targets in 2018, Senator Jeff Flake, was behind this creepy effort -- and he led every single GOP Senator to pass this bill -- while every Senate Democrat voted against it.” The Electronic Frontier Foundation solicited funding off the vote.

Democratic Pushback

Democratic FCC and FTC commissioners also objected.

FTC Commissioner Terrell McSweeny tweeted: “91% of Americans feel they have already lost too much control of their data. The President should veto this bill.” The House vote “harms consumers,” tweeted FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn. “Outrage spreading as people hear,” tweeted former FCC Commissioner Michael Copps, now at Common Cause. Copps called the GOP Congress “beyond shame.” Actor Chris Evans is Capuano's nephew and was one celebrity weighing in on Twitter: “We should ALL care about this! Do you want your online info sold to corporations? Thanks Uncle Mike for caring so much. ... I love when he yells.”

“The bill is an effort by the F.C.C.’s new Republican majority and congressional Republicans to overturn a simple but vitally important concept -- namely that the information that goes over a network belongs to you as the consumer, not to the network hired to carry it,” wrote former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler in an opinion piece Wednesday for The New York Times. “Reversing those protections is a dream for cable and telephone companies, which want to capitalize on the value of such personal information.”

Many Republicans and ISP industry groups lauded the House vote, but public interest groups were overwhelmingly opposed. Industry said there will be no loss in privacy, noting FCC rules never took effect. “I’m all for privacy rights, but throwing the word ‘privacy' on a rule and calling it consumer protection doesn’t mean it’s a good rule,” said Rep. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D.

“In 2015, FCC stripped consumer #broadbandprivacy protections," tweeted FTC acting Chairman Maureen Ohlhausen, citing the statement from FCC Chairman Ajit Pai approving of the congressional action and saying he wants to return broadband privacy to FTC authority. "I look fwd to working w/ @AjitPaiFCC to fix properly." That likely would mean undoing classification of broadband as a Communications Act Title II service, done as part of the FCC open internet order.

“The demise of the FCC’s broadband privacy rules would provide a good basis for challenging the Privacy Shield agreement between the EU and U.S., which is supposed to ensure that Europeans’ personal information is just as well protected when it’s in the hands of U.S. companies as it is at home,” Consumer Federation of America Director-Consumer Protection and Privacy Susan Grant said Wednesday.

“We urge President Trump to sign this bill, what would be the first technology bill approved under his presidency,” said CTA President Gary Shapiro. “This is a vital and necessary step to both preserve innovation and competition on the internet and in line with his approach to remove duplicative government regulations that have made it harder for American innovators to develop the technologies of tomorrow." CRA enactment “would simply maintain the status quo on privacy protections by removing the misguided rules adopted last year,” USTelecom President Jonathan Spalter said.

GOP Dissenters

The House vote included 15 Republicans voting against the CRA resolution and no Democrats in favor. That’s in contrast to last week’s 50-48 Senate vote, which had unified GOP support for the measure.

The 15 opposing Republicans included those active on privacy issues, such as Reps. Justin Amash, R-Mich., and Kevin Yoder, R-Kan. “More wrinkles to this issue/vote than most people on either side acknowledge,” Amash tweeted. “Bottom line: This legislation makes the law more convoluted.”

“We don’t want the government having access to our information without our consent, and the same goes for private business,” Yoder said in a statement. “These digital privacy protections put in place by the FCC are commonsense measures similar to long-standing rules that apply to phone companies that will simply ensure internet users can continue to have control over their personal information. I don’t believe they should be repealed, and I will continue to fight for Americans’ digital privacy rights.”

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., also has eyed privacy issues hawkishly but voted in favor. “The Obama Administration’s rule that is before Congress today did not exist until five months ago, yet abuse of customer data was not prevalent before the rule,” Massie said in a Facebook post. “Likewise, this FCC rule has never applied to search engines or social media platforms, yet harmful use of customer information has not been prevalent. In fact, many Internet Service Providers already voluntarily include opt-in clauses in their privacy policies.” He referred to people contacting him in favor of the FCC order. “I share concerns for privacy and have always been an adamant defender of the Fourth Amendment,” he said. “I see some benefit from the rule. On the balance though, I feel that letting the Federal government regulate Internet activity is more harmful than the good that results from voluntary exchanges between parties in the free market.”