Cantwell Responds to GOP: Congress Should Do Its Job, Legislate Privacy
Congress should do its job and legislate privacy, Senate Commerce Committee ranking member Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., told reporters Thursday, in response to a question about remarks from Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., and Senate Majority Whip John Thune, R-S.D. The Republicans said Wednesday there’s currently no path forward for privacy talks (see 2003040052).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
“Privacy is still a very big issue in the United States, and people also care about cybersecurity and the security of their data,” Cantwell said. “I don’t think anybody wants to think they’re like shutting off conversations about that.” The public wants privacy work to continue, “they want us to do our job,” she added.
The announcement from Wicker and Thune is “about right,” Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, told reporters: “I am always about keeping hope alive, but we’re not currently talking.”
Asked if anything has changed on the privacy front, Thune told reporters Thursday, “No, it’s still kind of stalled out.” He called it a stalemate with Democrats, “more particularly the trial lawyers.” Lawmakers are anxious to move bills, he said: “This idea of continuing to negotiate a bipartisan solution is the best way to proceed, but it’s getting harder.” Asked about the possibility of privacy legislation passing both chambers this Congress, Thune said, “it gets hard” because of California and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. The state has its own privacy law.
Wicker, Cantwell, Thune, Schatz and Sens. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., formed the original Senate Commerce Committee privacy working group. Cantwell denied she ever formally joined any group, though (see 1906270053). In June, Wicker and Cantwell opted to negotiate bilaterally, which resulted in two separate privacy proposals from Republicans and Democrats (see 1912040045).
A private right of action and federal pre-emption remain sticking points, Wicker said. He has repeatedly noted California’s privacy law doesn’t include a private right of action (see 1911260055). But the California Consumer Privacy Act does include a limited PRA. “I don’t know how [PRA] ever got to be the holy grail, but it is an absolute showstopper with Republican senators, representatives,” Wicker said, noting injunctive relief is a “different matter.”
Moran has been in bilateral privacy talks with Blumenthal ever since group discussions broke down. Moran told us he expects to reach consensus with Blumenthal before the next congressional recess, or two separate bills will be introduced. He said he continues to meet with Blumenthal on the Senate floor, though no formal meetings have been scheduled.
“We’re still working,” Blumenthal told reporters. “I can’t tell you what exactly we’re going to do. I’m going to be talking to him.”
Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., continues to rally support for her privacy legislation with Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif. (see 2002260049). The bill would create an independent digital privacy agency within the executive branch. She recently met with EU officials to discuss the differences between privacy regimes in the EU and the U.S. Things in the EU’s general data protection regulation “really probably wouldn’t pass constitutional muster here,” she told us. EU officials have expressed concern why the U.S. hasn’t passed a federal privacy bill, she said: “Things that are very large take time around here.”