Ohio House Privacy Bill Skipped; Ind., Okla. Measures Advance
Ohio lawmakers skipped a planned vote on a privacy bill Wednesday, but comprehensive measures continued to advance in other legislatures. Oklahoma and Indiana committees teed up privacy bills for floor votes.
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.
The Republican-controlled Ohio House decided HB-376 would be “informally passed” over while retaining its place on the calendar. It means legislators “were prepared to vote on it but then … decided against it,” emailed American Civil Liberties Union Ohio Chief Lobbyist Gary Daniels. “There are still a fair amount of House Republicans not thrilled with it,” said Daniels. ACLU opposes the bill. HB-376 sponsor Rep. Rick Carfagna (R), who Wednesday gave a floor speech about resigning to join the Ohio Chamber of Commerce, didn’t comment by our deadline.
An Oklahoma privacy bill will advance to the House floor after clearing the Technology Committee in a 6-0 vote Wednesday. Rep. Scott Fetgatter (R) asked at the livestreamed hearing if the proposed threshold, which would apply HB-2969 only to businesses with at least $15 million annual revenue, could still capture some small businesses like restaurants that have slim margins. It was $10 million in last year’s version of the bill. Sponsor Rep. Collin Walke (D) dismissed the concern. Small-business restaurants probably don’t collect personal data, and bigger ones like McDonald’s probably already comply with California’s privacy law, he said. The panel also unanimously supported an anti-robocalls bill (HB-3168).
HB-2969 could hit the House floor in about three weeks, Walke told us later. Wednesday’s “vote shows that Oklahoma’s elected officials are serious about protecting Oklahoman’s privacy and setting the standard for data privacy in the country,” he emailed: “It’s our constituents’ data, not Big Tech’s.”
Indiana’s House Commerce Committee voted 12-0 for SB-358 at a webcast meeting Tuesday. The committee amended the bill to exempt third parties under contract with a government entity, except data unrelated to the contract. The bill can now go to the full House. The Senate passed the bill unanimously earlier this month but will have to concur with House changes (see 2202030022).
A hearing will occur March 1 on a Connecticut privacy bill , confirmed a spokesperson for Sen. James Maroney (D). Senators are expected to substitute SB-6 with language drafted by Maroney. The senator’s draft is similar to Colorado’s privacy law. SB-6 is before the Joint General Laws Committee.
“We anticipate a vote in the near future” on Wisconsin’s HB-957, Mark Austinson, policy aide to bill sponsor Rep. Shannon Zimmerman (R), emailed Wednesday. The House Consumer Protection Committee was to hear testimony but not vote on HB-957 at a Wednesday hearing that wasn't livestreamed.
A Massachusetts measure awaits a Senate vote. The bill, which got a hearing last year (see 2110130060), was redrafted Monday as S-2687 and reported to the Senate by the Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity.
Florida’s privacy bill could get a vote as soon as next week in the House Judiciary Committee after clearing Commerce last week on a bipartisan basis (see 2202100040). A Kentucky panel mulled a privacy bill Tuesday (see 2202150068).