Complain about a product or service

Congress Considers "Worst Data Bill Ever"

By Martin H. Bosworth
ConsumerAffairs.com

March 16, 2006

Data Theft • T-Mobile: No Hacking in Data Breach • T-Mobile Confirms Data Breach • Consumers Increasingly Concerned About Online Transactions • Are Identity Theft Services Worth the Cost? • Online Tools Help Spot Financial Fraud • Financial Fraud Hits 7.5 Percent Of Americans In 2008 • Feds Charge Mortgage Broker In Potential Data Breach • Millions of Credit Cards Exposed in Data Breach • 2008 Data Breach Total Soars • Bank Data Breach Threatens 248,000 in North Carolina • GPS Not Foolproof • Countrywide Warns Millions of Data Breach • Thieves Steal AT&T Laptop with Employee Data • Report: Data Breach Disclosure Laws Don't Affect Identity Theft • Patient Information Exposed in Data Breach at Walter Reed • Supermarket Chain Reports Data Breach • Report: Feds Still Not Doing Enough To Secure Data • Data Thieves Hit Georgetown University Students, Faculty • 800,000 Job Seekers At Risk In Gap Data Breach • TJX Data Breach Settlement Has Strings Attached • More ...

A new identity theft prevention bill in Congress is drawing such heavy criticism that a number of influential consumer groups have united against it, with some calling it the "worst data bill ever."

House Resolution (H.R.) 3997, the "Financial Data Protection Act," is coming under fire from the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG), the Consumer Federation of America (CFA), the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, and many other groups, for preempting strong state fraud prevention laws with weaker federal laws.

Critics say the bill opens loopholes that would enable companies to avoid notifying customers if data breaches occur.

The bill is currently up for vote by the House of Representatives' Financial Services Committee. PIRG's Ed Mierzwinski issued a statement urging committee members to reject the bill, saying "We believe consumers today would be worse off under this bill than if nothing passed."

The resolution amends the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) to mandate protections for consumer information in order to prevent an identity breach.

Under the Data Protection Act, if a company engages in a "reasonable" investigation and determines a possibility that stolen information can harm consumers, they can then notify them "without unreasonable delay."

The bill also limits consumer notification of data breaches to cases where "substantial harm" has occurred, defined as "material financial loss to or civil or criminal penalties imposed on the consumer or the need for the consumer to expend significant time and effort to correct erroneous information relating to the consumer."

Mierzwinski said that if H.R. 3997 had been in place when ChoicePoint lost the records of 145,000 people to a Nigerian identity theft ring, the public never would have heard about it.

"We believe individuals need to know whenever their sensitive personal information has been breached," he said.

The bill's sponsor, Rep. Steve LaTourette (R-OH), ironically bemoaned the slow pace of notification of data breaches in a Dec. 2005 press release urging passage of his resolution.

LaTourette cited the loss of customer data belonging to the ABN AMRO mortgage group, and said "The company is taking a good step by notifying customers, but it's bothersome to me that the tape has been missing nearly a month and the public and Congress are just learning about it."

Sweeping Preemptions

The bill also preempts virtually all state law enforcement power over identity theft and data breaches, remanding investigative power exclusively under federal agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and other federal agencies.

The bill also mandates that any company affected by a data breach offer its customers six months of free credit monitoring, but only after the customers have been directly affected by identity theft or fraud.

Many corporations already offer free credit monitoring for one or two years in case of breaches, even without direct evidence that every involved customer or employee was affected, as in the case of Verizon losing a laptop containing employee data to theft.

The bill does enable consumers to "freeze" their credit records to prevent thieves from opening new accounts in their name, but only once their information was actually misused. In other words, they would have to wait for an identity crime to occur in order to prevent it.

Mierzwinski hammered the bill for what he called "locking the door after the horse has already left the barn."

"All consumers should have the right to sleep at night without worrying about identity theft, by placing a freeze on their accounts. It's the only proven way to stop identity theft before it starts," he said.

Report Your Experience
If you've had a bad experience -- or a good one -- with a consumer product or service, we'd like to hear about it. All complaints are reviewed by class action attorneys and are considered for publication on our site. Knowledge is power! Help spread the word. File your consumer report now.

Back to the top |