Don’t let anyone say a Wisconsin privacy bill is moving too fast, state Rep. Shannon Zimmerman (R) said during a livestreamed hearing Tuesday. The Wisconsin Senate Consumer Protection Committee heard testimony on Zimmerman’s AB-466 and Senate companion SB-642 but didn’t vote. The Assembly last month unanimously passed AB-466, which would allow consumers to request and delete information that certain data controllers hold (see 2311150039). Versions of the bill appeared in three straight legislative sessions, said Zimmerman. “That’s six years of my life.” Zimmerman said he wants to avoid a state privacy law “tapestry.” Instead, the Republican hopes to push Congress to make a good federal law, he said. Wisconsin’s bill is similar to Virginia’s “pretty darn good” privacy law, he added. The main difference is that, in Wisconsin, consumer complaints wouldn’t go to the state AG, Zimmerman said. Instead, they would be handled by the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, an existing state agency that seems more suited to the task, he said. The AG would remain the Wisconsin bill’s sole enforcer, however. BSA|The Software Alliance supported the bill during Tuesday's hearing. In the absence of Congress approving a national privacy bill, “and I don't see a light at the end of the tunnel anytime soon,” Wisconsin should be the 14th state with a privacy law, Head of State Advocacy Matthew Lenz said. The bill "imposes strong obligations on all companies that handle consumer data," while being "interoperable" with other states' laws, he said.
New Jersey privacy legislation will go to the Assembly floor, despite opposition from tech and business groups, the chamber’s Judiciary Committee decided Monday. In a 4-0 vote, with one abstention, the panel advanced the proposal with amendments. One change increased the time businesses would have to cure violations to 18 months, from six in the original bill (A-1971/S-332). Industry groups especially objected to the bill's creation of a rulemaking process at the Department of Law and Public Safety’s Consumer Affairs Division.
Louisiana is the first state to get full NTIA approval of its initial proposal for the broadband, equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program. NTIA approved volume 2 of the state's plan, the agency said Friday. On a videoconference with reporters Thursday, outgoing Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards (D) said he has no concerns that Gov.-elect Jeff Landry (R) “will depart from the commitment that we have made in our submission.”
Don’t cut a free broadband requirement from California Advanced Services Fund public housing account (PHA) rules, The Utility Reform Network (TURN) urged this week. The California Public Utilities Commission posted comments and replies this week on a staff proposal in docket R.20-08-021. TURN reacted to a suggestion by the California Emergency Technology Fund (CETF) to consider removing the proposal's requirement to provide five years free.
California’s largest tribe rejected multiple AT&T recommendations for the state’s participation in the broadband, equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program. The California Public Utilities Commission received reply comments Thursday on volumes one and two of draft BEAD initial proposals (docket R.23-02-016). The Yurok Tribe disagreed with AT&T that project area units should be as geographically small as possible. "AT&T says that requiring minimum geographic units to be equivalent to a contiguous tribal land area could ‘eliminate synergies and increase costs,’ but that’s precisely the logic that has led to a patchwork of service on tribal lands, and the chronic underinvestment of incumbent providers in remote, rural tribal locations,” the tribe said. In addition, Yurok disagreed with AT&T that applicants should have prior experience with technology they plan to deploy. "This suggestion would, quite obviously, completely disqualify a number of new providers seeking to bring quality service to areas long ignored by incumbent providers from eligibility." And the tribe disagreed with the carrier to score more points to larger projects. "Doing so would reward incumbent providers at the cost of new providers, as incumbent providers are better positioned to develop larger projects that serve more locations.” AT&T made the suggestions in its opening comments (see 2311280053). The San Diego Association of Governments urged the CPUC to better prioritize equity. "The current scoring rubric allocates only 10 points out of 100 for projects targeting low-income and disadvantaged communities,” the San Diego group said. While CPUC must comply with NTIA rules, “we contend that this limited point allocation may not serve as a sufficient incentive for ISPs to invest in areas of utmost need.” USTelecom replied, "California should rely on ACP participation and a comparability test to meet BEAD’s affordability requirements and affordability should not be scored on a sliding scale.” If the state adopts low-cost and middle-income affordability plans, “providers should be able to adjust prices to capture inflation, cost of living increases and other costs outside of the providers control such as taxes,” said USTelecom: And don’t prioritize open access. The CPUC’s independent Public Advocates Office urged the CPUC to reject recommendations to modify "affordability requirements in ways that would prioritize private interests over the public interest.”
California should be cautious about adopting limits from other jurisdictions’ privacy laws as it decides how to apply rules to AI, California Privacy Protection Agency Chairperson Jennifer Urban said Friday. But board member Alastair Mactaggart raised concerns that the CPPA is proposing too broad a definition of automated decision-making technology (ADMT) during the board’s virtual meeting. The CPPA board discussed pre-rulemaking proposals on cybersecurity audits, risk assessments and ADMT that privacy experts say could affect many industries, including communications and the internet (see 2312060021).
Future automated decision-making rules in California could have national impact on communications and internet companies, among many other industries, privacy experts said in interviews last week. The California Privacy Protection Agency board plans a Friday meeting to discuss an early proposal that the CPPA released last week. The proceeding is preliminary, with the agency saying it expects to formally begin the rulemaking next year.
Arizona commissioners questioned state USF accountability as they unanimously declined Tuesday to raise contribution rates. During a livestreamed meeting, commissioners voted 5-0 against staff’s proposed decision to raise state USF charges for 2024 (docket RT-00000H-97-0137). In addition, members unanimously granted a Verizon application to discontinue MCIMetro basic local exchange services to residential and small business customers throughout its service territory on Dec. 31 (docket T-03574A-23-0243).
A proposal to split the District of Columbia’s unified 911 system could advance in the D.C. Council despite opposition from D.C. Fire and Emergency Services (DCFEMS), said sponsor Brianne Nadeau (D) in an interview Friday. Nadeau was to introduce her bill Friday evening with fellow Democrats Zachary Parker, Janeese George, Trayon White and Robert White, a Nadeau spokesperson said.
If the FCC doesn’t impede state regulation, the California Public Utilities Commission will support FCC open internet rules and reclassifying broadband information access service (BIAS) as a telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act, the CPUC decided Thursday. Through a unanimous vote on the consent agenda during the state commission’s livestreamed meeting, commissioners agreed the CPUC should file comments urging the FCC to reclassify broadband as a telecom service and mobile BIAS as a commercial mobile service.