Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2017
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prohibit funds made available by the act from being used to implement, administer, or enforce any of the rules proposed in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking adopted by the FCC on March 31, 2016. That is order FEC 16-39. It is intended to regulate ISP consumer privacy obligations.
Mr. Chair, there are two problems with the FCC's actions that warrant a delay in the adoption of rules by the agency.
First, the FCC's proposed rules are extreme and go well beyond anything they should be doing in this space, and it is a bipartisan concern. In May, Democrats Bobby Rush, Gene Green, and Kurt Schrader joined several Republicans in a letter to all of the FCC Commissioners and voiced strong concerns that the FCC's proposed privacy rulemaking ``intends to go well beyond'' the traditional framework that has guarded consumers from data practices of Internet service providers and ``ill-serves consumers who seek and expect consistency in how their personal data is protected.''
The FTC has traditionally been our government's sole Internet privacy regulator. A dual privacy enforcement model will create confusion within the existing Internet ecosystem. The FCC simply doesn't have the requisite technical expertise to regulate privacy.
Former FTC Commissioner Joshua Wright testified before the House Judiciary Committee that the FTC has ``unique expertise'' in ``enforcing broadband service providers' obligations to protect the privacy and security of consumer data.''
The FCC's proposed rule would create economic harm. Former FTC Commissioner Joshua Wright, a GMU economist, recently said that there has been no economic analysis on the rule's impact. He said, ``That's a bad thing, to be clear.''
Let me tell you something. The fact that we have an agency that is not studying and working on the economic impact and reviewing what this is going to do to the economy is absolutely unbelievable, especially when you look at the fact that the FCC does not have the authority and expertise to move into privacy. That is the FTC's domain and a place where they work. This new rule has caused the FTC to bring forward two dozen additional questions; the stakeholders have proposed 500 questions; and the rule is a 147-page rule.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chair, a couple of points here.
We have a privacy regulator. It is the Federal Trade Commission. The FTC has that jurisdiction. To add the FCC is going to cause confusion as to who is in charge of what. Everyone knows that. Do we need to pass a privacy bill? Absolutely. Do we need to pass a data security bill? Absolutely. That is the responsibility of this body. It is not the responsibility of unelected bureaucrats, who are sitting down at the FCC, who come up with a 147-page rule, and then they are not even looking, necessarily, at where the problem is with privacy. They are going to focus on the ISPs. They are out in front of their skis, if you will, on this one.
We have a privacy regulator. It deserves to keep that authority because it has expertise in that area.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chair, what we have is an issue of jurisdiction. The jurisdiction is with the FTC, and they have the funds, and they do a good job of this. Let them do their job. Preemption--yes, that is something that we should discuss and pass in a privacy and data security bill within this body. It should not be done by the FCC, which is saying, Hey, just trust us; just trust a Federal agency, and we will come in here and do this through the rules.
It is a Big Government power grab. I think people have had enough of that. It is expensive. It is confusing. I urge support for my amendment.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source