Massachusetts 2023-2024 Regular Session

Massachusetts House Bill H4024 Compare Versions

Only one version of the bill is available at this time.

Old	New	Differences
1	1	HOUSE . . . . . . . . No. 4024
2	2	The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
3	3	________________________________________
4	4	HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, August 3, 2023.
5	5	The committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and
6	6	Cybersecurity to whom was referred the petition (accompanied by bill,
7	7	Senate, No. 33) of Jason M. Lewis and Michael O. Moore for legislation
8	8	to establish a commission on automated decision-making by government
9	9	in the commonwealth; and the petition (accompanied by bill, House, No.
10	10	64) of Sean Garballey, Simon Cataldo and Vanna Howard for legislation
11	11	to establish a commission (including members of the General Court)
12	12	relative to state agency automated decision-making, artificial intelligence,
13	13	transparency, fairness, and individual rights, reports recommending that
14	14	the accompanying bill (House, No. 4024) ought to pass.
15	15	For the committee,
16	16	TRICIA FARLEY-BOUVIER. 1 of 5
17	17	FILED ON: 7/31/2023
18	18	HOUSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No. 4024
19	19	The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
20	20	_______________
21	21	In the One Hundred and Ninety-Third General Court
22	22	(2023-2024)
23	23	_______________
24	24	An Act establishing a commission on automated decision-making by government in the
25	25	Commonwealth.
26	26	Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority
27	27	of the same, as follows:
28	28	1 SECTION 1. (a) As used in this section, the following words shall, unless the context
29	29	2clearly requires otherwise. have the following meanings:
30	30	3 “Algorithm”, a specific procedure, set of rules, or order of operations designed to solve a
31	31	4problem or make a calculation, classification, or recommendation.
32	32	5 “Artificial intelligence”, computerized methods and tools, including but not limited to
33	33	6machine learning and natural language processing, that act in a way that resembles human
34	34	7cognitive abilities when it comes to solving problems or performing certain tasks.
35	35	8 “Automated decision system”, any computer program, method, statistical model, or
36	36	9process that aims to aid or replace human decision-making using algorithms or artificial
37	37	10intelligence. These systems can include analyzing complex datasets about human populations
38	38	11and government services or other activities to generate scores, predictions, classifications, or
39	39	12recommendations used by agencies to make decisions that impact human welfare. 2 of 5
40	40	13 “Executive agency” a state agency within the office of the governor
41	41	14 “Identified group characteristic", age, race, creed, color, religion, national origin, gender,
42	42	15disability, sexual orientation, marital status, veteran status, receipt of public assistance, economic
43	43	16status, location of residence, or citizenship status.
44	44	17 “Source code”, the structure of a computer program that can be read and understood by
45	45	18people.
46	46	19 “Training data”, the data used to inform the development of an automated decision
47	47	20system and the decisions or recommendations it generates.
48	48	21 (b) Notwithstanding any special or general law to the contrary, there shall be a special
49	49	22legislative commission established pursuant to section 2A of chapter 4 of the General Laws to
50	50	23conduct a study on the use of automated decision systems by executive agencies.
51	51	24 The commission shall consist of 11 members: 2 of whom shall be the chairs of the joint
52	52	25committee on advanced information technology the internet and cybersecurity, who shall serve
53	53	26as co-chairs; 1 of whom appointed by the speaker of the house of representatives; 1 of whom
54	54	27shall be appointed by the president of the senate; 1 of whom shall be the secretary of the
55	55	28executive office of technology services and security, or a designee; 1 of whom shall be the
56	56	29attorney general or a designee; 1 of whom shall be the executive director of the American Civil
57	57	30Liberties Union of Massachusetts or a designee; 2 of whom shall be appointed by the Governor
58	58	31and shall work at academic institutions in the Commonwealth in the field of (i) artificial
59	59	32intelligence and machine learning, (ii) data science and information policy, (iii) social
60	60	33implications of artificial intelligence and technology; or (iv) technology and the law; 1 of whom 3 of 5
61	61	34shall be a member of the Massachusetts High Technology Council; and 1 of whom shall be a
62	62	35member of the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative.
63	63	36 (c) . The commission shall study the use of automated decision systems by executive
64	64	37agencies and make recommendations to the legislature regarding appropriate regulations, limits,
65	65	38standards, and safeguards. The commission shall:
66	66	39 (i) survey the current use of automated decision systems by executive agencies and the
67	67	40purposes for which such systems are used, including but not limited to:
68	68	41 (A) the principles, policies, and guidelines adopted by executive agencies to inform the
69	69	42procurement, evaluation, and use of automated decision systems, and the procedures by which
70	70	43such principles, policies, and guidelines are adopted;
71	71	44 (B) the training executive agencies provide to individuals using automated decision
72	72	45systems, and the procedures for enforcing the principles, policies, and guidelines regarding their
73	73	46use;
74	74	47 (C) the manner by which executive agencies validate and test the automated decision
75	75	48systems they use, and the manner by which they evaluate those systems on an ongoing basis,
76	76	49specifying the training data, input data, systems analysis, studies, vendor or community
77	77	50engagement, third-parties, or other methods used in such validation, testing, and evaluation;
78	78	51 (D) the manner and extent to which executive agencies make the automated decision
79	79	52systems they use available to external review, and any existing policies, laws, procedures, or
80	80	53guidelines that may limit external access to data or technical information that is necessary for
81	81	54audits, evaluation, or validation of such systems; and 4 of 5
82	82	55 (E) procedures and policies in place to protect the due process rights of individuals
83	83	56directly affected by the use of automated decision systems;
84	84	57 (ii) consult with experts in the fields of machine learning, algorithmic bias, algorithmic
85	85	58auditing, and civil and human rights;
86	86	59 (iii) examine research related to the use of automated decision systems that directly or
87	87	60indirectly result in disparate outcomes for individuals or communities based on an identified
88	88	61group characteristic;
89	89	62 (iv) conduct a survey of technical, legal, or policy controls to improve the just and
90	90	63equitable use of automated decision systems and mitigate any disparate impacts deriving from
91	91	64their use, including best practices, policy tools, laws, and regulations developed through research
92	92	65and academia or proposed or implemented in other states and jurisdictions;
93	93	66 (v) examine matters related to data sources, data sharing agreements, data security
94	94	67provisions, compliance with data protection laws and regulations, and all other issues related to
95	95	68how data is protected, used, and shared by executive agencies using automated decision systems;
96	96	69 (vi) examine any other opportunities and risks associated with the use of automated
97	97	70decision systems.
98	98	71 (vii) evaluate evidence based best practices for the use of automated decision systems;
99	99	72 (viii) make recommendations for regulatory or legislative action, if any;
100	100	73 (ix) make recommendations about if and how existing state laws, regulations, programs,
101	101	74policies, and practices related to the use of automated decision systems should be amended to
102	102	75promote racial and economic justice, equity, fairness, accountability, and transparency; 5 of 5
103	103	76 (x) make recommendations for the development and implementation of policies and
104	104	77procedures that may be used by the state for the following purposes:
105	105	78 (A) to allow a person affected by a rule, policy, or action made by, or with the assistance
106	106	79of, an automated decision system, to request and receive an explanation of such rule, policy, or
107	107	80action and the basis therefor;
108	108	81 (B) to determine whether an automated decision system disproportionately or unfairly
109	109	82impacts a person or group based on an identified group characteristic;
110	110	83 (C) to determine prior to or during the procurement or acquisition process whether a
111	111	84proposed agency automated decision system is likely to disproportionately or unfairly impact a
112	112	85person or group based on an identified group characteristic;
113	113	86 (D) to address instances in which a person or group is harmed by an agency automated
114	114	87decision system if any such system is found to disproportionately impact a person or group on
115	115	88the basis of an identified group characteristic.
116	116	89 (d) The commission shall submit its report and recommendations, including any proposed
117	117	90legislation, with the governor, the clerks of the house of representatives and the senate, and the
118	118	91joint committee on advanced information technology and cybersecurity on or before December
119	119	9231, 2023.