Providing for protection of personal data of certain public servants; imposing duties on data brokers regarding personal data; and providing for civil and criminal enforcement.
Impact
If enacted, HB 1822 will amend Title 44 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, establishing a legal framework that enhances the privacy of public servants' personal information. The legislation creates both civil and criminal liabilities for data brokers who fail to comply with nondisclosure requests. These provisions are designed to offer recourse for public servants whose information is mishandled, thereby reinforcing the importance of privacy in maintaining effective governance. The bill also allows public servants and their families to receive protection against potential threats stemming from the publication of their personal data.
Summary
House Bill 1822 addresses the protection of personal data for public servants in Pennsylvania, specifically judges, lawmakers, and other officials. The bill responds to increasing threats and acts of violence against these individuals, highlighting the risks posed by publicly accessible personal information. By prohibiting data brokers from disclosing protected information, the bill aims to create a safer environment for public officials to perform their duties without fear of reprisal or intimidation. This chapter acknowledges the crucial role that public servants play in governance, emphasizing the need for their protection.
Sentiment
The reception of HB 1822 has been mixed, reflecting concerns about the balance between public transparency and personal safety. Supporters argue that the bill is essential for protecting public officials from harassment and threats, while opponents may raise issues about the implications for public data access and accountability. The overall sentiment appears to be in favor of the bill among legislators who recognize the challenges faced by public servants but with caution regarding its potential to limit public access to information.
Contention
Notable points of contention regarding HB 1822 include the definition of protected information and the bill's implications for data brokers' practices. Some stakeholders might argue that stringent regulations could stifle transparency and citizen engagement with their representatives. Furthermore, there may be concerns regarding the enforcement measures included in the bill, particularly the distinction between civil and criminal liability and the potential for overreach in restricting information that should remain publicly available to ensure accountability.
Providing for protection of certain personal data of consumers; imposing duties on controllers and processors of personal data of consumers; providing for enforcement; prescribing penalties; and establishing the Consumer Privacy Fund.
In preliminary provisions, providing for student data privacy and protection; imposing duties on the Department of Education; and providing for penalties.
Providing for skill video gaming; imposing duties on the Department of Revenue; providing for issuance of licenses for skill video gaming; imposing a tax and criminal and civil penalties; and providing for zoning.
Providing for skill video gaming; imposing duties on the Department of Revenue; providing for issuance of licenses for skill video gaming; imposing a tax and criminal and civil penalties; and providing for zoning.
In enforcement, further providing for powers and duties of enforcement officers; and, in protection of property and persons, providing for mitigation of damage and for registry of responsible hunters.
Providing for duties of direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies and for prohibition on disclosure of genetic data of consumers; and imposing civil penalties.