►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
United
standing
committee
on
economic
development,
tourism,
labor
I,
welcome
you
all
this
morning,
thanks
for
being
here.
If
you
do
have
a
cell
phone
I,
ask
that
you
please
turn
that
to
silence
or
vibrate
as
we
conduct
our
business
here
today.
As
you
see,
we
do
not
yet
have
a
quorum,
we're
running
into
an
issue
when
we
have
the
Education
meeting
meeting
at
11
o'clock
and
five
of
our
members
on
this
committee
are
members
of
the
education
committee.
So
I
do
apologize.
A
Some
will
be
trickling
in
as
we
conduct
our
business,
but
I
do
want
to
at
least
go
ahead
and
get
started
this
morning.
If
you
would
like
to
sign
up
for
a
bill
to
speak
forward
against,
ask
you,
please
sign
the
sign-in
sheet
at
the
interest
of
the
room.
The
request
to
speak
is
when
the
chair's
discretion,
based
upon
the
time
constraints
that
we
have
in
here
today,
also
a
reminder.
A
A
Go
ahead
and
get
started
with
today's
business
I
do
want
to
apologize
to
the
Senate
sponsor
Senate
Bill
15.
We
did
have
that
on
the
agenda
for
last
week.
However,
as
I
mentioned,
I
was
not
able
to
be
here
with
having
a
bill
in
the
education
committee.
Some
of
our
members
were
also
present
for
Veterans
Day.
Excuse
me
for
Kids
Day
at
the
Capitol
with
military
families,
and
so
we
did
not
have
a
quorum.
C
C
I
brought
this
bill
up
for
the
second
year
in
a
row,
and
I've
been
working
on
it
even
before
I
found
it
last
year.
Kentucky
doesn't
have
any
law
in
place
that
provides
any
protections
or
rights
for
consumers
in
the
digital
space,
except
we
exist
in
the
digital
space.
Increasingly
every
day
we
rely
on
at
all
of
us
in
some
form
or
fashion.
Even
if
we're
not
trying
to
we
end
up
relying
on
that
that
system
of
the
digital
world-
and
we
don't
have
any
protections
there,
we
don't
have
any
rights
there.
C
That
I
think
we
ought
to
be
able
to
have
the
data
economy
is
worth
a
lot
trillions
of
dollars.
It's
important
for
it
to
exist.
I
don't
want
to
stop
it.
I
do
want
consumers
to
have
a
voice
in
it,
because
today
they
don't
have
one
at
all.
We
have
two
laws
in
the
books
in
Kentucky
that
handle
the
digital
world
in
any
way
and
they
are
related
to
data
breaches
both
for
the
public
and
the
private
sector
and
those
have
been
around
for
the
better
part
of
a
decade.
C
I'd
say
but
there's
nothing
else,
there's
nothing
else
to
protect
us
or
give
us
any
rights
to
our
data
and
it's
our
data
to
start
with.
We
share
it.
We
are
generating
that
value
in
that
data
economy.
Senate,
Bill,
15
sets
out
to
create
those
protections.
It's
only
materially
only
about
11
sections
long,
it's
got
14
or
15
sections
in
it
section.
One
covers
the
definition:
two.
There
are
a
slew
of
exemptions,
I'm
not
aiming
to
create
another
layer
of
compliance
on
top
of
something
else.
That
already
exists.
C
If
you
already
have
to
comply
with
HIPAA
we're
carving
you
out,
if
you've
got
some
sort
of
other
Federal
requirements,
you've
got
to
deal
with
we're
carving
you
out,
I.
Think
and
I
started
there
about
five
other
states
that
have
a
bill
like
this
that
have
been
enacted.
I
started
with
the
Virginia
Bill
and
improved
upon
it.
I
believe
my
bill
has
more
exceptions
in
carve
outs
than
anybody
else's
in
the
other
state.
C
Again,
I'm
not
trying
to
double
up
I
just
want
to
provide
protections
that
don't
currently
exist
and
then
section
three
and
that's
the
key
area,
that's
where
the
rights
themselves
are
listed
in
section
three
of
the
bill.
It
creates
an
appeal
process.
So
if
you've
tried
to
exercise
one
of
these
rights
with
a
company-
and
they
deny
it-
you
can
appeal
that
it
requires
that
appeal
process.
C
Ultimately,
the
company
still
has
the
final
save,
because
there's
there's
no
Beyond
appeal
beyond
that
at
all,
but
we'll
get
to
the
private
right
of
action
in
just
a
moment.
Section
four
covers
the
duty
of
the
controller.
The
controller
is
the
company
that
you're
dealing
with
as
a
consumer
that
has
and
is
collecting
that
data
they
may
process
it
process
it
themselves.
C
They
may
hire
another
party
to
process
that,
but
the
controller
is
that
company
that
you've
got
the
responsibility
with
or
that
relationship
with,
rather
also
calls
in
section
four
a
report
and
I
should
have
clarified.
You
have
proposed
sentence
sub
three,
that's
before
you.
That
makes
an
important
change
in
this
particular
section.
C
A
D
C
C
Members,
thank
you
chairman
I
appreciate
that
section
four
makes
an
important
change
there.
Originally
it
was
a
quarterly
report
to
more
than
just
the
Office
of
the
Attorney
General.
That's
now
an
annual
report
to
the
Office
of
the
Attorney
General
section.
Five
controls
are
or
governs
the
duty
of
the
processors
involved.
Section
6
governs
de-identified
data,
that's
data
that
has
been
Stripped
Away
of
anything
that
can
identify
or
trace
it
back
to
who
you
are
being
the
consumer.
There
section
seven
deals
with
controller
powers
and
some
protections
for
those
controllers.
C
There
are
some
limitations
on
what
this
bill
requires:
a
controller
to
do,
and
some
exemptions
and
protections
for
those
businesses
that
have
to
comply
with
this
bill.
Section
8
calls
for
the
data
protection
impact
assessment.
This
is
a
basic,
a
list
of
basic
information
that
any
company
that
wants
to
get
involved
in
the
data
space
and
monetize
that
information
in
some
way,
if
they're
acting
responsibly,
should
be
able
to
answer
every
one
of
those
questions
and
identify
that
information
with
ease
they're
not
accustomed
to
compiling
it
right
now.
C
But
again,
the
information
is
not
novel
to
them.
If
they've
taken
any
responsible
due
diligence
to
get
into
the
data
game
at
all,
with
their
business
section,
9
governs
the
oag
investigation
Powers,
it
gives
the
Office
of
the
Attorney
General
the
power
to
investigate
issues
and
claims
that
are
brought
up
by
consumers
and
then
section
10
is
unique
in
the
country.
There
are
two
things
about
my
bill
that
are
different
from
most
of
the
other
states.
The
first
one
way
back
in
section
two
or
three.
C
C
The
laws
in
those
other
states
don't
kick
in
until
you've
got
a
hundred
thousand
customers
or
more
y'all
that
that's
an
unconscionably
high
number
of
customers
for
them
to
finally
have
to
abide
by
some
sort
of
law.
99
999
customers
is
a
lot
of
customers
and
I.
Think
the
threshold
should
be
one
I've
told
every
Advocate
that
opposes
the
bill,
or
that
supports
the
bill
that
the
threshold
should
be
won.
I
can't
pass
one,
and
last
year
at
ten
thousand
I
got
substantial.
Pushback
I
have
made
it
twenty
five
thousand
in
this
bill.
C
It
should
be
one
but
I'm
happy
to
give
24
000
things
up.
So
that's
the
threshold.
The
other
issue
of
contention,
the
biggest
I'd
say
this
is
the
private
right
of
action.
This
is
unique
in
the
country
and
I
realize
that
we
frown
we
generally
speaking
the
collective.
We
sometimes
frown
in
creating
private
rights
of
action.
There
is
concern
among
some
about
creating
an
opportunity
to
take
people
to
court,
frivolous
lawsuits
and
the
like,
but
our
constitution
establishes
the
courts
for
the
redress
of
our
grievances.
C
Now
I
don't
want
to
create,
with
apologies
to
Senator
wheeler,
a
trial
bar
Bonanza
on
one
end
and
I,
don't
want
to
create
the
alternative,
which
is
what
Most
states
have
done,
and
that's
pure
oag
enforcement,
and
the
reason
behind
that
folks
is
this:
no
matter
who
sits
in
the
Office
of
the
Attorney
General,
be
they
Republican
or
Democrat.
It
does
not
matter.
They
will
make
a
political
calculation
about
whether
or
not
to
take
a
clay.
C
A
case
they'll
also
consider
the
resources
and
staff
and
the
scope
of
the
damage,
but
at
some
point
they're
going
to
decide
some
number
of
kentuckians
complaining
about
business.
X
is
not
enough
for
us
to
Warrant
going
after
it,
and
so
the
only
thing
that's
left
in
the
states
that
have
oag
enforcement.
You
file
a
complaint
online.
We've
got
a
consumer
protection
statute
framework
in
Kentucky
right
now,
it's
been
around
for
many
years
and
you
file
a
complaint
online,
no
human
that
I'm
aware
of
touches
that
letter.
The
computer
spits
out
a
form
letter.
C
C
My
bill
is
a
hybrid
of
both
I
heard
input
from
a
group
that
opposes
the
bill.
Last
year
they
talked
about
a
report
from
The
Office
of
the
Attorney
General
in
California,
where
they
have
a
private
right
of
action,
but
only
for
data
breaches
and
they
said,
look
our
PR.
Our
oag
enforcement
mechanism
works
pretty
well.
It
cures
the
problem.
Seventy
percent
of
the
time
and
setting
aside
my
suspicion
that
an
AG's
office
would
ever
put
out
a
report
saying
that
their
thing
doesn't
work
very
well.
C
Let's
just
assume
that
it
does.
Let's
assume
that
that's
true
so
I've
deferred
and
delayed
my
private
right
of
action
in
this
bill
until
after
you've
filed
a
complaint
with
the
oag
that
form
letter
goes
out
and
they
still
don't
respond.
I've
limited
the
profit
of
action
in
a
second
way.
It
is
for
injunctive
Relief.
Only
you
can't
get
money
damages.
C
You
can't
sue
them
for
money.
You
can't
sue
them
to
to
get
rich.
The
lawyer
can't
get
rich.
The
plaintiff
can't
get
rich.
You
can
only
do
only
ask
for
injunctive
relief
and
then
I
limited
limited
it,
and
this
is
a
change.
Importantly
in
the
sub
that
you've
adopted,
my
intent
was
only
to
be
able
to
enforce
the
Rights
created
in
the
bill,
and
now
it
explicitly
says
that
one
of
the
one
of
the
opponents
raised
the
concern.
Well,
you
could
file
a
lawsuit
to
shut
our
whole
business
down.
C
You
cannot
you
can
file
this
lawsuit
at
your
own
expense,
because
you're
not
going
to
get
some
trial
attorney
or
whatever
you're
gonna
have
to
pay
for
that.
You
can't
get
rich
off
of
this
this
claim,
but
you
can
only
ask
the
court
to
enforce
the
six
rights
provided
in
section
three
rights,
like
I,
write
to
a
copy
of
your
data,
a
right
to
delete
your
data,
a
right
to
opt
out
of
targeted
advertising.
C
C
A
D
I
just
wanted
to
acknowledge
my
appreciation
for
your
nerdiness
Senator
Westerfield,
and
the
fact
that
you
gave
me
two
weeks
to
look
this
over
because
it
really
truly
has
the
value
for
consumers
and
I'm
a
small
business
owner,
so
I
do
recognize
that
businesses
may
be
affected,
but
I
believe,
as
you
do,
that
maybe
one
consumer
having
the
opportunity
to
opt
out,
but
we
gave
it
25
000
is
kind
of
that
number.
But
thank
you
for
bringing
this
forward
very
complex,
very
meaningful
and,
in
fact,
straightforward.
It's
actually
simple
thanks.
A
C
A
You
only
one
I
have
signed
up.
I
see
is
Kate
Shanks
and
Shannon
stiglitz
representing
the
Kentucky
chamber,
and
also
the
Kentucky
retail
Federation.
If
those
two
individuals
who
just
make
their
way
to
the
table,
please
they
did
sign
up
to
wish
to
speak
against
the
bill,
so
if
they
would
make
their
way.
A
F
F
E
Chairman,
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
instead
of
Bill
15
today.
Are
you
in
front
of
this
committee
supporting
legislation
dealing
with
Workforce
issues
or
talking
about
our
tax
code
and
I'm,
not
thrilled
to
be
here
today
talking
about
concerns
about
chairman
westerfield's
bill
on
Senate
Bill
15.
I
just
want
to
start
by
saying.
We
greatly
appreciate
his
interest
and
really
passion
for
this
issue.
I
think
everybody
knows
that
he's
the
legislator
of
the
general
assembly.
E
That's
really
diving
into
these
issues
and
cares
about
these
issues
deeply,
and
we
also
appreciate
his
willingness
to
meet
with
us
discuss
the
issue
work
through
some
of
our
concerns
and
so
I'd
just
like
to
lay
out
a
few
of
those
today.
This
is
actually
not
my
first
time.
Speaking
on
the
business
community's
perspective
on
data
privacy
laws,
I
testified
a
few
years
ago
in
an
interim
joint
committee
and
at
the
time
my
our
position
was
simple.
E
We
needed
a
federal
approach
to
data
privacy
laws
and
that
the
state-by-state
approach
that
Patchwork
approach
could
be
very
costly
for
businesses
as
each
individual
State
takes
on
this
issue
and
there's
been
some
studies.
The
information
technology
and
Innovation
Foundation
put
the
cost
of
a
50-state
state,
state-by-state
Patchwork
in
in
the
billions
on
what
it
would
cost
for
businesses
to
to
handle
that.
But
a
national
framework
has
not
come
to
be
and
we
aren't
close
to
a
national
framework
on
data
privacy
I'll
acknowledge
that.
E
We
understand,
there's
several
States
working
on
similar
legislation
this
year
as
well,
and
so
it's
like
we're
seeing
a
lot
of
these
states
kind
of
come
together
on
similar
legislation
and
what
that
does
for
businesses
across
these
states
is
that
they're
used
to
the
definitions
they're
used
to
the
requirements.
They
understand
the
enforcement,
the
compliance
piece
of
it,
and
it
simplifies
something
that
is
otherwise
very,
very
complex.
E
Senate
Bill
15,
though,
have
passed,
make
Kentucky
an
outlier
among
the
states.
What
I've
heard
from
members
on
this
bill
is
that
it's
complex
and
difficult
to
comply
with.
There
are
certain
definitions
that
are
unique
to
this
legislation
and
because
the
bill
favors,
what
we've
seen
in
other
states
like
California,
we
know
it
can
be
costly.
E
As
one
thing
we
are
very
diverse
in
how
we
use
the
internet
is
going
to
be
different
across
different
types
of
consumers
and
I
had
a
really
big
discussion
with
the
on
this,
with
my
husband
last
night
and
we're
on
two
different
sides
on
this
issue.
So
I'm
kind
of
somebody
that
comes
to
the
internet,
not
surprisingly
repeller
officers,
yeah
and
I-
meant
to
text
you
and
be
like
I
got
somebody
anyways,
but
we're
we're
on
different
sides
of
this
issue
when
I
go
to
the
internet.
E
I
want
to
pick
up
where
I
left
off
I
want
you
to
know
me
I,
want
you
to
know
what
I
want
and
I
want.
You
to
say
you
fought
X
people
like
you
also
bought.
Why
do
you
want
Y
and
it's
20
off
with
free
shipping
I
like
that
experience,
when
I
shop
online
there's
a
product
I've
had
my
eye
on
for
a
while,
it's
priced
too
high,
I've
clicked
on
it
several
times.
My
social
media
feed
puts
it
in
front
of
me
daily.
E
It's
on
sale,
20
off
with
free
shipping,
so
I'm
probably
gonna
buy
it.
So
that's
the
experience.
I
want
and
I'm
I'm
good
with
the
status
quo.
My
husband,
on
the
other
hand,
would
probably
opt
out
of
certain
uses
of
his
data,
though
I
kind
of
questioned
it,
but
he
says
he
would
opt
out
of
some
things.
So
what
we're
looking
for
in
privacy
legislation
I
want
to
make
it
clear.
We
are
not
opposed
to
working
on
privacy.
E
Legislation
in
Kentucky
is
an
experience
for
the
consumer
that
allows
individuals
who
may
want
to
opt
out
of
how
their
data
is
being
used
to
do
so
with
a
with
a
a
privacy
statement
or
a
consumer
rights
statement.
That's
easy
to
understand,
ticks
off
the
boxes
and
they
can
make
that
decision
proactively
as
they
want
to
without
interfering
with
the
experience
many
of
us
are
used
to
who
maybe
don't
want
to
have
to
opt
in
over
and
over
as
they
use
a
site.
E
I
think
that
that's
where
we
need
to
do
some
discussion
and
have
some
discussion
on
this
bill
and
then
Additionally.
You
know
we
don't
have
to
take
a
bill
word
for
word
from
another
state.
We
can.
We
can
make
some
tweaks
that
are
specific
to
Kentucky,
but
I
think
the
process
should
be
mirrored
and
what
we
have
seen
in
states
that
have
passed
similar
legislation
bringing
together
consumer
groups
different
types
of
consumers,
their
perspectives,
along
with
the
business
community.
E
That
could
help
you
understand
how
it's
going
to
look
for
tumor
once
it's
implemented,
what's
workable
for
for
the
business
Community,
that's
a
process!
That's
worked
in
other
states
and
we
can.
We
can
use
that
process
here.
Lastly,
I
will
say
I'm.
Obviously,
a
consumer
who
shops
online
constantly,
as
many
of
us
are
even
when
I
shop
in
stores
I
go
online.
First
I
value.
E
My
time,
I
value,
efficiency
and
I
do
care
about
privacy,
and
there
would
be
times
when
I
would
look
at
a
certain
site,
and
maybe
you
know,
for
whatever
reasons:
I
don't
want.
My
data
stored
on
that
site,
so
there
would
be
instances
would
I
would
look
at
that,
but
I
think
we
have
to
find
something
that
balances
not
only
what
consumers
want
and
what
is
workable
for
businesses.
But
what
ensures
the
consumer
experience
is
is
a
good
one
and
one
where
they
will
continue
to
come
back
and
get
what
they
need
efficiently.
E
G
G
I,
don't
understand
why
that
information
I
would
want
that
information
to
go
to
Big,
Box
clothing
store
or
go
to
Big
Box
hardware
store
I'll,
go
to
any
big
box.
Retail
I
mean
I
I,
don't
know
why
they
need
to
get
that
information
or
why
I
want
that
information
and
I
don't
think
most
people
realize
that
without
sinner
westerfield's
bill,
which
I
will
say,
I've
liked
for
a
long
time
and
and
with
being
who
I
am
that
may
work
against
you,
yeah
I
sure
will,
but
but.
A
H
F
And
I
will
be
very,
very
brief.
I
want
to
thank
chairman
Westerfield
because
he's
met
with
me
numerous
times
and
is
probably
very
sick
of
me,
but
he's
also
taught
me
a
lot
of
information.
I
think
that
Senator
wheeler
I'm
gonna
address
your
question.
You
you
are
correct.
We
and
Senator
Thomas.
We
want
and
understand
that
our
consumer
data
is
precious
to
us.
If
we
aren't
protecting
our
consumers,
whether
it's
as
I
say
in
analog
life
or
in
the
digital
space,
then
we
aren't
going
to
have
those
consumers.
F
Additionally,
for
example,
you
know
the
definition
of
dark
patterns
is
contained
in
there
and
Senator
Westerfield
is
has
educated
me
a
lot
on
dark
patterns,
I'm
now
very
proud
of
myself
when
I
defeat
them,
but
the
the
issue
that
the
even
the
Federal
Trade
Commission
is
currently
debating
is
is
what
is
that
distinction
in
line
that
one
crosses
between
a
dark
pattern
which
really
I
look
at
as
an
analog
life?
A
you
know,
potentially
deceptive
practice.
Arguably
I'm
sure
my
folks
are
screaming,
be
quiet,
but
and
then
what
is
advertising
and
marketing?
F
And
those
are
the
things
that
we're
trying
to
work
with
and
mishanks
is
correct.
We
cannot,
we
are
operating
in
a
digital
space.
Our
members
are
wanting
to
meet
the
consumer
where
they
are
and
wanting
to
provide
them
with
the
cons,
experience
that
is
positive
for
them
and
that
assists
them
in
ways
to
get
the
products
that
they
want
delivered
with
ease
or
shop
in
a
store,
Senator
Thomas.
We
want
all
of
those
options
available
to
the
consumer.
F
And
how
can
we
balance
that
and
make
it
work
for
the
consumer
and
for
the
business?
Because,
if
it's
difficult
for
our
members
to
implement
it,
it's
not
going
to
be
successful
and
I.
Really
I
haven't
said
that
you
know
we
really
enjoy
working
with
chairman
Westerfield
on
a
whole
host
of
issues
and
and
want
him
to
be
successful.
And
we
we
want
this
to
be
successful
for
the
customer
as
well
as
for
the
business,
and
we
think
there
are
states
that
have
models.
I
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
I,
guess
I
can
address
it
to
either
one
of
you
but
Ms
Shanks
I
heard
you
say
this
first.
If
you
had
by
the
way,
I'll
speak
for
all
of
us.
If
you
had
a
way
to
make
Congress
go
ahead
and
act
on
things
that
could
help
all
of
us
on
a
timely
basis,
so
we
didn't
have
to
do
ad
hockey.
We
we
would.
We
would
appreciate
your
input,
so
there's
been
a
lot
of
talk
about
the
model
model
legislation.
I
E
Yeah
we
have
there's
been
legislation
filed,
I,
think
was
last
year,
there's
legislation
filed
this
year,
there's
some
bills
that
have
been
filed
in
the
house
as
well.
So
you
know,
and-
and
we
are
committed
to
working
on
this
issue
and
you're
right-
you
know
when
I
testified
on
I
mean
this
was
before
covid,
so
it's
that
long
ago,
and
we
were
talking
about
a
federal
approach
and
it
didn't
happen
and
so
states
are
saying
we're
not
waiting
and
we're
going
to
pass
privacy
legislation.
E
So
you
know
we're
on
board
with
having
those
conversations
and
being
helpful
throughout
the
process
and
recognizing
this
is
something
that
you
care
about.
You
care
about
your
data,
you
care
about
your
constituents,
data
I
care
about
my
data.
I
know.
Sometimes
I
can
say:
oh
click,
click.
We
all
accept
the
cookies,
but
it
has.
It
is
an
eye-opening
process
to
understand
how
your
data
is
being
used
and
Senator
Thomas
to
your
point,
I
think
people
have
a
lot
that
they,
you
know
probably
want
to
learn
about
this
right.
E
I
mean
some
of
this
stuff
is,
is
US
learning
how
our
data
is
being
used
and
some
of
it
I'm,
very
okay
with
it,
and
some
of
it
I
may
not
be,
and
so
it's
a
process
as
well
and
I
think
it's
important
that
we
have
privacy
policies,
consumer
protection
policies
that
are
easy
to
understand
that
people
can
navigate.
So
they
can
make
those
decisions.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
As
I
mentioned,
we
do
have
two
individuals
who
have
signed
up
on
Zoom.
That's
a
Chairman's
discretion.
You
call
me
in
a
good
day
that
I'm
going
to
allow
that
I'm
going
to
first
let
Andrew
Kingman,
go
I.
Think
he's
with
the
state
promising
security
Coalition
I'm,
going
to
limit
this
to
three
minutes.
Please,
sir!
If
you
can
I've
had
a
timer
here
with
me,
so
you're
on
Deck,
please
go
right
now.
Go.
J
Thank
you
Mr
chairman
and
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
Andrew
Kingman
Council
of
the
state
privacy
and
security
Coalition.
My
background
is
not
only
as
an
advocate,
but
also
as
a
compliance
attorney
helping
companies
work
through
various
State
privacy
laws.
Our
goal
regarding
this
type
of
comprehensive
privacy
legislation
is
to
work
to
find
solutions
that
appropriately
balance
increased
consumer
transparency
and
control
over
their
personal
data
with
operational
workability.
J
When
compliance
is
an
issue,
it
negatively
affects
consumers
as
well,
and
if
businesses
don't
understand
what
they
are
required
to
provide
for
consumers,
consumers
will
be
less
informed
about
the
rights
and
controls
that
they
have
over
their
data.
This
bill
combines
elements
of
the
Virginia
framework
with
elements
from
the
consumer
California
consumer
privacy
act
with
elements
from
Europe's,
General
data
protection
regulations
and
also
with
novel
elements
that
do
not
appear
in
any
other
Privacy
Law,
and
the
best
analogy
I
can
think
of.
Is
that
all
these
laws
operate
as
individual
puzzles.
J
They
have
pieces
that
are
unique
to
these
Frameworks
and
they're
not
intended
to
be
used
with
different
Frameworks.
So
if
you
have
four
different
puzzles
and
attempted
to
make
one
clear
picture
that
was
understandable
from
the
different
pieces,
you
wouldn't
be
able
to
do
so
because
those
pieces
wouldn't
fit
together,
and
that
is
our
overarching
issue
with
sp15
as
it
stands.
J
J
In
conclusion,
I
I
do
want
to
be
very
clear.
We
do
not
oppose
strong
consumer
data,
privacy
protections
or
new
obligations
for
businesses.
The
Virginia
framework
covers
the
concerns
that
committee
members
have
expressed
today,
but
the
bill
in
its
current
form
is
not
a
tenable
draft
with
which
to
move
forward.
Thank
you.
K
Minutes,
thank
you
Mr
chair
and
vice
chair
wheeler.
My
name
is
Chris
Marchese
and
I'm,
testifying
against
sv15.
Today,
on
behalf
of
netchoice,
we
are
a
trade
Association
based
in
Washington
DC,
and
our
members
include
basically
all
The
Usual
Suspects
in
the
tech
space,
everyone
from
Google
and
meta
to
Etsy,
eBay
and
Pinterest.
So
first,
let
me
just
start
by
saying
that
netchoice,
like
the
others
opposing
this
bill,
do
support
a
Privacy
Law
right.
We
recognize
that
privacy
is
incredibly
important
and
that
Congress
has
not
been
doing
its
job.
K
K
They
put
up
a
bunch
of
burdensome
regulations,
so,
instead
of
repeating
what
Mr
Kingman
said,
all
instead
just
raise
some
First
Amendment
issues,
so
net
Choice
actually
has
a
lawsuit
against
the
state
of
California
right
now
of
challenging
a
new
Privacy
Law
that
came
out
at
the
end
of
last
year.
That
law
is
a
little
different
from
this
one,
but
it
has
the
same
data
privacy
impact
assessment
requirement,
as
well
as
some
notice
and
appeal
requirements.
K
While
these
are
well
intentioned,
they
are
actually
unconstitutional
under
the
First
Amendment,
because,
basically,
what
the
bill
is
trying
to
do
is
to
force
a
legal
obligation
on
covered
entities
to
create
these
very
burdensome,
very
intensive,
like
data
privacy
impact
assessments
that
include
things
like
analyzing,
the
risk
of
data
collection,
and
it's
just
very
hard
to
have
a
clear
sense
of
how
one
would
assess
risk,
because
it
really
does
vary
based
upon
the
user.
Him
or
herself
I
mean
just
in
this
conversation
alone.
K
We've
heard
from
some
folks
who
are
very
comfortable
with
having
their
data
shared
I'm,
one
of
those
people
as
well,
and
then
there
are
other
folks
who
want
absolutely
nothing
about
them,
collected
or
known
on
the
internet,
and
so
it's
difficult
to
try
to
have
an
objective
way
to
measure
these
things.
In
addition,
the
sponsor
made
an
amazing
point
during
his
testimony
about
the
fear
of
politicized
AG
offices,
and
this
is
another
concern
that
netchoice
has
too,
which
is
when
laws
are
vague.
A
L
L
M
I
I'm
gonna
explain
why
I
vote
I
think
we
need
to
move
this
matter
forward.
I've
heard
a
lot
of
people
talk
about
all
the
problems
that
they
foresee
with
Senator
westerfield's
Bill
and
maybe
I
slipped
through
this
in
the
last
three
years.
But
today
was
the
first
time
that
I'd
even
heard
that
there
was
an
alternative
out
there.
It
seems
we're
real
focused
on
what
this
doesn't
do.
I
B
N
H
Minute
you
know:
I
I,
think
that
Senator
Westerfield
has
worked
very
hard
on
this
issue.
Clearly
he
I
think
understands
it
more
than
anybody
in
our
caucus
I'm
not
going
to
say
that
retailers
have
not
expressed
some
some
concerns,
but
to
me
I,
you
know
I
generally,
err
on
the
side
of
of
getting
more
information
and
and
I.
You
know,
but
that's
my
choice
and
I,
don't
see
where
this
bill
blocks
me
my
ability
to
make
that
choice.
Just
like
I,
usually
click
to
accept
the
cookies.
H
Every
time
I
go
onto
a
website,
so
I
can
do
something
so
I
I
think
that
most
folks
most
you
know,
but
there
may
be
websites
I
go
on
to
that.
I!
Don't
want
to
make
that
choice.
I
mean
if
it's
a
you
know,
one-time
thing:
I
need
a
new
vacuum.
Cleaner
I
may
not
want
to
have
50
million
new
products
in
at
me.
I
mean
it
just,
but
you
know
I
think
this
does
leave
the
choice
in
the
hands
of
the
consumer,
while
letting
the
businesses
have
adequate
flexibility.
A
Aye
by
a
vote
of
eight
to
zero,
the
bill
carries
and
moves
on
is
that
it's
amended.
I
know
that
Central
Westfield
is
one
that's
going
to
continue
to
work
with
all
parties
that
are
in
this
room.
Thank
you
for
doing
that.
Thank
you
all
for
bringing
your
voices
to
be
heard
today.
The
bill
moves
on
sure
to
watch
them
I.
Have
you
keep
your
seat
there?
A
O
Sir
I
come
to
you
not
as
a
lobbyist
or
representing
a
special
interest,
but
is
your
uniform
law,
commissioner,
and
the
legislative
liaison
between
the
uniformed
law
Commission
in
Kentucky,
and
fortunately,
chairman
of
the
ulc's
Uniform
Commercial
Code
committee.
The
uniform
commercial
code
is
the
nation's
primary
body
of
commercial
law.
Its
purpose
is
to
facilitate
Commerce
and
it
does
that
two
ways,
one
by
providing
a
certainty
of
outcome
in
commercial
transactions
and
two
by
providing
a
uniform
body
of
law
between
all
53
uniform
law
jurisdictions.
O
Kentucky,
along
with
its
sister
Commonwealth
Massachusetts,
was
the
first
state
to
adopt
the
code.
Effective,
July,
1,
1960.,
we've
updated
article
by
article
as
the
economy
has
changed
since
it's
become
more
of
a
National
Committee
economy,
and
now
we
updated
with
the
22
amendments
to
the
uniform
commercial
code
to
accommodate
emerging
Technologies.
O
O
This
is
the
first
total
not
rewrite,
because
we
we
still
keep
with
the
same
basic
policies
of
the
code.
It's
the
first
Total
update
to
bring
the
code
into
the
digital
world.
We
have
a
new
article
12..
If
you
know
the
code,
you
might
say
what
happened
to
10
and
11.
Those
were
transition
rules,
so
they've
gone
away.
Article
12
concerns
controllable
electronic
records.
Again
we
try
to
draft
with
durability
Does.
It
include
cryptocurrency,
yes,
Does.
It
include
a
non-fungible
token
that
might
be
a
digital
work
of
art.
O
A
B
G
A
C
A
A
A
M
M
M
M
A
Do
need
to
First
adopt
the
committee
sub.
If
that's
okay,
do
you
have
a
motion?
I
got
a
motion.
Senator
Wilson
I
have
a
second
Senator
meal,
saw
those
in
favor
accepting
the
subdues
by
saying
aye,
all
those
opposed
motions
adopted.
Please
proceed.
We
have
a
motion
on
the
bill
of
central
Mills.
We
have
a
second
Senator
wheeler
Sasha.
Please
call
the
roll.
A
A
A
You
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
committee
Max
wise
State,
Senate,
District
16..
What
I
have
before
you
is
Senate
Bill,
3
and
act
relating
to
the
Educators
liability
insurance
and
making
an
approach
appropriation
there
for
real.
Briefly
what
the
bill
does.
Senate
Bill
3
establishes
the
Educators
employment
liability
insurance
program
within
the
Kentucky
Department
of
Education.
The
program
will
provide
excess
liability
insurance
coverage
to
provide
liability
protection
to
teachers,
including
attorneys
fees
Inc
incurred
in
defending
claims
in
the
event
that
teachers
are
sued
in
connection
with
their
employment
within
the
schools.
A
In
this
litigious
society
that
we
live
in
teachers
are
faced
with
the
prospect
of
being
sued
by
parents
of
students.
This
excess
liability
charge
will
not
protect
a
teacher
from
Criminal
conduct
on
their
part,
while
the
teachers
May
ultimately
be
found
not
liable.
In
many
cases,
the
cost
of
Defending
against
the
claims,
particularly
attorneys
fees,
can
be
substantial
and,
in
many
cases,
financially
devastating
to
the
teacher
and
their
families.
A
This
excess
liability
coverage
will
only
activate
if
the
claims
exceed
the
underlying
insurance
coverage
that
the
teacher
should
be
covered
by
through
their
respective
Teachers
Association,
which
should
make
the
excess
liability
coverage
more
affordable
to
the
state
than
primary
insurance
coverage.
The
program
is
designed
to
assist
in
attracting
new
teachers
and.
H
A
A
A
bit
of
a
169
before
using
ACT
relating
to
public-private
Partnerships,
and
this
was
a
piece
of
legislation
that
you
had
before
you-
that
I
worked
with
Eric
on
when
he
was
in
his
lrc
role
here
before
he
left
to
work
for
the
Kentucky
School
Board,
Association
I
think
it
was
in
2015
2016,
maybe
in
the
time
frame,
for
that
we
did
not
include
in
that
original
language.
Local
school
districts,
of
having
the
ability
to
partner
into
P3
projects.
P
P
G
P
Yes,
sir,
thank
you
especially
in
communities
that
are
growing
as
Fayette
is,
and
especially
in
communities
where
the
student
enrollment
is
growing
and
land
available
land
at
any
price
is
a
constrained
or
the
cost
is
going
up.
The
biggest
benefit
would
probably
be
in
speeding
everything
up
so
that
you
could
contract
with
one
private
one
private
partner
to
do
more
aspects
of
the
project
of
Building
Construction
and
getting
a
building
up
and
operating
more
quickly
to
ultimately
save
time
and
cost
I
know.
P
G
The
way
it
benefits
the
the
private
party
and
I'll
just
use,
UK's
example,
is,
you
know
they
receive
dormitory,
Reds
or
or
or
or
they
received,
receive
reduced
rents
in
terms
of
the
restaurants
that
locate
in
in
their
facilities.
So
so
that's
how
the
private,
in
the
private
contractor
benefits
and
and
despite
what
people
may
think,
I'm
all
for
private
Enterprise.
G
P
Another
example
of
to
get
more
to
what
you've
asked
and
zero
in
there
could
be
situations
where
either
another
local
government
could
have
property
that
they
might
want
to
go
into
like
a
property
swap
with.
There
could
be
cases-
and
we
see
this
and
also
our
largest
school
district
in
the
state,
where
there
is
available
property
that
a
private
business
has
that
they
would
like
to
have
in
a
complicated
deal
where
one
government
agency
has
a
piece
of
it.
P
A
private
property
as
an
adjoining
property
in
the
school
district
wants
to
either
buy
or
sell
that
for
a
new
school
and
having
the
P3
Arrangement.
That
does
it
can
simplify
a
very
complicated
project
and
get
it
underway
more
quickly,
especially
when
there's
more
than
one
partner
involved,
so
kind
of
putting
properties
together,
piecing
it
together.
Several
different
revenue
streams
usually
are
the
case
with
a
school
construction
project.
P
Having
ap3
partnership
to
put
all
of
that
together
would
be
a
benefit
than
sort
of
the
traditional
delivery
methods
that
a
school
board
is
facing,
with
lots
of
steps
in
the
process
and
the
traditional
thinking
of
there's
like
one
piece
of
land.
I
buy
it
from
one
party
and
I
do
that
as
like
step
one
and
then
separately,
there's
another
piece
of
it
that
comes
to
design
it
separately,
there's
another
piece
of
construction.
H
L
H
D
Are
dealing
with
some
very
complex,
your
example
is
perfect
and
we're
dealing
in
Campbell
County
with
some
complex
questions
to
this
effect
and
and
I,
also
like
Senator
Thomas,
feel
very
inspired
by
local
business
in
the
opportunity
for
this
P3
Arrangement
and
reducing
the
complexity
but
amplifying
some
business
collaboration
as
well,
so
I
think
it's
excellent.
Thank
you.