An added exemption for political organizations to a sweeping data privacy proposal has narrowed support for the legislation, though it’s still moving forward — for now.
For the past several years, the Maine Legislature has debated how aggressive the state should be in protecting consumer privacy online. But competing proposals, along with sizable behind-the-scenes influence from lobbyists, have left the state without a comprehensive policy.
After the majority of the Maine House of Representatives last month cast initial votes in favor of a plan that would amount to some of the nation’s strictest consumer protections, Sen. Anne Carney (D-Cumberland) introduced a floor amendment in the Senate on Thursday that drew the ire of Republicans, and some within her own party.
The upper chamber initially voted 20-14 in favor of LD 1822, but the amendment was passed by a narrower 18-16 vote, sending the bill back to the lower chamber to reconsider.
The amendment delays the effective date to September of 2027, switches the funding source for staff to help administer and enforce the act from the general fund — which is largely made up of taxes and fees — to special revenue funds, and exempts political organizations from the restrictions.
Carney said her amendment would ensure the bill does not infringe upon freedom of speech. But other lawmakers saw the exemption as allowing lawmakers to skirt the rules they’re seeking to implement on others.
A political organization is defined in the amendment as “a party, committee, association, fund or other organization” that operates “primarily for the purpose of influencing or attempting to influence the selection, nomination, election or appointment” of candidates for public office, political organizations or to be an elector.
“When I think about what is actually dangerous on the internet, it is the manipulation of information and misinformation that is promulgated by both sides of the political aisle to completely alter what reality looks like for people in this country,” said Minority Leader Trey Stewart (R-Aroostook).
Meanwhile, Carney said the amendment would “ensure that the language reflects the original intent of the bill.”
Both LD 1822, sponsored by Rep. Amy Kuhn (D-Falmouth) and a competing, industry-favored bill that the Legislature rejected last year contained stipulations that the legislation may not be interpreted as adding obligations that infringe on First Amendment rights.
This approach is an example of a data-level exemption that applies only to specific information. Another approach is an entity-level exemption, which offers a total exemption for a specific business. That’s what the amendment seeks to add for political organizations.
Throughout consideration of data privacy plans dating back to the previous Legislature, industry lobby groups for health care, automobiles, bankers and credit unions argued in support of entity-level exemptions because several federal acts already regulate their data collection and information-sharing practices.
Health care entities, for example, are exempt under Kuhn’s bill because all of the information they regulate is protected as confidential under federal laws, such as HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.
That rationale is what Carney is applying to political entities.
“This simply adds these political organizations, because what they are doing as political organizations is that they are exclusively focused on exercising First Amendment rights,” Carney said on the Senate floor Thursday.
Not all Democrats agreed with that approach.
“If this is a First Amendment issue,” said Sen. Joe Baldacci (D-Penobscot), who voted against the amendment, “I say let the political parties sue us.”