Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Privacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee adopts amended substitute for House Bill 410 on data privacy after mixed public comment
Summary
The House Commerce & Economic Development Committee voted unanimously to adopt an amended committee substitute to House Bill 410, a statewide consumer data privacy measure, after presenters removed a contentious section and members heard both support and opposition from business groups and privacy advocates.
The House Commerce & Economic Development Committee on Tuesday adopted an amended committee substitute to House Bill 410, a proposed New Mexico consumer data privacy law, after sponsors removed a previously contested section and the committee approved technical language changes.
Committee members voted 8-0 to adopt a narrow editorial amendment and later approved the committee substitute and the bill recommendation by voice with a final recorded tally of 9-0 in favor of moving the bill out of committee.
The substitute removes a previously controversial section (referred to in the record as the former “section 13”), eliminates a definition for “artificial intelligence services,” and adds a requirement that businesses delete certain sensitive federal data if it was not provided by a New Mexico resident by opt-in, the sponsor told the committee. The substitute also corrects a drafting error in the definition of “publicly available information” by changing a conjunction to align the language with similar statutes in other states.
Supporters from business and trade groups largely told the committee the revised bill strikes an acceptable balance between consumer protections and business compliance. “We think this bill is very workable,” said Jason, a registered lobbyist for the Albuquerque and Hispano Chamber of Commerce, adding the group had been satisfied with the new section 13. Scott Scanlon of the Consumer Data Industry Association said the change to the definition on page 9 was “very, very important” and that the association supported the amendment. Jason Espinosa of the New Mexico Retail Association and Lisonbee Riley of the New Mexico Chamber of Commerce both said, on behalf of their organizations, that they supported the bill as amended, with Riley praising the changes “especially related to small business.” Art Hall said Fidelity Investments remained officially neutral but called the substitute “far more workable.”
Privacy advocates, however, urged caution and stronger protections. Katrina Fitzgerald, deputy director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), testified in opposition and urged the committee to issue an unfavorable report. “Connecticut’s law received a D,” Fitzgerald said, referencing independent evaluations of state privacy laws and arguing the bill mirrored model language that has, in her view, underperformed for consumers. She told the committee she preferred House Bill 307, which she characterized as “much more pro-consumer.”
Committee members debated process questions about the amendment and the substitute before voting. After the amendment to the committee substitute passed 8-0, the committee adopted the substitute and reported HB 410 out of committee as the Commerce & Economic Development Committee substitute to House Bill 410, as amended; the final tally recorded on the motion was 9-0.
The committee record shows the sponsor made the committee substitute available for questions and identified Julie Mead of the Attorney General’s office as a subject-matter expert present to answer legal questions.
No effective date, enforcement mechanisms beyond the language in the substitute, or final floor actions were decided in the committee; the committee action forwards the bill to subsequent House consideration.
