Anchorage Daily News

JUNEAU -- A consumer protection bill that aims to protect Alaskans from identity theft is headed for the Alaska Senate where a similar measure ran aground two years ago.

Click to enlarge

"It's my intention not to be antibusiness but to give them clear rules to work by," said Rep. John Coghill, R-North Pole.

Story tools

Comments

E-mail a friend

Print

Digg this

Seed Newsvine

Send link via AIM

Font size : A | A | A

The House approved the bipartisan-sponsored bill 35-0 on Wednesday.

Its main provisions include a ban on the sale or disclosure of Social Security numbers and a requirement that individuals be notified of security breaches involving their personal information. It also allows consumers to freeze their credit reports and scores to prevent thieves from obtaining the information and requires merchants to use truncated numbers in electronic transaction receipts.

House Bill 65's prime sponsor, Rep. John Coghill, R-North Pole, described himself as its manager because so many lawmakers from both the House and the Senate had input into its provisions.

He said consumers, bankers, insurance companies and credit reporting agencies also were involved.

"I think we've worked diligently to make sure that we're fair and yet still tough," said Coghill. "It's my intention not to be antibusiness but to give them clear rules to work by."

Co-sponsor Rep. Les Gara, D-Anchorage, said three years ago, when identity theft bills first appeared in the Alaska Legislature, only 10 states had passed similar protections. Thirty states have them now.

He pointed in particular to "a glaring hole in the law" revealed in 2005. That's when information clearinghouse ChoicePoint Inc. accidentally released information on more than 145,000 consumers nationwide, including 251 Alaskans. The law did not require that the company inform Alaskans of the breach and it only did so months after the fact.

Though the new bill had a smooth ride in the House, it could face a tougher fight in the Senate where a similar bipartisan effort died two years ago.

Senate President Lyda Green, R-Wasilla, opposed that bill over concerns that it would be a burden on businesses, but she said those concerns have been addressed in the current bill. However, she said more information is needed on how much the state will spend to protect citizens' information.

The Department of Administration estimates it would cost just over $2 million the next fiscal year to strengthen the security of the state's network and data and about $320,000 a year thereafter to keep it secure.

But depending on whether breaches occur, the notification could cost from zero to about $1 million a year, according to the state. It also could result in fines and litigation.

Green said the estimate sounds low and she wants a firmer accounting from the state.

Green said the bipartisan Senate majority has not discussed its position on the legislation.

"I imagine they'd come down on the side of liking it, but I just see major unintended consequences and that's the thing we want to avoid," she said.

ADVERTISEMENT