October 2, 2000

We don’t need a commission to study consumer privacy rights. Consumers either have the right to determine how personal information they give others will be used, or they don’t. In my view, consumers deserve this right. Spending 18 months studying privacy and $5 million of the taxpayers money will not bring us any closer to deciding this fundamental issue. Only Members of the Congress, not members of a study commission, can decide whether to protect consumer privacy.

What consumers are demanding is a simple and clear statement from Congress that banks, insurance companies, securities firms, HMO’s, and other entities cannot disseminate or use personal information in ways the consumer has not approved. That’s not a complicated concept, although many who don’t want to protect consumer privacy will maintain that it is. One hundred and thirty-eight of our colleagues are cosponsors of one such bill that we should have the opportunity to consider either as an amendment to the bill before us or on its own.

That legislation, H.R. 2457, is sponsored by our colleague, Mrs. Slaughter, and prohibits genetic discrimination in determining eligibility for health insurance and employment. Polls show that more than 80% of those surveyed are afraid that genetic information could be used against them. One hundred and seventy-eight of our colleagues have signed a discharge petition to bring this matter to the floor for a vote. Outside medical professional groups, including the Director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, support the bill. The Administration strongly supports it, and the platforms of both major national parties include planks that call for legislation like H.R. 2457.

Clearly, Members are ready to act on genetic privacy, yet the Republican House Leadership says we can’t. The Chairman of the Commerce Committee has repeatedly rejected requests from Democratic Members to let the Committee act on this important legislation. In fact, Republican Leadership won’t even permit an amendment prohibiting genetic discrimination to be offered to the matter before us.

That’s just plain wrong, and the Republican Majority should not be allowed to cite passage of this meaningless commission bill as evidence that they have concerns for consumer privacy. If they truly were concerned about consumer privacy we’d be considering Mrs. Slaughter’s bill, or others like it that are intended to legally protect consumer privacy, not just study it. At the very least, Members should have the right to amend this bill with proposals that provide consumers real and needed protection.