Movement on those issues ground to halt in the Legislature in the last two weeks. Several bills carried big price tags and failed to win the approval of appropriators. Others were pulled by their authors after meeting resistance from their colleagues.
For Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson, D-Santa Barbara, her bill to mandate security features into so-called smart toys and appliances was a tough sell. She barely got the bill out of committee after business groups, backed by several lawmakers, worried that her legislation would lead to overly burdensome security features on everyday products that Californians have come to rely upon.
Jackson pulled SB 327 from the Senate floor last week but vowed to keep the issue alive next year.
“I believe consumers want and deserve basic security and privacy protections on Internet-connected devices and toys,” Jackson said in a statement to Techwire. “Parents should not be left in the dark about the capability of these devices or the sensitive information they may be recording, collecting and potentially making accessible to strangers.”
Her bill would have mandated that “reasonable” security features be built into appliances, electronics and children’s toys that can connect to the Internet. It also would have required that Californians be alerted by either an audio or visual signal (like the blinking red record light of a video camera, for example) whenever data is being collected by their device.
Here is a look at other tech bills that failed to move forward this year:
- Appropriators shelved legislation that would have required that state budgets be made available online in a downloadable spreadsheet format, noting the Department of Finance would incur “significant costs” for staff and equipment to implement the requirements. SB 683 by Sen. Henry Stern, D-Los Angeles, was an effort to shed more light on state expenditures, which are difficult to analyze in the HTML and PDF format now offered by the Finance Department. A Senate Appropriations Committee analysis estimated it could cost more than $1 million to find an IT solution that could convert budget data into a downloadable format.
- A possible $1 billion price tag gave lawmakers pause about providing identity theft protection to individuals who might be affected if there were a breach of personal data held by state government. It is the second time appropriators have blocked identity theft legislation. A staff analysis of AB 241 by Assemblyman Matt Dababneh, D-Encino, found that a breach of driver license records at the Department of Motor Vehicles, for example, would cost the state more than $1 billion to provide identity theft prevention and mitigation services.
- Californians will have to wait for a digital driver’s license. AB 1255 by Assemblyman Matt Dababneh, D-Encino, would have authorized the Department of Motor Vehicles to establish a pilot program for the development of a California digital driver’s license mobile application. But the cost of similar pilot programs in other states have reached roughly $2 million, according to an analysis prepared by the Assembly Appropriations Committee, which held the bill back.
- Assembly appropriators steered clear of legislation that would have changed securities rules that govern investing. Legislation by Assemblyman Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance, failed to get a vote, in part because it would have cost the Department of Business Oversight $1.5 million a year to administer. AB 1517 would have authorized the state to create a new “crowdfunding” permit and allowed for the offer and sale of inexpensive equity-based securities a bid by Muratsuchi to boost investment capital for California businesses.
- Lawmakers this year approved a handful of cybersecurity bills, but appropriators held back one that would have commissioned a study of the industry. AB 364 by Sen. Ed Chau, D-Arcadia, would have required the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development to commission an economic impact study by July 2018. Chau, who chairs the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee, argued that the state should understand California’s fast-growing cybersecurity industry so it could better promote it. But the administration estimated such a study could cost between $400,000 and $500,000.
- A bid by Assemblyman Sebastian Ridley-Thomas, D-Los Angeles, to ban cities and counties from taxing video streaming services stalled for the year. The Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee approved AB 252 by an 8-2 vote, but it was retained in committee on a procedural move. Ridley-Thomas had argued that taxation of video streaming services — such as Netflix or Amazon Video — was a state matter and must be addressed only by the state.
- San Francisco and San Jose won’t be hosts for testing automated technology that tickets speeding drivers — at least not yet. AB 342 by Assemblyman David Chiu, D-San Francisco, would have allowed those jurisdictions to participate in a five-year pilot program of ASE systems on streets where traffic crashes are most likely to occur. The technology is used in more than 140 cities across the country — including Denver, Washington, D.C., and Seattle — but it is not allowed under California law. Chiu pulled the bill from consideration in the Assembly Transportation Committee, citing concerns by opponents about the technology. He pledged to bring the bill back before the panel.
