Investigative & Security Professionals for Legislative Action

Current Legislative News

<< First  < Prev   ...   4   5   6   7   8   Next >  Last >> 
  • 28 Aug 2009 3:07 PM | Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Federal Trade Commission's "Red Flags Rule" Leads American Bar Association to File Suit

    Rule Burdens Lawyers with No Client Benefit and Invades State Regulation of Lawyers

    Aug. 27, 2009 undefinedThe American Bar Association today asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to bar the Federal Trade Commission from applying its Red Flags Rule, designed to prevent identity theft, to practicing lawyers.  Because the FTC is exceeding the powers delegated to it by Congress and misinterpreting the Rule, the ABA is seeking declaratory and injunctive relief in advance of pending FTC Rule enforcement on Nov 1, 2009.

    The ABA complaint, prepared on a pro bono basis by Proskauer Rose, states that the application of the Rule to practicing lawyers is “arbitrary, capricious and contrary to law,” and that the FTC has failed “to articulate, among other things: a rational connection between the practice of law and identity theft; an explanation of how the manner in which lawyers bill their clients can be considered an extension of credit under the FACTA; or any legally supportable basis for application of the Red Flags Rule to lawyers engaged in the practice of law.”

    The Rule requires creditors to develop and implement plans to detect and respond to activity signaling possible identity theft.  The FTC’s original enforcement policy in October 2008 and subsequent updates provided no indication that lawyers engaged in the practice of law fell within the definition of “creditor.”  Only after implementation of the Rule was delayed again in April 2009, just one day before the expiration of an initial six-month extension did the FTC publicly announce its position that lawyers were subject to the Rule. 

    ABA President Carolyn Lamm said, upon the filing of the lawsuit, “Congress did not intend to cover lawyers under the Rule.  The FTC’s decision to apply the Rule to lawyers is contrary to an unbroken history of state regulation of lawyers and intrudes on traditional state responsibilities.  The Rule requires extensive reporting and bureaucratic compliance that would unnecessarily increase the cost of legal services.  This kind of unauthorized and unjustified federal regulation of law practice threatens the independence of the profession and the lawyer’s role as client confidante and advocate.” 

    Today’s suit follows months of outspoken concern by the ABA regarding the unintended consequences of the Red Flags Rule.  Nearly 30 state and local bar associations also have officially registered their opposition.  President Lamm stated that “the ABA and its counterparts at the state and local levels will continue to work with Congress to obtain clarification that the Rule should not be applied to these lawyers.”

    The ABA is seeking to have the Red Flags Rule’s application to lawyers engaged in the practice of law declared unlawful and void.  The Rule “imposes significant burdens upon lawyers, particularly sole practitioners and those practicing in small firms, who comprise the majority of the lawyers in the United States,” the association noted in its complaint.  President Lamm praised the work of the ABA’s Task Force on the Red Flags Rule for its work assessing these legislative developments and preserving continued protection of clients under existing ethical rules.

    A copy of the complaint is available at http://www.abanet.org/media/nosearch/1_1_Complaint.pdf 

  • 28 Aug 2009 2:55 PM | Anonymous member (Administrator)

    S 773- Cyber Security Act of 2009 - Draft Significantly Altered

     

    Sweeping cybersecurity legislation introduced by Senate Commerce Chairman John (Jay) Rockefeller and Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, in April has undergone major changes during the August recess and now features a more prominent focus on ensuring that the U.S. government and private sector have a properly trained workforce to thwart high-tech threats.

    A revised version of the bill sent to Commerce and Intelligence committee aides late last week "captures a lot of the input we've received since its introduction" but is still a draft and has not been approved at the member level, Rockefeller aide Chan Lieu said in an e-mail to colleagues obtained by CongressDaily.

    A separate e-mail from Commerce Committee General Counsel Bruce Andrews said the panel is aiming for a hearing and a markup in September or October.

    High up in the reworked document are provisions instructing the Commerce secretary to work with the White House Office of Personnel Management to train and certify government cyber professionals. Under the proposal, uncertified individuals could not represent themselves as such nor could uncertified service providers handle critical infrastructure information systems or networks.

    A new section would require the head of each federal department to develop an annual workforce plan that includes hiring projections, short- and long-term planning to address skill deficiencies, recruitment strategies and an analysis of barriers to recruitment.

    Agencies would also have to measure and collect information on cybersecurity hiring effectiveness.

    The original bill's provision that called for the creation of a National Science Foundation scholarship program is preserved with a $50 million authorization for FY10 that increases incrementally to $70 million by FY14.

    Also included is a $15 million annual authorization over the same period for the National Institute of Standards and Technology to conduct competitions and challenges to woo students into cybersecurity careers.

    One of the bill's most contentious provisions, which high-tech policy watchers argued would give the White House the power to effectively turn off the Internet during a cyber crisis, has been substantially curtailed.

    The section would have allowed the president in a cyber emergency to "order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic" to and from any compromised government or U.S. critical infrastructure information system or network.

    The new proposal directs the president to work with industry during a cyber emergency on a national response as well as the timely restoration of affected networks.

    Absent from the revised language is a requirement that an advisory panel ensure national security would not be compromised before approving the renewal or modification of a contract between the U.S. government and the entity that oversees global Internet addresses.

    A section that directed the National Telecommunications and Information Administration to develop a strategy for secure domain name addresses was also removed.

    The reworked draft changes what was a quadrennial cyber review into a biennial affair beginning in 2013 to review "the cyber posture of the United States, including an unclassified summary of roles, missions, accomplishments, plans, and programs." Consistent with the original measure, the draft would set up a cybersecurity advisory panel of representatives from industry; academia; nonprofit organizations; interest and advocacy groups, and state and local governments.

    It would also create state and regional cybersecurity enhancement programs as well as a threat and vulnerability clearinghouse for the government and the private sector. The initial bill specified that the Commerce Department would serve as home to the clearinghouse but the latest version leaves its designation vague.

    Other provisions would require a comprehensive analysis of the federal statutory and legal framework applicable to cyber-related activities in the United States and a joint intelligence threat assessment by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Cmmerce and Homeland secretaries.
  • 11 Aug 2009 5:34 PM | Anonymous member (Administrator)
     
    CALI Announcement
    RE: SB202
    Logo
    California Association of Licensed Investigators
    1215 K Street Suite 2290
    Sacramento, California 95814
     
    Since September 2007, CALI has been involved in a legislative process to research and seek continuing education standards for licensed investigators in California.
    CALI sponsored SB 1282 [Margett] that passed through each house of the State Legislature successfully with overwhelming majority support and without opposition by any state administrative official or agency. The bill was vetoed in September 2008 along with a number of other bills that Governor Schwarzenegger stated were not important during the budget crisis. CALI disagreed with his analysis.
    In 2009, CALI continued the effort and sponsored essentially the same bill [SB 202, Harman]. This bill has also proceeded through both houses, this time without even one "nay" vote and sixty-six "aye" votes. In July 2009, the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) and the Department of Finance (DOF) sent letters to Senator Harman indicating their opposition to SB 202.
    Previously, CALI representatives were successful in resolving issues concerning financing and were confident that the minor=2 0financial obstacles issues could be overcome with DOF and the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
    CALI contacted Secretary of State and Consumer Services Agency, Fred Aguiar to discuss the DCA opposition position. As you are aware, the position of DCA Director has been vacant since the resignation of Carrie Lopez, and the Secretary is the cabinet-level official who oversees DCA and the Director. Secretary Aguiar reports directly to the Governor.
    Representatives of CALI met with Secretary Fred Aguiar. During this meeting, he very candidly stated that he did not believe SB 202, or any other proposed CE program would be supported by his administration or by the Governor. Further, he stated that the administration had a long-standing position of opposition to CE.
    At approximately the same time Senator Harman received the DCA opposition letter, a letter was also received in opposition to a CE bill calling for continuing education for licensed Architects [AB 623 Emmerson]. The Architects bill was unopposed in both houses and also passed without a "nay" vote. It was very clear from our meeting that any CE measure would be opposed by Secretary Aguiar and the Administration.
    After careful consideration of the current situation with SB 202, including consultations with Senator Harman's office, CALI recommends that SB 202 remain in suspense status in the Assembly Appropriations Committee. No further efforts will be made by CALI or Senator Harman to re-introduce SB 202 in an y form.
    CALI thanks Senator Harman for all the hard work and effort he and his staff have devoted to SB 202 and for their interest in pursuing legislation on behalf of CALI. During this process CALI forged a strong working relationship with Senator Harman and many legislators. CALI opened doors that were previously closed before SB 1282 / 202 and the process of educating legislators about the real work licensed investigators do will benefit our profession for years to come.
    CALI will continue to work to keep those doors open; we are going to need them when bills are introduced to restrict our access to information essential to our professions. This has been critical to our previous legislative efforts, including our recent successes in preventing the passage of legislation prohibiting pretext, stopping passage of legislation prohibiting the use of credit reports for employment purposes, and defeating legislation to provide process servers with an exemption from the PI Act.
    During the SB 1282 / SB 202 effort CALI received strong support from legislators and the private sector. The Privacy Rights Clearinghouse and many other consumer friendly groups supported SB 202 and sent very thoughtful letters to the legislature.
    Further CALI is grateful to the several other authors of the bill [Senators Sam Aanestad, Dave Cox, Denise Ducheny, and Mark Wyland] and co-authors [Assembly Members Anthony Adams, Ted Gaines, Martin Garrick, Isadore Hall, Dave Jones, and Jim Silv a] who have put their names forth in support of SB 202.
    With every end there is a beginning and CALI hopes those opposed to SB 202 can recognize that political passion has its time and place and that time is now past. We need to find common ground to work towards protecting our profession from both unlicensed activity and the activities of those already licensed who bring our industry into disrepute. Those people should not enjoy the benefits of our hard work and sacrifice.
    Near the end of this long process, there appeared to be an opportunity to use SB 202 as an enforcement bill to empower BSIS to issue citations and abate unlicensed investigation activity. While BSIS enjoys some enforcement power, it must still rely on District Attorney and City Attorney offices in California to initiate criminal actions. BSIS desires more tools to be able to truly enforce unlicensed activity; CALI supports their call for more enforcement of this major problem.
    After much debate and consideration, CALI believes it would be in everyone's best interest to consider an enforcement bill at the beginning of the 2010 legislative session rather than do so this year. This will give all parties time to research the issue, conduct surveys and focus groups, meet with licensed investigators and other associations throughout California and learn whether or not our industry is willing to support such a bill.
    Many lessons have been learned during the past two years and we hope those lessons can be translated into something positive for all licensed investigators in California. This is a time to heal wounds and reunite for causes that our members and the industry can and will support; we hope a stronger unlicensed activity bill will be one of those causes that can unite rather than divide.
    Once again, CALI extends it's thanks to the hundreds and hundreds of hard working licensed investigators, attorneys, associations and citizens who encouraged and assisted with SB 202. Thank you!
    CALI will continue working to offer its members educational benefits they can use to better their work in their profession.
     Sincerely,
    Board of Directors
    California Association of Licensed Investigators
     
    Lita Abella
    John Bryant
    Sean Ditty
    Anne Fields
    Andy Hanson
    Justin Hodson
    Roy Howat
    Frank Huntington
    Francie Koehler
    Graham McGruer
    St ephanie Pappas
    Riley Parker                                                                   
    Chris Reynolds
    Robert Rice
    Ed Saucerman
    Jan Tucker
    Tawni Tyndall
    Chris Woodson
    Jim Zimmer
     
    0A
     
  • 27 Jul 2009 10:31 PM | Anonymous member (Administrator)

    For Immediate Release

    July 27, 2009

    Investigative & Security Professionals for Legislative Action (ISPLA) is proud to announce that their exclusive, first of its kind, and real-time state and federal legislative tracking system for the investigative and security professions is now open online to all for a limited time.

    To view and use this great system, go to Legislation Tracking

    This is a live system that is updated daily. You will now be able to stay on top of the ever-changing legislation that occurs in your state and around the country.  Just click on the interactive map to choose the state with which you are concerned.

    What we have created on the ISPLA website is a first for the investigative and security professions and has never before been provided by any other professional organization. The ISPLA website is the definitive location for up-to-the-minute legislative activity.  For a limited time only, the state and federal legislative tracking system will be available free of charge to all who visit the ISPLA website. In the future, this system will be accessible only to members.

    ISPLA continues to move forward and be proactive. In the past few months, ISPLA representatives have been speaking and working with members of Congress and regulatory agencies on important issues that impact your businesses. At this time, bills and regulatory issues are proliferating.  Issues of continuing education, identity theft, social security number access, and more, are all continually evolving; and ISPLA is monitoring what is happening across the country. We are available to assist you at the state level as well.

    In the coming weeks, ISPLA representatives will be meeting individually with key members of Congress and their staff on critical issues involving our profession. To date, ISPLA representatives have made personal contact with over 300 members of Congress.

    It is imperative that we not wait to act until legislation has been proposed that will adversely affect our ability to do business. Business as usual in these trying times is not the answer. Being proactive and building relationships is the name of the game. Having a political action committee is as well. We are the first national association representing investigators and security professionals to form a federal PAC. If you want more information on how you can help your profession in both the state and national arenas, go to the ISPLA website now: www.ispla.org

    Support your profession by joining ISPLA.

  • 07 Jul 2009 10:44 AM | Anonymous member (Administrator)

    This excerpt is from an article in today's Washington Post:

    Researchers have found that it is possible to guess many -- if not all -- of the nine digits in an individual's Social Security number using publicly available information, a finding they say compromises the security of one of the most widely used consumer identifiers in the United States.

    Many numbers could be guessed at by simply knowing a person's birth data, the researchers from Carnegie Mellon University said.

    The full article can be found at:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/06/AR2009070602955.html?hpid=moreheadlines
  • 23 Jun 2009 10:19 AM | Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Lautenberg, Conyers, Scott: Known or Suspected Terrorists Cleared To Buy Guns or Explosives 865 Times Since 2004 – Senator Lautenberg Introduces Legislation to Close "Terror Gap" In Nation's Gun Laws

    June 22, 2009 WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Congressmen John Conyers (D-MI-14) and Bobby Scott (D-VA-3) on June 22 released a new GAO report finding that, from February 2004 to February 2009, there were 963 cases in which a known or suspected terrorist attempted to buy a gun.  In 90 percent of those cases – a total of 865 times – they were cleared to proceed with that purchase.  One of those cases involved the purchase of explosives. 
                  
        “The special interest gun lobby has so twisted our nation’s laws that the rights of terrorists are placed above the safety of everyday Americans.  The current law simply defies common sense.  This new report is proof positive that known and suspected terrorists are exploiting a major loophole in our law, threatening our families and our communities.   This ‘terror gap’ has been open too long and our national security demands that we shut it down,” Sen. Lautenberg said.
                   
        Congressman Robert C.” Bobby” Scott, Chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security said, “This report is disturbing and certainly warrants consideration by Congress and the Administration.  One might reasonably ask what the purpose of a Terrorist Watch List is if those on it are free to acquire firearms and explosives.”
           
        In response to this report, Sen. Lautenberg is introducing legislation to close the “terror gap” in the nation’s gun laws by giving the Attorney General authority to stop the sale of guns or explosives to terrorists.  Under current federal law, there is no legal way to stop someone on the Terrorist Watch List from buying guns and explosives. 
          
        According to the new GAO report, which the lawmakers requested in July 2008, only ten percent of the time were terrorists suspects denied weapons because of disqualifying factors, such as a felony conviction or illegal immigrant status.  Being on the Terrorist Watch List is currently not a disqualifying factor for buying firearms. 

        In January 2005, a previous GAO report requested by Senator Lautenberg found that from February 3 to June 30, 2004, a total of 44 firearm purchase attempts were made by individuals designated as known or suspected terrorists by the federal government.  In 35 cases, the FBI authorized the transactions to proceed because FBI field agents were unable to find any disqualifying information (such as felony convictions or illegal immigrant status) within the federally prescribed three business days. Today’s report shows an alarming increase in these numbers.   
     
        Under the federal Brady Act, a licensed firearms dealer must request a background check through the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) before an unlicensed individual may purchase a weapon.  However, even if a NICS check reveals that the prospective purchaser is a known or suspected terrorist, nothing in current law prevents that person from purchasing a gun unless he or she meets one of the other disqualifying factors, such as felony conviction, illegal status, or domestic violence convictions.
     
        Sen. Lautenberg’s measure, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009, would:

    • Provide the Attorney General with discretionary authority to deny the transfer or issuance of a firearm or firearm or explosives license or permit when a background check reveals that the purchaser is a known or suspected terrorist and the Attorney General reasonably believes that the person may use a firearm or explosives in connection with terrorism;
    • Requires the Attorney General to issue guidelines describing the circumstances under which such discretionary authority will be used;
    • Include due process safeguards that afford an affected person an opportunity to challenge a denial by the Attorney General; and
    • Protect the sensitive information upon which terrorist watch lists are based.                   
           In 2007, the Bush Administration backed the introduction of a previous version of this bill written by Senator Lautenberg. 

  • 21 Jun 2009 8:01 PM | Anonymous member (Administrator)

    FTC Testifies on Efforts to Combat Identity Theft

    The Federal Trade Commission on June 17, 2009, described its comprehensive efforts to combat identity theft before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The FTC also recommended legislative remedies to enhance the effectiveness of these efforts.

     

    Testimony presented by Betsy Broder, Assistant Director of the FTC’s Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, highlighted the agency’s leadership role in developing a national strategy to combat identity theft as part of the President’s Identity Theft Task Force. The Task Force issued 31 recommendations that promoted an enhanced data security culture in the public and private sectors, launched victim assistance initiatives, and improved law enforcement’s ability to pursue and punish identity thieves.

     

    The FTC’s testimony recommended that, to help prevent identity theft, Congress should establish data security standards across the private sector requiring all organizations that hold sensitive consumer data to take reasonable measures to safeguard it, and to notify consumers when the security of their information has been breached. In addition, the Commission has asked Congress for authority to seek civil penalties in data security cases and for legislation that would help reduce the unnecessary use and display of Social Security numbers.

     

    The FTC testimony described the agency’s efforts to keep sensitive information out of the hands of identity thieves by working to ensure that those who maintain such information adequately protect it. Since 2001, the FTC has brought 26 law enforcement actions against businesses that failed to implement reasonable security measures to protect sensitive consumer data. The Commission believes that these aggressive law enforcement efforts have helped sensitize businesses to the importance of data security and motivated them to devote more attention and resources to protecting consumers’ data. In addition, the agency shares consumer complaints with more than 1,700 law enforcement agencies through the Consumer Sentinel Network to facilitate criminal prosecution of identity thieves. The testimony also discussed the Commission’s direct assistance to ID theft victims, such as online resources at www.ftc.gov/idtheft and a toll-free hotline for victims, 1-877-IDTHEFT, which assisted more than 300,000 victims in 2008 alone. The testimony outlined how these resources guide victims to limit the damage and restore their identities.

     

    According to the FTC testimony, the agency’s efforts to educate consumers also include disseminating English- and Spanish-language materials directly to consumers; working with organizations to help inform their members, constituencies, and employees; and creating a
    multimedia Web site, OnGuard Online, with tips on safe online computing. For businesses – especially small businesses – the Commission has created a brochure and online tutorial on information security and hosted regional data security workshops.

     

    The Commission also has worked to implement the identity theft provisions of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACT Act). For example, the FACT Act gave consumers the right to receive free annual credit reports so that they can spot signs of identity theft. The FTC has enforced this right by bringing two actions against companies offering so-called “free” credit reports that were tied to the purchase of a credit monitoring service.

     

    The Commission vote authorizing presentation of the testimony was 4-0.

     

  • 18 Jun 2009 1:06 PM | Anonymous member (Administrator)

    IT’S TIME TO GET INVOLVED AND MAKE A DIFFERENCE!!!

     

    As individuals, we don’t have much of a voice regarding the things that affect our businesses directly.  Now we can.  ISPLA is that voice! But we need your help.

     

    Collectively we want to watch the bills below and get all our colleagues involved to ensure that the outcomes are right for everyone.  

     

    This “Bill Watch” covers some of the federal bills in Washington being monitored by ISPLA.  In addition, we have been closely watching issues presently coming under scrutiny of various federal agencies.

     

    We are concerned with potential unintended consequences of the Lexis-Nexis acquisition of ChoicePoint and possible restraint of trade and unfair competition issues.  We have been assured by the FTC that they, too, will be watching.

     

    We have continued to stay on top of the American Bar Association Resolution 301 and various court cases involving Computer and Digital Forensic Examiners and the question of their being regulated by states.

     

    Concerns have also surfaced regarding the ever-growing practice of SSN and DOB information being redacted from public records.  We have been working closely with First Amendment organizations and others to establish alliances to address this and other similar concerns.

     


    In the near future we will also be providing information about important issues pending in states as well as more extensive federal reporting to individuals, businesses, and other professional associations joining us in our lobbying and political action committee activities. 

     

    Please take a look at the bills below that are coming up for review in Washington. ISPLA is closely watching them as they move through the branches of government. We want to ensure that our opinions carry weight with our legislators.  We thank all of you that responded to our recent initial email message and joined ISPLA.  We respectfully request that others receiving this message will also.  We need the support of everyone to achieve success in our mission.  After you review the pending bills, please go to our website:  WWW.ISPLA.ORG for information on joining.    

     

    Data Breach Issues

     

    S.139 Data Breach Notification Act: Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) Requiring federal agencies, business entities, and persons engaged in interstate commerce, in possession of data containing sensitive personally identifiable information, to disclose any breach of such information.  

     

    H.R.2221 Data Accountability and Trust Act: Rep. Bobby L. Rush (D-IL-1) To   protect consumers by requiring reasonable security policies and procedures to protect computerized data containing personal information, and to provide for nationwide notice in the event of a security breach

    Social Security Number Misuse

    S.141 Protecting the Privacy of Social Security Numbers Act of 2009: Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to limit the misuse of Social Security numbers, to establish criminal penalties for such misuse, and for other purposes. 

    H.R.122 Protecting the Privacy of Social Security Numbers Act of 2009:  Rep.  Rodney P. Freylinghusen (R-NJ-11) To amend title 18, United States Code, and the Social Security Act to limit the misuse of Social Security numbers, to establish criminal penalties for such misuse, and for other purposes.

     

    H.R.133 Identity Theft Notification Act of 2009: Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA-24) To amend title II of the Social Security Act to provide that individuals and appropriate authorities are notified by the Commissioner of Social Security of evidence of misuse of the Social Security account numbers of such individuals.

     

    Social Security Number Use

    H.R 220 Identity Theft Protection Act of 2009: Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX-14) To amend title II of the Social Security Act and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to protect the integrity and confidentiality of Social Security account numbers issued under such title, to prohibit the establishment in the Federal Government of any uniform national identifying number, and to prohibit Federal agencies from imposing standards for identification of individuals on other agencies or persons.

    Caller ID - Spoofing

     

    H.R.1110 Preventing Harassment through Outbound Number Enforcement Act of 2009 or the PHONE Act of 2009: Rep. Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-VA-3) To amend title 18, United States Code, to prevent caller ID spoofing, and for other purposes.

     

    H.R.1258 Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009: Rep. Elliot L. Engel (D-NY-17)  To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit manipulation of caller identification information, and for other purposes.

    S.30 Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009: Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL)  A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit manipulation of caller identification information.

    Freedom of Information Act

    H.R.985 Free Flow of Information Act of 2009: Rep Rick Boucher (D-VA-9) To maintain the free flow of information to the public by providing conditions for the federally compelled disclosure of information by certain persons connected with the news media.


    Outsourcing Personal Information

    H.R.427 Notify Americans Before Outsourcing Personal Information Act: Rep. Ted Poe (R- TX-2) To prohibit the transfer of personal information to any person or business outside the United States, without notice.

    Criminal Record Expungement

    H.R.1529 Second Chance for Ex-Offenders Act of 2009: Rep. Charles E. Rangel (D-NY-15)  To permit expungement of records of certain nonviolent criminal offenses.

    Camera Phone

    H.R.414 Camera Phone Predator Alert Act: Rep. Peter T. King (R-NY-3)To require mobile phones containing digital cameras to make a sound when a photograph is taken.

    Public Safety

    S.163 Child Protection Improvement Act of 2009:  Sen. John Ensign (R-NV)  A bill to amend the National Child Protection Act of 1993 to establish a permanent background check system.

    H.R.1469 Child Protection Improvement Act of 2009:  Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-CA-29)  To amend the National Child Protection Act of 1993 to establish a permanent background check system.

    H.R.748 Center to Advance, Monitor, and Preserve University Security Safety Act of 2009 or the CAMPUS Safety Act of 2009: Rep. Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-VA-3) To establish and operate a National Center for Campus Public Safety.

    H.R.1939 Electronic Life Safety and Security Systems Federal Background Check Act of 2009: Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO-9)  To direct the Attorney General to establish a system of background checks for employers and employees of the electronic life safety and security system installation and monitoring industry, and for other purposes.

    S.631 Patient Safety and Abuse Prevention Act:  Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI)  A bill to provide for nationwide expansion of the pilot program for national and State background checks on direct patient access employees of long-term care facilities or providers.

     

    H.R.434 (No Title.  Amends Privacy Act of 1974): Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX-2)  To amend title 5, United States Code, to permit access to databases maintained by the Federal Emergency Management Agency for purposes of complying with sex offender registry and notification laws, and for other purposes.

     

    •  

     

    Make your voice heard and make a positive difference for your profession.

     

    If you are a member, be sure to spread the word about the good work we’re doing here.  And keep in touch.

     

    If you are not yet a member please join us. Membership Dues are just $99.

     

    You can join by clicking on the "Join Now" button to the left.

  • 18 May 2009 12:46 PM | Anonymous member (Administrator)

    There is good news on the federal lobbying front. A new voice for the investigative and security professions has been launched.

     

    This newly formed organization is Investigative & Security Professionals for Legislative Action (ISPLA).  ISPLA will be working with a number of well-known professional association leaders in the investigative and security fields, each of whom are committed to ensuring that our profession’s interests are protected from ill-conceived legislation and burdensome regulations.

     

    Equally important, ISPLA will be fulfilling a need at the federal level that has not been addressed until now by any national association.  It is forming a political action committee, thus creating a mechanism for other national organizations as well as state associations where there are mutual interests to participate in lobbying and financially supporting qualified political candidates for office.  The leadership of a number of national and state organizations is deeply committed to providing legislative expertise and financial resources to accomplish this important mission.  We certainly hope you will also give the same support and commitment.  Former and current selected leaders in NCISS, a number of other professional associations, and individuals with whom we have worked on legislative issues in the past have also joined our effort.

     

    Last year ISPLA Legislative Affairs Director, Bruce Hulme,  was pleased to report that all federal bills in the 110th Congress which, if passed, would have adversely affected our profession, failed to be enacted.  However, as we now enter the 111th Congress, with Democratic control in both the Senate and House and a Democratic President, we must be able to accurately assess all contingencies on the legislative front and be prepared to act swiftly and with the best efforts of all our colleagues who risk being adversely affected by ill-conceived legislation.

     

    ISPLA will be asking Congress to review existing law and take a cautious approach to restricting access and other measures that may have a significant impact on the judicial system, law enforcement, and corporate America.  We support the State licensing processes and encourage the enforcement of existing laws, regulations, standards, and restrictions governing access to and distribution of personal identifying information.


    Still, we expect bills to be offered by members of Congress who are supported by privacy advocates and labor and are determined to curtail your access to database information under the guise of protecting consumers’ personal identifying information, shielding them from identity theft and Internet phishing, and preventing security breaches.  Such legislation seeking to ban the dissemination of information containing the SSN would effectively shut down your information data providers and eliminate credit headers.  Redaction of the SSN as well as the DOB on public records is another legislative goal of privacy advocates that would block your access to critical information.  And there are also bills to expunge criminal records.  For example, on March 16, 2009, Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) offered H.R. 1529, the “Second Chance for Ex-Offenders Act of 2009.”  The bill calls for the expungement of criminal records for certain nonviolent offenders. In January, Rep. Peter King (R-NY) introduced H.R. 414, the "Camera Phone Predator Act" requiring any mobile phone containing a digital camera to sound a tone whenever a photograph is taken. Disabling or silencing the tone would purportedly violate a consumer product safety standard and require enforcement by the Consumer Product Safety Commission.  Legislative intent is thought by some as a response to the recent trend of taking "upskirting" photos with camera phones.

     

    You now have a watchdog organization prepared to protect your interests in your state and nation’s capitols.  When you receive ISPLA’s call for action and support, we hope you will respond.  In the meantime, our members are meeting with business leaders, organizations in Washington, and members of Congress to apprise them of the concerns of investigators and security professionals.

     

    Security issue of concern:

    There is also a major federal legislative issue impacting the security industry that is backed by organized labor and the Security Employees International Union.  Where some organizations have seen fit to throw in the towel regarding labor’s Employee Free Choice Act of 2009 (H.R. 1409/S. 560), ISPLA has not.  It will continue to oppose this bill and assist the contract security industry and its corporate clients that stand to be adversely affected should EFCA be enacted.  This bill takes away an employee’s right to a National Labor Relations Board secret ballot, creating a situation for union intimidation.  It will require mandatory arbitration if the guard company and union cannot come to a contract agreement within a specific timeframe.  Its purpose is to undermine the Taft-Hartley law.

     

    There is some favorable news to report on the present status of this bill.  Senator Arlen Specter (now D-PA) is a key pivotal vote, and the Democrats and labor had counted on him being potentially the 60th cloture vote on EFCA, thus fending off a Republican filibuster.  Prior to changing his party affiliation, he announced that he opposes EFCA and will oppose cloture on the bill.

     

    While this is good news, we believe that labor’s effort to pass EFCA and other amendments to the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) will still remain very active.  EFCA’s proponents need only two votes in the current Senate to gain the 60 votes necessary to defeat a filibuster and pass the bill.  In the House they have more than enough, and in the 110th Congress this same bill passed in the House but not the Senate.  President Obama supports its enactment.  EFCA, also called the “card check” bill, will be an issue that is not going to die.  We urge you to write to your senators and members of congress urging them to again this bill.

     

<< First  < Prev   ...   4   5   6   7   8   Next >  Last >> 

                                                         ISPLA

Powered by Wild Apricot. Try our all-in-one platform for easy membership management