The Insights Association and ten other data-focused trade associations have come out in opposition to California Proposition 24, calling it "a premature and ill-timed overhaul of California’s privacy law."
The groups "strongly believe consumer privacy is an essential value that deserves meaningful protections in the marketplace," but "join the growing number of stakeholders in opposition to Proposition 24, the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 ballot initiative (“CPRA”). We oppose Proposition 24 because the initiative would not only fail to provide meaningful new protections for Californians but would also impose considerable new costs on a business community that is still working to implement the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”) as well as weather substantial economic hardships due to the COVID-19 pandemic."
CPRA, if approved by California voters in November, would add new consumer rights and business responsibilities while expanding existing CCPA ones, with some coming into effect immediately. Most importantly, California’s privacy law would also be almost impossible to improve ever again if the initiative is passed, as the initiative would forbid most future attempts to change the law via the legislature.
As explained in the joint letter, "The CCPA went into effect in January of this year and became enforceable by the California Attorney General approximately two months ago on July 1, 2020. California’s citizens, policymakers, and businesses have had only a limited—and insufficient—time to evaluate the effects of the new data requirements posed by the CCPA, and to understand how this new law will impact citizens and the California economy. In addition, the version of the CPRA that will be presented to California voters this Fall was proposed before the Office of the Attorney General issued multiple updates to the draft regulations that implement the CCPA. The CPRA is consequently an outdated response to an incomplete CCPA regulatory regime, as it seeks to alter legal rules that were not finalized before the initiative took up the task of proposing substantive amendments to the CCPA."
The groups urged California to instead follow a deliberative process of evaluating the performance and impact of CCPA and making changes through the legislature as needed: "The CPRA ballot initiative threatens to upend the legal approach to data privacy in California after years of work to refine the CCPA through amendments and various releases of modified regulations based on detailed input by consumers, the business community, and other stakeholders. The ballot initiative circumvents important deliberative processes that have taken place and are necessary to develop nuanced, carefully considered bills, such as the processes bills endure when they proceed through the legislature. Indeed, a deliberative process for crafting legislation is exceedingly important, particularly for proposed laws such as the CPRA that are technically and legally complex and would greatly impact the vast majority Californians and companies that do business in the state."
Ultimately, Prop 24 "would not provide meaningful new protections for Californians." Instead, it "would overhaul the existing data privacy regulatory framework set forth by the CCPA before consumers and businesses have" even had an opportunity "to fully understand the benefits and costs of the statute."