Federal Privacy and AI Statutes Needed to Stop Confusion, ANA Executive Says
A federal privacy statute is badly needed, and the timing is right to pass one now, said Chris Oswald, executive vice president and head of law, ethics and government relations at the Association of National Advertisers (ANA). He spoke Tuesday during a panel on data privacy at the group's Masters of Data Conference.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Privacy Daily provides accurate coverage of newsworthy developments in data protection legislation, regulation, litigation, and enforcement for privacy professionals responsible for ensuring effective organizational data privacy compliance.
“Our primary goal is to pass a national, comprehensive privacy law for the nation, and to do it in this Congress,” he said, adding that “we've never had a better opportunity to do it.” Oswald noted that Rep. John Joyce, R-Pa., “was instructed to lead a working group on what a national privacy law should look like, [and] he spent the whole year basically interviewing stakeholders.”
Oswald said he and other ANA employees talked to the working group's members, “and we told them, 'Look, we want a national privacy law that protects consumer privacy but is also workable for business.'”
“We might see some language [for a potential federal bill] right after Congress gets back from their summer break,” Oswald added. “Towards the end of August, keep your eyes peeled, because we might catch our first glimpse of what a national privacy bill will look like.”
One reason “we need a national privacy law [is] because complying with 21 different state laws is really expensive,” said Oswald. “Just talk to your compliance counsel. They’ve got more work than they know what to do with.”
A comprehensive AI law at the federal level would also be helpful, he said, noting the AI moratorium that was left out of the reconciliation bill (see 2507210042). Had it remained, "we could have avoided all of the AI-related restrictions and laws that are certain to come from the states [or] that are already coming.”
Sen. Ted Cruz (R), who suggested the AI moratorium language, isn't giving up on it, Oswald noted, because “having one set of laws, one set of rules for governing AI for our country, he thinks, is a national security strategic initiative and an imperative.”
“Of course, you can never underestimate the power of Congress to do nothing,” he said, so it makes sense that states are filling the void.