Palm Beach Post

First Amendment-rights group wary of privacy bills

By Michael C. Bender

Palm Beach Post Capital Bureau

Monday, March 12, 2007

TALLAHASSEE — An effort in the state Capitol to protect Floridians against the increasing threat of identify theft could also cut off public access to real estate, criminal and government personnel records, according to a First Amendment advocacy group.

“These bills do more than just target identity theft,” said Florida First Amendment Foundation Director Adria Harper. “They create a vacuum of public records.”

Lawmakers, however, said they are looking out for vulnerable residents.

“My bill in its present form has invited a discussion and that’s the objective,” said Rep. Bill Proctor, a St. Augustine Republican sponsoring a bill (HB 1213) the First Amendment Foundation tagged as “one of the worst bills ever.”

The bill requires that personal identification information should always remain private, even when collected legally.

It would give people the option of choosing whether to have personal identification information released to the public when requested by a state agency to supply such information.

Personal identification information is defined as a person’s name and any information that may be used to identify an individual, including an address, telephone number, social security number, date of birth or mother’s maiden name.

In all, the First Amendment Foundation included three bills on its “legislative alert” for 2007. All three are intended to deal with identity theft and all three duplicate language from House Speaker Marco Rubio’s book, 100 Innovative Ideas for Florida’s Future. The book has become a legislative agenda for Republican House leaders.

“We had higher hopes for open government in the legislative process this year,” Harper said. “But it seems like we are once again in the same position: Open government is under assault.”

Proctor, chancellor of Flagler College, is sponsor of two of the three bills on the foundation’s alert list.

His second (HB 1211) would make it a misdemeanor to distribute personal identification information about someone without first receiving permission from that person, even if the distributors legally acquired the information from public records.

Harper said the bills would cut off a person’s access to public records with identifying information about people: real estate records that show a neighbor’s name, a teacher’s personnel record, arrest reports and court records.

But Proctor said he tried to prevent ID information from being passed among banks, credit card companies or marketing corporations.

“If you subscribe to a magazine, is it your thought that this is your information going to the magazine? Or is it your intention to have a relationship with 15 other organizations?” Proctor said.

Proctor said both of his bills were “broadly written” and will probably be “re-crafted” in committee hearings.

The third bill on the foundation’s alert list would make it a first-degree felony to fraudulently use personal identification information of people 65 or older.

The bill (HB 1117) also would make it a third-degree felony to possess someone’s “sensitive personal information,” which is defined similarly to personal identification information, without first getting that person’s consent.

“What right is it of another individual to have someone else’s personal information?” said Rep. John Legg, R-Port Richey. “We’re not talking about public information here for public consumption. This is for private residents who want to keep their private information to themselves.”

But Harper said the bill is so broad it would be a felony if she had her mother’s social security card after helping her with paperwork.

“The details of the bill we’re going to work on in committee,” Legg said. “What we have is basically a concept, an idea out there that our speaker has put forward as an issue we want to debate in committee.

“I would love to work with groups, First Amendment included, that are saying there needs to be some tweaking. We’re open to discussion.”

Reproduced courtesy of the Palm Beach Post.
Back to top | Return to fsne.org