Much debate over data privacy bill

I’m not sure I’ve seen a stranger roll call than last week’s House
vote on Senate Bill 2978. The data privacy bill is an initiative of Illinois
Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias, and he was on the House floor during the
debate.

The far-right ginned up social media opposition to the bill by
claiming that it would allow non-citizens to vote. More than 1,400 electronic
witness slips have so far been filed in opposition.

Groups like the Illinois Freedom Alliance and the Illinois
Conservative Union claimed on Facebook that the bill will “interfere with
verification of citizenship of voters.” The Illinois Family Institute went even
further in a recent email blast, claiming, “As it is written, this bill will
likely be used to allow non-citizens to vote in our elections.”

Accusations from the far-right that Democrats will use the votes
of undocumented residents to “steal” the 2024 election have gained significant
national traction over the past months. Usually, no evidence is presented, and
you can chalk up this latest freak out to yet another misunderstanding of the
basic lawmaking process.

The offending language is actually already in state statute, an
official with the secretary of state’s office explained during a House
Executive Committee hearing last week. The bill drafters simply “recodified”
it. A search of state statutes shows those claims to be accurate.

The official also said that the secretary of state voter
registration system “does prevent anybody that is not provided citizenship
information from being transmitted to register to vote.”

But the loud, conspiracy-minded opposition stampeded Republican
committee members away from the bill, and so it passed the committee on a
partisan roll call.

The ACLU of Illinois is also strongly opposed to the bill, but for
an entirely different reason.

The civil liberties group claims the measure “could be read as
permitting data-sharing with federal or out-of-state law enforcement who are
investigating or enforcing laws that criminalize abortion or gender-affirming
care in other jurisdictions.”

“We believe that the bill should be amended to be clear that
our data should not be used to identify people seeking, providing, or assisting
with reproductive or gender-affirming care – health care Illinois has made a
policy decision to protect,” The ACLU IL continued. “This could be
accomplished by enacting protections similar to last year’s automated license
plate reader bill.”

Secretary Giannoulias never convinced the group to drop its
opposition.

Rep. Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, a legislative leader on abortion
and trans rights, rose in debate to point out that, “Indiana law enforcement
could ask the secretary to provide information related to an Illinois license
plate on a car used in connection with an Indiana resident accessing abortion
care in Illinois.”

Cassidy also objected to the bill by noting that it does not have
the same standard language inserted “several times” in other bills to make it
“explicitly clear that the data would not be used to identify people seeking, providing
or assisting with lawful health care.” She also said she was “deeply concerned”
that the data could be sold, “given that that’s allowed as well.”

In a shocking defeat, the entire Republican caucus and three House
Democrats voted “No,” while numerous other Democrats skipped the vote. The bill
wound up with 57 votes, three shy of passage, as Secretary Giannoulias looked
on. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a legislative chamber reject a bill supported
by a statewide officeholder while that official was standing among the members.

The sponsor, Rep. Margaret Croke, D-Chicago, put it on what’s
called Postponed Consideration, meaning she could bring the bill up for a vote
again. Some House Democrats were legitimately absent, but this bill needs to be
retooled.

This article appears in Summerguide 2024.