CDT Opposes Two Bills, H.R. 8312 and H.R. 8464, That Threaten Personal Privacy from the Federal Government
On April 29, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform advanced two bills, H.R. 8312 and H.R. 8464, that would dramatically expand the federal government’s efforts to consolidate sensitive information held by federal agencies, threatening the privacy of Americans across the country. While these bills’ overall goal of preventing fraud in federal programs is critical for maintaining program integrity and protecting tax dollars, these bills adopt an approach that would dramatically consolidate personal information and sacrifice privacy without evidence that they will achieve their stated goals. Several lawmakers and civil society organizations have raised concerns about the potential impacts of these bills, and CDT joins them in opposition.
CDT’s recent polling confirms that bipartisan majorities of the American public are acutely concerned about the privacy and security risks to personal data held by government agencies and want Congress to take action to increase, rather than erode, protections for such information. Three in four Americans are concerned about the privacy and security of the personal data that government agencies collect and store about them. Without robust protections, personal data held by the federal government is vulnerable to data breaches, misuse, and surveillance. As a result of these concerns, 79 percent of Americans agree that Congress should use its authority to hold government agencies accountable when they ignore privacy laws that protect personal data.
These two bills, however, run counter to public opinion and threaten the privacy and security of personal data held across the federal government.
H.R. 8312, the Fraud Prevention and Accountability Act, would expand the Department of Treasury’s Do Not Pay database, a system intended to help agencies address fraud and improper payments through identity and eligibility verification, to include significantly greater amounts of sensitive information from agencies across the federal government, functionally creating a master database on all Americans. All agencies would subsequently be required to screen all prospective awardees or payees against the information held in such a database.
H.R. 8464, the Stopping Fraudulent Payments Act, would provide the Department of Treasury with the authority to pause any payment by a federal agency if the Department suspects an elevated risk of potential fraud based on a “fraud risk indicator,” which the bill defines so broadly that it includes a wide range of data points and analytics that could indicate potential fraud. This loosely defined “fraud risk indicator” would mark a significant departure from the current operation of the Do Not Pay database which currently serves to verify eligibility rather than to make potential fraud predications. This creates a significant risk of the Department continuing the trend of withholding appropriated funds by misusing sensitive information to apply subjective view-point based criteria for denying payments, similar to how this Administration has weaponized its authority to withhold payments to states like California.
Taken together, these two bills would significantly weaken privacy protections for Americans’ data collected and stored by federal agencies. For these reasons, the Center for Democracy & Technology opposes these proposals and broader ongoing efforts to consolidate and repurpose sensitive personal information across government.
The Privacy Paradox: How Government Data Has Become Less Private and Less Useful
Providing ready access to information collected and maintained by the government promotes accountability, innovation, and research, making transparency a core responsibility of serving as a steward of the public’s data. Public agencies must also safeguard sensitive information when making data publicly available.
Defending State Data: Lessons from California v. USDA
As the federal government increasingly seeks access to state administrative data, policymakers should consider not only legal authority and privacy implications, but also the practical effects on public confidence, program effectiveness, and states’ ability to fulfill their obligations to residents.
CDT, EFF, EPIC, and Upturn Submit Comments on GSA’s Updated Draft AI Terms and Conditions for Federal Contracts
Today, the Center for Democracy & Technology and allies submitted comments to the General Services Administration (GSA) in response to the request for comment regarding their updated draft AI Terms and Conditions for federal solicitations and contracts.
Bias at Scale: Understanding AI’s Impact on Student Achievement and Opportunity Gaps
Schools have an opportunity and responsibility to ensure that new technologies support, rather than undermine, their longstanding goal of expanding opportunity.