Washington Business Fall 2016 | Legislative Review | Page 16

2016 legislative review

Rep. Matt Manweller, R-Ellensburg (speaking), is the ranking Republican on the House Labor & Workplace Standards Committee. Rep. Mike Sells, D-Everett,
(center) is chair of the committee. Other members (from left): Rep. Norma Smith, R-Clinton; Rep. Gina McCabe, R-Goldendale; and Rep. Mia Gregerson, D-SeaTac.

SB 6579

industrial insurance
privatization
Failed/AWB Supported

Senate Bill 6579, introduced by Sen. Michael
Baumgartner, R- Spokane, would have
created a task force to propose legislation
that would privatize the industrial insurance
system. While it did not move out of the
Senate, AWB testified in support of the
bill because we believe it is important to
continue to look for opportunities to address
the unreasonable costs of the state’s workers’
compensation system.

additional bill
2ESHB 1094

biometric identifiers
Failed/AWB Opposed

Second Engrossed Substitute House Bill
1094, a carryover from the 2015 session, was
sponsored by Rep. Jeff Morris, D-Mount
Vernon. The bill would have prohibited
a person from enrolling an individual’s
“biometric identifier” for a commercial

14 association of washington business

purpose without obtaining affirmative
consent from the individual. It also would
have restricted the sale, lease, or other
disclosure of an enrolled biometric identifier
to a third party and would have attempted to
establish standards for storage and retention
of enrolled biometric identifiers. It further
would have provided for the enforcement of
material violations by the attorney general
under the Consumer Protection Act as well
as create a private cause of action. The bill
passed the House on a vote of 87-10. It failed
to move in the Senate.
The business community was united
in its opposition to the bill. From the
beginning it was clear that the definition
of “biometric identifier” was not clear.
It created a system so convoluted that
businesses would find it nearly impossible
to comply. Any new innovation would have
been required to put in multiple affirmative
consent provisions that individuals would
never use the product or system. The
collection of biometric data is meant to
make the consumers’ experience better
and more efficient. Consumers demand that
businesses constantly improve their product

or system. This requires a constant push to
innovate an item or feature of a particular
product. This law would have required a
form of affirmative consent with each use,
not just at the time of purchase, to use it.
The process would have been cumbersome
and would have resulted in the product
failure. The law also, in its early stages,
would have limited the use of a biometric
identifier by law enforcement. Consent
from a criminal would have been required
before the criminal’s biometric data could
be released. This is just one example of how
the bill failed to look at all the ramifications
of a law without fully vetting the draft.
After multiple meetings with the prime
sponsor it became clear that the agenda was
to pass any bill with no sense of how it might
impact business across multiple industries.
While there is a legitimate need for privacy,
this bill would not have addressed that
issue. Instead, it would have punished
innovation without going after those who
actually misused the information. AWB
will continue to work with the sponsor of
the bill to try to find a common ground to
address the privacy concerns.