It. I said in the opening comments that the preemption should not have the unaintended consequence raised outside the bill. We would certainly be willing to make that plain. Miss moy, you said i thought i heard you say that we shouldnt have 50 different standards is not the answer. Is that what you said, or did i mishear your comments . So what i have said is i think the best for consumers would be to create a floor, not a ceiling so that states can continue so set a National Standard and then allow states to protect additional categories of information. So my understanding is 13 states have data breach standards like this. And ours would be better than all of them except maybe one which is massachusetts and ive been talking to my colleagues from massachusetts. Would you agree with that . I well so i think that oregon has a pretty good standard and i also think there are elements of other state laws that you might not consider specific day sta security laws. A pretty High Standard . It
Congresswoman maloney no. The standards have been flexible. I think congressman nugerbauer and congressman carnie have done a good job in doing the same thing in their bill, which is to say, were going to have standards and were going to allow them to be scaled. I think thats a good model. In other words theyve worked well and they wont be too burdensome for smaller institutions and retailers. Id also like to know your feelings about the having a minimum or a floor standard. I know that california oregon have a standard thats higher. I think its important you have to have a floor. Do you think it should be a floor or should it be a ceiling and why . Another great question. Right now we have nothing. Right. Something is better than nothing. Absolutely. And so floor would be progress, but ceiling, if its set high. We passed what we thought were nation leading standards and notification standards. You wouldnt want a bill that undercuts the 13 or so states that have done this. If youre goi
Standards. In setting minimum standards, we need to be careful not to hamstring our states and federal regulatorss ability to adapt and strengthen protections for consumers. Otherwise, well limit regulatorss ability to keep up with Technology Change and reserve a private right of action for consumers and for Financial Institutions to ensure that affected entities and breach victims have further recourse. Further, consumers must be consistently provided with clear disclosures of the rights and remedies available to them so they are aware of the various ways in which they can protect themselves from Identity Theft and fraud and other cyber crimes. Mr. Chairman efforts to guard against Cyber Threats are critically important and shouldnt deval of into the same partisan fault lines seen on far too many other issues before this committee such as the basis attacks on watchdogs like the cfpd and blocking efforts to reauthorize the charter of the import export bank that expires in 22 legislativ
Regulatorss ability to adapt and strengthen protections for consumers. Otherwise, well limit regulatorss ability to keep up with Technology Change and reserve a private right of action for consumers and for Financial Institutions to ensure that affected entities and breach victims have further recourse. Further, consumers must be consistently provided with clear disclosures of the rights and remedies available to them so they are aware of the various ways in which they can protect themselves from Identity Theft and fraud and other cyber crimes. Mr. Chairman efforts to guard against Cyber Threats are critically important and shouldnt deval of into the same partisan fault lines seen on far too many other issues before this committee such as the basis attacks on watchdogs like the cfpd and blocking efforts to reauthorize the charter of the import export bank that expires in 22 legislative days. With that, i look forward to hearing from the witnesses today, and i yield back the balance of
That as we have this longer term discussion of investment and structure that we do drn that everyone understands that the program, Aviation System and the Grant Program and aviation structure in the United States has always been about achieving twin objectives. First is to have an efficient system that serves the largest number of passengers and second is too provide a level of access to communities throughout the country. And in previous reauthorizations that has always been matter of great debate as you well know between members of congress about how to achieve that balance. That challenge and issue does not go away under any structure, nor does any structure alone deal with what those issues are. What youre raising is a important Public Policy request, where are we going with respect to ensuring a modernization of that system, while at the same time ensuring some level of access. And that debate i think is let me give i was part of building a Great Technology company in montana and