Theo Wells-Spackman is a Report for America corps member who reports for VTDigger.
“For me, data privacy is about risk,” Wendy Peterson, a Vermont resident and software engineer, told the House Commerce and Economic Development Committee on Friday morning. As a transgender woman, she said, federal policy has increasingly threatened her personal freedoms in recent years.
“It’s about whether someone can build a profile of my life,” Peterson said, “where I go, what care I seek — without my knowledge or consent.”
Lawmakers took testimony Friday on S.71, a relatively comprehensive data privacy bill that seeks to strengthen Vermonters’ control of where their information goes online. Having dedicated much of his committee’s time this week to the issue, chair Rep. Michael Marcotte, R-Coventry, said this bill will be a central focus for him as the session approaches its end. Lawmakers have also launched several related efforts this year, targeting areas of privacy policy like genetic data protections, though none of these bills has yet become law.
The most recent draft of S.71, which was under discussion in the committee this week, would guarantee consumers the right to access, correct and delete their data within the records of some organizations that store it. It would also impose a number of restrictions on what entities can do with such data, and only allow them to collect as much information as strictly necessary under certain rules, particularly in relation to “sensitive” data like government-issued identification numbers, medical information or sexual orientation.
Marcotte said that in the absence of granting individuals the right to sue companies that illegally use their data — a provision that was in play last session — he thinks robust protections are crucial to sufficiently shield Vermonters from the harm that improper data use could cause.
Several lobbyists expressed concern with the new draft of the bill Friday, saying that the less restrictive and more narrowly targeted Senate version is a better starting point for discussion. Jessa Barnard, who leads the Vermont Medical Society and who spoke for nearly a dozen professional medical associations and organizations across the state, said the bill would create confusion, cost and additional burdens for providers who are already subject to rigorous privacy rules under the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, known as HIPAA.
More than 100 Vermont businesses and professional associations also criticized the bill in an open letter to officials Thursday, in which they said the current version went “beyond regional norms” and would “unreasonably limit e-commerce” in the state.
“I think that carries a lot of weight with the governor,” Marcotte said of the letter in an interview, “as it does with us.”
The governor’s pen may be a real barrier for lawmakers championing stricter regulation for companies handling personal data. In 2024, Scott vetoed a broad effort at increasing privacy protections, citing concerns over state regulations harming the competitiveness of Vermont businesses.
Rep. Edye Graning, D-Jericho, the vice chair of the House Commerce and Economic Development Committee, said in an interview that she and her colleagues were focused on striking an appropriate balance between interests, despite what she called “significant misinformation” in some dialogue surrounding the bill.
“All we have time for is to put a bill together that makes sense for Vermonters and Vermont businesses, and that the governor can get behind,” she said.
In the know
Around the time Final Reading was hitting your inboxes yesterday, lawmakers on the House Health Care Committee were wrapping up a nearly two-hour public hearing about access to primary care. The testimony centered on S.197, a bill that aims to create payments for primary care providers throughout the state, so that patients can access the preventative care more readily.
On Friday, the committee began its discussion and revision of the bill, which it received after passage in the Senate earlier this spring.
“I’m excited that you’re the last people we’re going to hear, grounding us in why we’re here, what we’re trying to accomplish and to make sure that your voice is heard in this process,” Rep. Alyssa Black, D-Essex Town, told the testifying public Thursday evening.
Forty people spoke, including former governor Howard Dean and candidate for lieutenant governor Molly Gray.
Nearly everyone who testified voiced support for S.197, and many urged representatives to use the bill as an onramp to universal healthcare — suggesting, for instance, that the bill include a study to outline a path toward a universal program.
Many spoke about the value of preventive care, and how more and more often, people forgo or delay care because it is too expensive.
Dr. Anna Carey, a family medicine physician in Cambridge, for instance shared a story about an uninsured 30-year-old patient who sliced his finger on a wire fence and sewed the wound with dental floss. He showed up at her office four days later, scared and swollen. Carey was able to clean the wound, provide antibiotics and advise frequent bandage changes, which she said saved the thumb and his hand — but the injury did not need to progress as far as it had.
Many others spoke about how the loss of Affordable Care Act subsidies made their insurance plans so expensive that they could not afford to even seek preventive care at all.
Arica Bronz, a self-employed Winooski resident who testified, said she and her family had “fundamentally lost access to primary care” with the loss of the subsidies, despite paying $13,200 a year in insurance premiums. Her deductible is $21,500.
“How bad does a symptom need to get in order for us to overcome the financial barrier to receive care?” she asked. “We are struggling just to pay our premium. We are avoiding going to the doctor for any reason.”
— Olivia Gieger
Data centers, with the proper guidelines, can have a positive impact for ratepayers on Vermont’s electric grid, said Jigar Shah, the former director of the U.S. Department of Energy loan program, to the Senate Natural Resources and Energy Committee on Friday.
His testimony came as lawmakers are considering a bill, H.727, which creates regulations for data centers that are designed to ensure environmental protections and positive outcomes for ratepayers in Vermont.
Setting parameters for data centers wouldn’t deter the centers from moving to Vermont, Shah said, rather it would let companies know that if they operate within certain limits, they’re welcome in the state.
Following state guidelines would likely only cost companies a small percentage of what a data center makes, Shah said. “This isn’t breaking the bank for them,” he said.
Among a list of recommendations he gave the committee, Shah said legislators could protect Vermont ratepayers by requiring data centers to cut their energy usage if a generator or a distribution line goes down. The data center would be the first thing on the grid to get cut, which would spare ratepayers any expense, he said.
Shah also recommended requiring data centers to cut any nonessential sources of energy if the grid is stressed due to extreme weather or demand spikes.
— Charlotte Oliver
