July 24, 2006 – The Financial Data Protection Act, HR 3997, is a bill that’s very name is a lie. Although some of the most egregious provisions of the bill have been pulled over the course of the past week, its passage would still harm consumers in at least 34 states, over the objections of the vast majority of States Attorney General and virtually every consumer group in the country. And if you want to know why Congress would consider legislation that is so clearly opposed by their constituents, you need look no further than campaign contributions. Two of the bill’s four co-sponsors are on the financial services industries "top 10 list" for campaign donations.

The Bible says you can’t serve God and mammon. In terms of Congress, the phrase may be restated by saying "you can’t serve the American people when you accept industry specific campaign contributions". But the snow-job that some in Congress would like you to believe is that the money they receive wouldn’t possibly cause them to vote for bills that are not in your best interest.

Rep. Michael Castle (R-DE), one of the bill’s co-sponsors, has accepted more than $116,000 in financial services industry donations. Dennis Moore (D-KS) has accepted more than $67,000. Although she is not on the so called top ten list, Deborah Price (R-OH), another of the bills co-sponsors has received $22,500 in campaign contributions from the industry.

In all, the financial services industry has given more that $12.5 million in campaign contributions over the past two years, and last year alone they spent more than $30 million on lobbying efforts.

All of that money has allowed the industry to move its agenda forward. One of the primary goals of the industry’s agenda is to replace strong state regulations on data breach notification with weak federal standards. Another goal is to limit the ability of consumers to freeze their credit file; locking out unwanted inquiries and stopping identity theives in their tracks.

Both of these goals were originally addressed in HR 3997; a bill that was largely written by the financial services industry.

As it was originally written, the bill would have limited the ability of consumers to freeze their credit files to those who had already become victims of identity theft. It would also have allowed companies that store consumer data to choose whether or not to notify consumers when files were accessed without authorization.

Last minute changes to the bill have eliminated the most egregious provision; limiting credit freezes. But the bill continues to move forward with language that allows companies to decide whether or not they should notify you when your personal data is lost or stolen. The bill would usurp stronger state laws in 34 states.

ACCESS is urging its readers to get involved and tell Congress that you don’t want them to weaken your consumer rights. Tell your congressional representatives to vote "no" on HR 3997.

To find out who your representatives are, fill in the form below. You will be given both phone and fax numbers. Then simply call your representatives office and express your opinion on the bill. If enough people call, they will listen.