Lobbyists: The Key to Passing Privacy Legislation in the United States?

In today’s rapidly evolving digital landscape, the protection of consumer data has become an increasingly pressing issue. From the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) to California’s Consumer Privacy Act, governments worldwide are enacting laws to safeguard individuals’ personal information. However, the United States lacks a comprehensive federal privacy law, leaving individual states to develop their own regulations. The challenge, however, lies in the opposition these laws face from a powerful network of lobbyists who represent major tech companies and other industries. These lobbyists play a crucial role in shaping the privacy legislation that governs Americans’ data. 

Lobbyists, like Andrew Kingman and his associates, have been highly influential in determining how privacy laws are passed across the country. Working in the shadows, their efforts have been instrumental in blocking or weakening bills that would otherwise impose stricter regulations on businesses collecting and using personal data. Their role is not merely incidental; lobbyists have become central to the negotiation, modification, and even suppression of privacy laws across multiple states. 

The Influence of Lobbyists in Privacy Legislation 

One of the most prominent figures in lobbying against strict privacy laws is Andrew Kingman, counsel for the State Privacy and Security Coalition (SPSC). Representing major corporations like Amazon, Meta, and Google, Kingman has played a key role in shaping data privacy legislation at the state level. Instead of fighting legislation outright, Kingman and others use a more nuanced approach by offering to “help” craft laws that are more favorable to businesses. 

Kingman’s tactics include: 

• Coordinating with local business groups: In Vermont, Kingman organized local businesses to oppose a stringent privacy bill by creating messaging strategies that aligned with business concerns. 

• Preemptive negotiations with lawmakers: By meeting with lawmakers before bills are introduced, Kingman helps shape privacy laws from the start, ensuring that they are business-friendly. 

• Influencing legislation through amendments: By proposing and pushing for certain amendments, lobbyists often water down privacy bills to the point where they become ineffective. 

This strategy has proven effective in preventing California-style privacy laws, which offer strong consumer protections, from being adopted by other states. Instead, states like Connecticut have adopted more business-friendly versions of these laws, thanks in large part to lobbying efforts led by Kingman.  

The Industry’s Playbook: How Lobbyists Block Privacy Laws 

While Kingman’s work is a prime example, it’s important to understand the broader strategies used by industry lobbyists to block or weaken privacy legislation. From Maine to Oklahoma, lawmakers report facing similar opposition from a coordinated network of lobbyists representing tech giants and other business interests. A few key tactics stand out: 

• Flooding the legislative process with amendments: Lawmakers in Maine and Maryland reported receiving hundreds of amendments from various groups, all of which had overlapping members from the tech industry. This “death by a thousand cuts” approach is designed to bog down the legislative process, making it harder for privacy bills to pass in their original, stronger forms. 

• Hiring large numbers of lobbyists: In Oklahoma, a single tech company reportedly hired 30 lobbyists to stop a privacy bill. The sheer number of lobbyists overwhelms state lawmakers, many of whom lack the resources to fight back. 

• Exaggerating the impact on small businesses: Lobbyists often argue that privacy regulations will disproportionately harm small businesses. However, many state privacy bills include thresholds that would exempt most small businesses from compliance. Despite this, lobbyists continue to push this narrative, swaying lawmakers who may not fully understand the scope of the legislation. 

• Using influential local employers: In Maine, L.L. Bean, a significant employer in the state, lobbied against privacy legislation. By aligning with well-known local businesses, lobbyists make their opposition appear more community-based, even though the primary benefactors are large corporations. 

These tactics are part of a well-coordinated playbook designed to either stop privacy bills altogether or weaken them to the point where they are ineffective. Despite broad bipartisan support for privacy protections, these lobbying efforts have been highly successful in many states. 

The Role of State Lawmakers 

Although lobbyists wield significant power, state lawmakers are not without agency. In states like Maryland and Montana, lawmakers have successfully pushed back against industry opposition to pass stronger privacy laws. These efforts highlight the importance of persistence and strategy in overcoming the influence of lobbyists.  

Key strategies used by state lawmakers include: 

• Building bipartisan support: Privacy legislation is one of the few areas where Republicans and Democrats find common ground. By emphasizing the non-partisan nature of data privacy, lawmakers can build broader coalitions to support their bills. 

• Coordinating with other states: Lawmakers are beginning to share notes and strategies across state lines. Given that industry lobbyists use similar tactics in every state, coordination between lawmakers can help counter these efforts. Vermont State Representative Monique Priestley noted that the similarities in lobbying tactics across states suggest a coordinated effort from the industry. 

• Engaging with the public: Lawmakers like Collin Walke from Oklahoma have suggested public awareness campaigns to put pressure on legislators who are holding up privacy bills due to lobbying. Public opinion is overwhelmingly in favor of stronger privacy protections, and engaging voters directly could help overcome the influence of industry lobbyists. 

The Future of Privacy Legislation in the U.S. 

With the continued gridlock in Washington, states will remain the primary battleground for privacy legislation. However, the fragmented nature of state laws makes it difficult to establish a uniform standard, which is why many privacy advocates are pushing for federal legislation. The American Privacy Rights Act of 2024 (APRA) represents a potential breakthrough, but it too faces stiff opposition from industry lobbyists. 

For now, the future of privacy legislation in the U.S. will be determined by the ongoing tug-of-war between lawmakers and lobbyists. While states like California and Vermont push for stronger protections, the business-friendly laws passed in places like Connecticut and Montana show how effective lobbying efforts can be. Until a comprehensive federal law is passed, lobbyists will continue to shape the privacy landscape, one state at a time. 

Lobbyists: Quiet, Yet Powerful 

Lobbyists have become central players in the fight over data privacy legislation in the U.S., wielding significant influence over how state laws are written, amended, and passed. Figures like Andrew Kingman exemplify the quiet yet powerful role lobbyists play in this process, using a combination of negotiation, local influence, and coordinated messaging to shape the privacy landscape. While some lawmakers are successfully pushing back against industry opposition, the future of privacy legislation in the U.S. remains uncertain. Until stronger federal laws are enacted, the battle for privacy rights will continue to be fought at the state level, with lobbyists playing a key role in determining the outcome.