Introduced
by
To clarify in a state identity theft protection law which entities are covered by the data breach response activities proposed by House Bill 4187.
Referred to the Committee on Financial Services
Reported without amendment
Refer to to the Committee on Ways and Means.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means
Reported without amendment
Without amendment and with the recommendation that the bill pass.
Substitute offered
by
To replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises details but does not change the substance as previously described.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Substitute offered
by
The substitute passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To expand the requirements to notify the state on certain data breaches.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To revise details of the proposed fines.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To give the state Attorney General additional powers the area of data breach disclosure requirements, and increase the proposed penalties.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Passed in the House 99 to 10 (details)
Referred to the Committee on Regulatory Reform
Reported without amendment
With the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Amendment offered
To clarify a provision that excludes from the effect of this proposed law businesses that are already subject to a state "Data Breach Notification Act".
The amendment passed by voice vote
Passed in the Senate 38 to 0 (details)
To clarify in a state identity theft protection law which entities are covered by the data breach response activities proposed by House Bill 4187.
Passed in the House 92 to 16 (details)
To concur with the Senate-passed version of the bill.
