On the recordJune 21, 2023
Just a few specific responses. First of all, this bill is very specific. It addresses health and location data, and, as I noted before, I continue to believe that we need Federal privacy legislation, in general, to address other privacy needs. But this bill is targeted at sensitive health data when it comes to location. And I know it was the conservative members of the Supreme Court who actually issued the broad decision to overturn half a century of precedent on a woman's right to make her own healthcare decisions. And this bill is a targeted response on one issue, and that is to set commonsense limits on how companies can use people's personal data. I just also wanted to respond to the issue of mifepristone, which was temporarily thrown out by one judge in the State of Texas, and that is now pending before several different courts. A different decision was made in another court, in Washington State. But I will note that the statute referred to, which would somehow limit this drug that was approved by the FDA decades ago and has been found safe in dozens and dozens of countries across the globe--that law that was referred to was actually enacted, the Comstock Act in 1873--1873--when they treated pneumonia with bloodletting, when the Pony Express existed, and, which I know, is 10 years before they even did the ``Yellowstone'' prequel. So if my colleagues want to move backward to that time period, those are the laws they are citing.…





