Proposition 24, also known as the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020, aims to expand consumer privacy and build on the 2018 California Consumer Privacy Act.
The proposition states that the 2018 privacy act allows consumers to request personal data that businesses have collected, ask the businesses delete that information if desired and to stop companies from targeting them with advertisements while surfing different websites.
Personal data includes a consumer’s race, ethnicity, religion, health information and
geological location.
Proposition 24 would give consumers the right to limit a business’s ability to use and share their personal information, correct it if it is inaccurate and restrict the amount of time a company can have that data for, according to a 2020 California government text of proposed laws.
Moreover, the act would increase the fines on businesses that commit privacy violations against children under the age of 16 and would apply to companies that collect personal information
on 100,000 consumers, a 50% from the 2018 privacy act. It would also establish a privacy protection agency that will cost Californians about $10 million annually.
Consumer Watchdog President Jamie Court said that he hopes the proposition will help consumers to let businesses know, if they allow the use or sale of their information via a button on the companies’s home page or browser.
Consumer Watchdog is a non-profit organization that advocates for consumers’ interests like privacy, insurance, health and political advocacy.
“Companies can try to dissuade you from opting out . . . by charging you a little more for that service if there’s a relationship to the cost of your data,” Court said.
AT&T Inc. discontinued providing personal data privacy protection for its customers in late September after the company was criticized for charging $29 for the service, according to a Sept. 30 PR News article.
Court said charging consumers for privacy is allowed under the 2018 privacy act. But Proposition 24 states that if a company chooses not to display the “do not share or sell” button on their website or app, and instead just electronically accepts the “do not share” button signal, that the company can charge you more for your privacy.
“[Businesses] can pay you more for your privacy if it only does that. And we’re hoping that that’s the way it’s going to be, that companies will accept those electronic signals,” Court said.
This means that companies can charge you extra for protecting your sensitive data.
Richard Holober, Consumer Federation of California president, said that is one of the reasons why he doesn’t agree with the proposition. It would allow for the right to pay for privacy, which he feels is unfair to people who are unable to afford the extra cost of keeping their information confidential.
“[Privacy] should not be the preserve of the wealthy,” he said. “Prop. 24 will result in the electronic version of . . . express lanes for the wealthy and traffic jams for the rest of us.”
Holober doesn’t believe Californians should vote yes on Proposition 24 because it would be enacted as it is currently written and provide no room for workability, given that a ballot initiative would need the approval of voters to appeal if enacted.
“You know, a ballot measure, you vote up or you vote down,” he said. “You can’t just pick the parts you like, exactly.”
