Senate Floor Amendment 2 made substantial changes to the bill and removed a great deal of opposition. The Chamber has been opposed because the original draft impacted membership in the delivery space. One out- standing concern was not addressed in Amendment 2 or in Amendment 3, so the Chamber remains opposed. To his credit, Senator Aquino worked collaboratively with stakeholders across the spectrum for a great deal of time and then moved very quickly. He managed to get the amendment filed on Tuesday, May 6th, and had it through committee on the morning of May 8th and off the Senate Floor later that afternoon. It received a nearly unanimous vote on the Floor. The Chamber met with the House Sponsor, Leader Bob Morgan, to alleviate member concerns before and after it was heard in the House Consumer Protection Committee, where it passed unanimously. Concerns raised by the Attorney General’s office prevented SB1486 from getting a vote on the House Floor. Leader Morgan informed the Chamber that he plans to work on the bill over the summer to address issues raised by the AG. The Chamber will remain involved with the sponsors to attempt to work out necessary changes on behalf of the affected Chamber members. HB 3494 (Williams, Ann/Villanueva) Healthcare Data Privacy HB3494 seeks to protect consumers from having information regarding their healthcare situations and/or choices from being sold or transferred without their consent. In order to achieve that goal, the initial language reached into places beyond purchase data to create those protections. This bill creates a strict set of protections around health-related data, and it includes a private right of action based on $1000/violation or actual damages, whichever is greater, along with enforcement from the Attorney General. After several lengthy discussions and good-faith efforts to provide alternative language, there was still gener- al disagreement over the definition of health data, which is at the crux of the bill. During a scheduled stakeholder discussion in early May, the bill sponsors announced that they will not be moving healthcare data privacy legislation this spring. With just a few short weeks before the May 31st dead- line, it was determined that more time would be needed. Instead, a subset of stakeholders will meet through- out the summer to work through several challenging issues regarding definitions, scope, and enforcement. The Illinois Chamber appreciates the sponsors’ approach as this issue deserves a deeper dive in order to get to a better legislative product. As progress unfolds, expect to see requests for feedback throughout the process. Naturally, the Chamber has extended its willingness to be included in those meetings over the summer re- garding health data privacy and how Other Legislation HB 3712 (Williams, A) Geo-Location- Opposed This bill has been filed in the past by Leader Williams to require additional consent for users to have their geo- graphic locations tracked by apps and platforms. This bill was passed out of House Judiciary – Civil Committee but did not get called on the Floor. HB 3021 (Rashid) Consumer Fraud – AI Deception - Opposed HB3021 attempts to clarify if a user is interacting with a human being or an AI-based chatbot. The bill passed the House Consumer Protection Committee on partisan votes. However, the sponsor was asked to bring an amendment, which is not unusual, except that the vote on the amendment received a Present vote from the Chair of the committee because the amendment didn’t address all the concerns raised during the bill’s initial presentation. The bill did not get called on the House Floor. HB 3567 (Briel) AI Meaningful Human Review The bill sponsor presented HB3567, which is a result of recommendations from the AI Task Force. The bill’s requirement for human oversight of decisions generated by AI processes within all state agency processes 29 | END OF SESSION REPORT
View this content as a flipbook by clicking here.