HOUSE COMMITTEE ON
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY
February 15, 2005 Hearing Room 357
1:00 P.M. Tapes 17 - 18
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rep. John Dallum, Chair
Rep. Jerry Krummel, Vice-Chair
Rep. Kelley Wirth, Vice-Chair
Rep. Chuck Burley
Rep. Brad Witt
STAFF PRESENT: Dallas Weyand, Committee Administrator
Louann Rahmig, Committee Assistant
MEASURES/ISSUES HEARD:
HB 2179 - Public Hearing
HB 2302 - Public Hearing
These minutes are in compliance with Senate and House Rules. Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact words. For complete contents, please refer to the tapes.
TAPE/# |
Speaker |
Comments |
TAPE 17, A |
||
003 |
Chair Dallum |
Calls the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. and opens a public hearing on HB 2179, which allows the Director of Consumer and Business Services to establish alternative regulatory options for the purpose of encouraging emerging technologies. |
HB 2179 – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
011 |
Patrick Allen |
Manager, Office of Regulatory Streamlining, DCBS. Explains that HB 2179 is one of several bills on regulatory streamlining this session. States that HB 2179 provides Building Codes Division with the ability to deal with emerging building technologies and materials. Suggests referring HB 2179 to the Business Committee. |
029 |
Chair Dallum |
Advises that the plan is to refer HB 2179 in the work session. |
034 |
Rep. Witt |
Asks for examples of what is being considered. |
036 |
Mark Long |
Administrator, Building Codes Division (BCD), DCBS. Testifies and submits written testimony in support of HB 2179 (EXHIBIT A). Provides BCD Fast Facts describing the division’s mission (EXHIBIT B). Advises that HB 2179 provides an expedited process to recognize certain high technology equipment that is not covered in the code. |
055 |
Rep. Krummel |
Asks for an example of a piece of equipment that needed to be regulated for which legislative authority had to be granted. |
062 |
Long |
Responds with explanation of equipment in the high technology sector, that is built overseas and has a particular function in a manufacturing setting. Cites examples of national and international standards not recognized by Oregon’s codes. |
096 |
Rep. Krummel |
Asks why we would regulate high technology equipment. |
100 |
Long |
Replies that it is regulated because the codes suggest it, or it is unclear if it should be regulated. |
116 |
Rep. Krummel |
Asks there are statutes and administrative rules that require regulation of things that should not be regulated. |
137 |
Long |
Explains that statutes and rules are developed from a particular set of circumstances at a particular time. States that products are changing faster than our regulations. Expresses a need to be proactive and a concern about attracting innovation to Oregon. |
160 |
Rep. Krummel |
Inquires if this will become part of the division’s performance measures. |
166 |
Long |
Responds, not at this time. |
173 |
Allen |
Adds that there is no frame of reference at this time to create a performance measure. |
183 |
Long |
Points out that there is a performance measure on the alternative and flexible permit approach. |
194 |
Rep. Krummel |
Comments that Oregon tends to over-regulate. |
202 |
Chair Dallum |
Closes the public hearing on HB 2179 and opens a public hearing on HB 2302, which prohibits a person from installing or causing installation of spyware on a computer. |
HB 2302 – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
227 |
Jim Craven |
Oregon Council of the American Electronics Association. Testifies and submits written testimony in opposition to HB 2302 (exhibit c). Discusses “spyware,” which is one contemporary threat to the Internet, and “spam,” viruses, worms and “phishing.” |
290 |
Craven |
Continues by explaining “spyware,” which is installed without a user’s informed consent. |
313 |
Craven |
Describes indicators that a computer may be infected with “spyware.” Points out that not all computer problems are caused by “spyware.” |
334 |
Craven |
Refers to Exhibit C, Page 4 that offers suggestions to safeguard a computer system. |
370 |
Craven |
Continues describing anti-virus programs and firewalls. |
TAPE 18, A |
||
010 |
Craven |
Refers to various state laws passed in 2004. Believes that a uniform federal law is better than individual state laws. |
040 |
Rep. Burley |
Agrees that there is a very serious problem and that federal regulations are preferable. |
049 |
Craven |
Indicates that Sen. Wyden was the key person on the federal “spam” bill so would be receptive to input from the state. |
057 |
Jim Gardner |
Microsoft. Testifies in opposition to HB 2302. Refers to a study by America On Line and the National Cyber Security Alliance, which revealed that approximately 80 percent of all Internet users have some form of “spyware” on their machines. |
090 |
Gardner |
Describes downloadable anti-spyware programs and a voluntary network of users who uncover new threats quickly. |
124 |
Rep. Wirth |
Asks what can be done about involuntary e-mail. |
140 |
Gardner |
Replies that some software tracks keystrokes, including credit card information from Internet orders. |
145 |
Rep. Wirth |
Asks about information tracked through “spyware.” |
148 |
Gardner |
Responds, yes, there have been instances of identity theft. |
150 |
Craven |
Adds that some pop-up ads are annoying but not meant to damage the computer. |
183 |
Craven |
Continues that some “phishing” lasts only 24 hours so prosecution is difficult. |
193 |
Chair Dallum |
Closes the public hearing on HB 2302. |
196 |
Dallas Weyand |
Committee Administrator. Announces that the work session on HB 2179 will be February 22. Discusses the field trip scheduled for February 17. |
209 |
Chair Dallum |
Adjourns the meeting at 1:44 p.m. |
EXHIBIT SUMMARY