Haven't heard of
ChoicePoint? My friend, where have you been? Here's the
down and dirty version from Greg Palast for the uninitiated:
Early in the year, the company, ChoicePoint, gave Florida officials a list with the names of 8,000 ex-felons to "scrub" from their list of voters.
But it turns out none on the list were guilty of felonies, only misdemeanors. The company acknowledged the error, and blamed it on the original source of the list -- the state of Texas.
Ah yes, now you remember. dKospedia also has an
excellent entry on the company. But what does this have to do with 2005?
You'd think they would have gotten their act together after all the 'scrutiny' they've faced in the past few years, but no. From the
AJC (
login):
Criminals posing as legitimate businesses have accessed critical personal data stored by Atlanta-based ChoicePoint, which
maintains databases of background information on virtually every U.S. citizen, according to a report on MSNBC.com.
The incident involves a wide swath of consumer data, the web site reported, including names, addresses, Social Security numbers, credit reports and other information. ChoicePoint aggregates and sells such personal information to government agencies and private companies.
Of course, what the AJC article doesn't tell you is something I found on
CNN of all places:
In California, the only state that requires companies to disclose security breaches, ChoicePoint sent warning letters to 30,000 to 35,000 consumers advising them to check their credit reports.
Why am I not surprised that it's California. Damn you birth state for making the rest of us look bad.
"This calls into question whether these data products actually make us more secure," he said. "This is a prime example of how they don't and why ChoicePoint should be subject to federal privacy regulations," he said.
In several recent filings with the Federal Trade Commission, Hoofnagle has argued ChoicePoint should be subject to a law that allows consumers to view their credit reports and see who else is accessing them.
The Hoof, as usual, makes an excellent point.
Why does ChoicePoint get off the hook with regards to open access laws? Wait, don't answer that.
Privacy concerns with regards to personal information should be part of the new Democratic agenda. If we can't pass a law similar to California's nationwide, then we can certainly do so on a state-by-state basis with a little progressive federalism.