BILL ANALYSIS
SB 888
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 888 (Dunn)
As Amended August 17, 2004
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :Vote not relevant
LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT 6-2 APPROPRIATIONS 11-4
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Koretz, Mullin, Chan, |Ayes:|Chu, Berg, Laird, |
| |Chu, Laird, Leno | |Corbett, Goldberg, Leno, |
| | | |Pavley, Ridley-Thomas, |
| | | |Wesson, Wiggins, Yee |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Shirley Horton, Houston |Nays:|Bates, Daucher, Haynes, |
| | | |Keene |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Prohibits the performance of any work involving
information that is essential to homeland security at a work
site outside of the United States (U.S.). Specifically, this
bill :
1) Prohibits any work involving information that is essential to
homeland security from being performed at a work site outside
of the U.S., unless the material or expertise necessary to
perform the work is unavailable in the U.S.
2) Defines "information essential to homeland security" as
either of the following:
a) Information necessary to enhance the capability of state
and local jurisdictions to prepare for and respond to
terrorist acts, including, but not limited to, acts of
terrorism involving weapons of mass destruction and
nuclear, radiological, incendiary, chemical, and explosive
devices; or,
b) Information relating to physical and information
infrastructures, including, but not limited to, the
telecommunications, energy, financial services, water, and
transportation sectors.
3) Requires the Office of Homeland Security to adopt regulations
SB 888
Page 2
necessary to implement these provisions.
EXISTING LAW , by executive order of the Governor, establishes
the Office of Homeland Security.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Committee on
Appropriations, the Department of General Services indicates
that state costs would exceed $150,000 and that, to the extent
this bill reduces the pool of eligible state contractors,
contract costs will increase. Moreover, state agencies would
incur costs to investigate whether existing and new state
contracts involve foreign contractors. With respect the most
recent amendment concerning the implementation of regulations,
the Assembly Committee on Appropriations anticipates potential
minor, absorbable costs to the Office of Homeland Security.
COMMENTS : According to the author's office, recent media
reports about sensitive and private information being offshored
raise serious concerns about how to best enforce our state's
privacy and security protections in today's global economy.
According to the author, since September 11, 2001, we have
become increasingly concerned with protecting our state from
terrorist attack. At a time when we are spending hundreds of
millions of federal and state dollars to protect our dams,
bridges, roadways and other infrastructure, it seems foolish to
be allowing engineering schematics relating to the state's
electricity grid to be worked on overseas. Recently, a
container exploded at the Port of Los Angeles after being
inspected at an offshore site. More and more, containers are
not being inspected for their contents once they enter a
California port. This puts the health and safety of port
workers as well as the public at large at risk.
Similarly, the California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO contends
that in these times where we experience the threat of terrorist
attacks, Californians should not have to compromise their
security simply because businesses are looking for a cheaper
bottom line.
The International Longshore and Warehouse Union, AFL-CIO (ILWU)
argues that prior to September 11, 2001, ILWU marine clerks
verified the manifest of cargo containers in California and
elsewhere on the West Coast. The clerks also inspected every
empty container that came to port. The ILWU contends that,
SB 888
Page 3
ironically, since September 11th this no longer happens with any
regularity. This bill will ensure that work related to homeland
security at our California ports will be performed in the U.S.
instead of a foreign country.
Opponents argue that the broadly worded language of this bill
will interfere with important and legitimate international trade
and commerce. Additionally, writing in opposition to an earlier
version of the bill (see discussion below), opponents argued
that the damage this bill will do to Californians attempting to
participate in the global economy outweighs any of the benefits
derived. For example, an individual wishing to purchase
property in another country would be required to individually
identify each piece of financial information to be sent out of
the United States. Medical providers could prohibit individuals
from seeking medical treatment in foreign countries due to the
administrative burden and enhanced liability for the provider.
(This opposition was received before the bill was amended to
contain only those provisions related to information essential
to homeland security).
Note: The provisions of this bill were originally contained in
SB 1492 (Dunn) of 2004, which, in addition to addressing issues
related to homeland security, also prohibited health care
businesses from transmitting individually identifiable health
information to a site outside of the United States. However, SB
1492 was amended to divide these provisions into two separate
bills. Therefore, SB 1492 currently contains only those
provisions related to medical privacy. The homeland security
provisions of SB 1492 were amended into this bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Ben Ebbink / L. & E. / (916) 319-2091
FN: 0007752