Chairman Goodlatte Opening Statement at Markup of H.R. 699, the "Email Privacy Act"

Chairman Goodlatte: Today, this Committee has an opportunity to lead in reforming and modernizing the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, or “ECPA.”  When ECPA was first enacted nearly 30 years ago, Congress declared that the law’s purpose was to achieve a “fair balance between the privacy expectations of American citizens and the legitimate needs of law enforcement agencies.”  Reforming this decades-old, outdated law has been a priority for me as chairman of this committee, and I have been working with members of Congress, advocacy groups, and law enforcement agencies for years on many complicated nuances involved in updating this law. While technology has undoubtedly outpaced the law in the last three decades, the purpose of the law remains steadfast. I am confident that we can again strike that balance, and do so in a way that continues to promote the development and use of new technologies and services and create a statutory framework that will modernize the law to reflect how people communicate with one another today and into the future. ECPA reform has broad-sweeping implications.  ECPA, and more specifically the Stored Communications Act, governs federal, state, and local government access to stored email, account records, and subscriber information from telephone, email and other service providers. H.R. 699, at its core, establishes for the first time in federal statute a uniform warrant requirement for stored communication content in criminal investigations, regardless of the type of service provider, the age of an email, or whether the email has been opened.  The core of H.R. 699 is a significant reform and should not be dismissed at trifle.  It establishes a standard that embodies the principles of the Fourth Amendment and reaffirms our commitment to protecting the privacy interests of the American people. But H.R. 699 goes beyond the creation of a uniform warrant standard in criminal investigations.  It dramatically expands the reach of the warrant requirement and imposes new requirements on law enforcement that could impede criminal investigations and threaten public safety.  And despite the number of House cosponsors, the bill as introduced is opposed by virtually every law enforcement and prosecutorial association in the country. The Stored Communications Act is as complex as it is outdated.  The Committee has worked for months with members of Congress, advocacy groups, and law enforcement agencies on the many complicated nuances involved in updating the law.  I am a strong advocate for enhancing Americans’ privacy. However, reforms are needed to the Email Privacy Act to protect crime victims and minimize unintended consequences of some of the provisions in the bill. In a few moments, I will offer a substitute amendment that makes several reforms to the Email Privacy Act while preserving the core goal of the bill.  This carefully-negotiated amendment is the product of years of work on this important issue. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of the amendment. At this time, I’d like to thank Representative Yoder for introducing the underlying legislation and for working with the Committee on this substitute amendment. I would also like to specifically thank Chris Calabrese and Greg Nojeim with CDT for their leadership and hard work on behalf of the coalition of outside supporters of the bill to help craft this amendment.  And last but certainly not least, I want to thank Caroline Lynch, Ryan Breitenbach, and Jason Herring on my staff for their tireless efforts on behalf of the committee over the past months – and in some cases over the past years – to negotiate and deliver this substitute amendment today. Finally, I’d like to say a word about geolocation.  We must continue to work to ensure that we protect Americans’ privacy, including ensuring sufficient protections for information that reveals the location of individuals. The committee continues to be committed to working on the geolocation issue, and we plan to hold a hearing on the issue.  If the short legislative calendar does not allow for a hearing this year, we will hold such a hearing at the beginning of the new congress. For more on today’s markup, click here.