SALEM, Ore. – Financial lobbies in the state including the Credit Union Association of Oregon are urging lawmakers to adopt a “go slow” approach on bills dealing with identity theft and security breaches betting Congress will take up pre-emptive bills during the current session or in 2006. In the meantime, a bill with support from consumer and public interest groups and which toughens penalties on security fraud but adds what the financial trades see as unnecessary paperwork and wasteful expense is to be considered this month in the Senate Commerce Committee. “There are some sections in this bill that are simply redundant duplicating requirements of the federal regulator,” said a CUAO spokesman. Joining the CUAO in asking for delays on the bill backed by consumer and public interest groups are the Oregon Bankers Association, two mortgage associations and the Oregon Financial Services Association, all of which comprise the United Financial Lobby. In a media statement finding “problems” with the Senate bill, the UFL and the CUAO maintain that financial institutions with multi-state operations are already facing conflicts with different state laws “and adding an Oregon law will further hinder business.” “A specific potential problem to credit unions,” wrote the CUAO “is the use throughout the bill of the term `consumer with mailing address in this state'. Will this require credit unions in other states with members in Oregon to comply with this law if passed? If so, this will cause these out of state credit unions technical and administrative nightmares.” The UFL said it is eager to protect the elderly against financial abuses and it supports various other bills giving law enforcement greater access to financial records and adding biometric identifiers as part of Oregon driver's license regulations. The CUAO noted also that federal regulatory agencies have issued guidance on response programs for security breaches effective June 2 requiring action for an “attempted” breach. The guidance, said the CUAO, addresses four areas: “assess the situation, notify regulatory and law enforcement agencies, contain and control the situation, and take corrective measures.” This federal guidance, said the UFL, “is much more `robust' and clear in the requirements than SB 1057.” “In conclusion,” wrote the UFL, “we urge you not to move SB 1057 forward, but rather give us the time of an interim to see if Congress does indeed act on these issues” and, if not, develop Oregon legislation “in a reasoned and deliberate manner that the interim provides.” -

[email protected]