Bill Overview
Title: Email Privacy Act
Description: This bill modifies provisions restricting an electronic communication service (ECS) or remote communication service (RCS) provider from disclosing the contents of a wire or electronic communication that is in electronic storage with or otherwise stored, held, or maintained by that service. Additionally, it revises the standards for the government to compel an ECS or RCS provider to disclose the contents of a wire or electronic communication or records, or inform of the recipient of the existence of a warrant, court order, subpoena, or request, unless the government obtains an order for delayed notification (i.e., an order directing a service provider to delay notifying anyone of the existence of a warrant, order, subpoena, or request for a specified period of time). The bill revises the process for obtaining a delayed notification order and lengthens the maximum duration of such an order.
Sponsors: Rep. DelBene, Suzan K. [D-WA-1]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals using electronic communication services
Estimated Size: 307000000
- The bill affects individuals whose electronic communications are stored or maintained by electronic communication services (ECS) or remote communication services (RCS).
- The global population using email and similar electronic communication services is vast, covering billions of people around the world.
- The changes primarily affect privacy and government access to electronic communications, impacting all users of these services.
- Internet penetration globally is estimated to be over 4.6 billion individuals, many of whom use email services.
- This population includes both personal users and businesses relying on electronic communications.
Reasoning
- The policy affects a broad population since nearly all internet users engage with electronic communication services. However, the degree of impact may vary based on one's dependency on privacy, such as activists or individuals handling sensitive information.
- Given the budget, not everyone will be directly affected monetarily, but rather the potential legal and privacy ramifications are the outcome many may feel.
- Consideration is given to people from diverse walks of life to simulate common concerns and reactions. Much of the population may not feel or notice a significant change in day-to-day activities due to this policy.
Simulated Interviews
Tech Worker (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I value my privacy a lot, and my company deals with sensitive client data all the time. It's reassuring to know there are stronger restrictions on government access.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Corporate Lawyer (New York, NY)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having stronger privacy protections is crucial in my field. Knowing that there is a longer delay in government notification should discourage unnecessary prying.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
College Student (Austin, TX)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think about email privacy much, but it's nice to know my data is a bit safer now.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Small Business Owner (Rural Kansas)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It doesn't impact me directly, but it's good to know my emails have more protection.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Social Media Manager (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Better email privacy means less risk of data leaks, so I'm in favor.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired (Miami, FL)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't understand all the changes, but I'm happy if it means my information is more secure.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
IT Specialist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy aligns with enhancing privacy, which is overdue given today's tech climate.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Journalist (Chicago, IL)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As someone who values freedom of the press, privacy is incredibly important. This strengthens our ability to protect sources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Banker (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Email security improvements are always welcomed in my field.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Community Organizer (Detroit, MI)
Age: 55 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- In organizing, privacy ensures safety. This policy is a step in the right direction.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Key Considerations
- The enforcement of delayed notification and improved privacy measures by ECS and RCS providers could increase their operational costs.
- Government agencies will need to develop new processes to adhere to revised privacy and notification rules, potentially requiring more resources.
- Consumer trust in electronic communications could improve with enhanced privacy protections.