 Welcome to the politics of privacy and technology fighting and uphill battle. It's going to be an exciting time. We've got a lot to talk about and I'm going to kick it off with a little bit of introductions that we're going to talk about what we're going to do. So I'm going to hand it over to Dan. All right. My name is Daniel Zolnikov. I'm a representative out of the state of Montana. So I serve in the state of Montana in Helena. I do not. I'm a politician so I don't really expect that yet until you figure out what we're trying to do. We'll see. Let's see. Really quick. Just the basics of why I ran for office. I ran because I don't like what's happening in politics. Everybody runs for that until they realize how the game works. Well, I didn't like how the game works as well. So you'll see how I stood up to some of those interests and what we tried to do on behalf of people, not special interests. One little nice side note is that I still have a blackberry so hopefully it's like the one thing that won't be hacked during this entire conference. You can follow me on Twitter at Daniel Zolnikov. Last little quick note is I'm originally from a town called Roundup Montana. 2,000 people in like a 30 mile radius. This is probably about the whole size of my town in this room right now. All right. And about myself, I am not a politician but I hang out with them. Thank you. I'm done. I am a hacker. I break things just like you guys. I run a security consulting firm in Bozeman, Montana. I know you guys are thinking, what do you hack out there? I get on the plane a lot and it's the internet. I can do it from my pajamas. So we have a lot of fun. It's great to be able to ski and adventure and hang out and then go home and you know hack hospitals and stuff. So it's a good time. I adventure a lot. I tweet under subsector corp. I get to do a little bit of public policy as was this speech working with Dan helping people out doing a little bit of training and a little bit of speaking. So we're going to kind of just jump right into this. What do we want to talk about? So we did a lot. Dan and I are here to talk to you about a little bit about information and politics in Montana. And for all of you, you might be going Montana, just another state. But Montana is good in that it models and represents what a lot of other state legislators do. Maybe on a little bit of a smaller scale. But everything that we talk about today is just as applicable for the states that you live in. Maybe not for all of you that live overseas. Hopefully you live in democratic nations. But in America, you know, it's broken down to the state system and Montana is very representative of all the other states. So everything we do here can be replicated. We're going to talk about privacy legislation, what we did, what we got to be passed. We did. Daniel here was able to get some privacy legislation passed to make sure your cell phones are safe. Yeah. But we tried so, so much more. And that did not pass. But we realized what we need to do to get privacy legislation passed in Montana. So we're going to talk about that and our future goals. Okay, so really quick, I'm going to talk about Montana and Montana's legislature kind of like what Eric spoke about prior. If we get something passed in Montana, we're not talking about just what we get in Montana for Montanans. It then is shown to the rest of the states and you get passed in other states on behalf of you. I mean, I don't really rely on the feds for making good policies anymore. So I think states rights are big when we can do it in Montana. We can do it anywhere. The size of Montana is comparable to the size of Germany in an area. The population though is about a million people. So we have a lot more cows than people. Legislature serves 90 days every two years. So if you want to talk about limited government four months every two years, that is not too much. And we also have term limits. I can serve four terms in the house and four terms in the Senate and then be termed out. That is very limited. There's not a lot of a lot of new, there's always new politicians in there. And the majority of the house in the Senate is Republican. The governor is Democrat. This is extremely important to know. I really don't care anybody's political affiliations right now. It's the fact that you have to work through both sides to get legislation passed. And that's, that's what we're going to discuss as well. Really quick, let's see if that shows up. This is a quick little screenshot of where Montana is for those of you who don't know. The border above is, hey, hey. Las Vegas is the bottom left-hand corner. A fun little side note is that we drove from Montana to Las Vegas in 15 hours. So this is our other accomplishment. So we're going to preface kind of what we wanted to do and give you a back story for the whole situation. So right now how many people know about prison and it's a rampant violation of your rights? Everybody, right? It's bad, okay? And so everything, thank you, everything that we did was before that. So think of yourself six months ago and go, did I care too much about privacy? For some of you maybe. This is DEF CON, right? We're the more heightened and more aware of privacy issues. But six months ago a lot of people were just like, I trust my government. And so it was a whole different mindset before that until now with the recent revelations where they go, maybe I shouldn't. Daniel was his first term as a legislator. He was a freshman, which is a feat in and of itself for getting the bill passed because there's so much that these guys have to learn, figure out, and basically navigate the jungle of politics in addition to everything else. So it was his first time doing that. He, you know, you hadn't built the connections, hadn't figured out the process. Next time it's going to be way spectacular. Not that we didn't accomplish a lot. And then myself, I worked with Dan doing a little bit of research, working with him, bringing the privacy idea kind of to life. So that's where we're coming from. So what we want to talk about, why is there a need for privacy laws? Like I said earlier, six months ago a lot of people didn't necessarily know why we needed these privacy laws. We wanted to create legislation to enforce Montana's constitutional right to privacy. And that's important. Not every state has a constitutional right to privacy. So we're lucky that we have kind of something that we can base all of our laws off of. It's enumerated in the constitution so we can say, look, we're just doing what the constitution says. And I'm going to read it out because it's very important. Article 10 of the Montana Constitution states, the right of privacy, the right of individual privacy is essential to the well-being of a free society and shall not be infringed without the showing of a compelling state interest. Awesome, right? This was written by a bunch of guys who didn't even have, you know, technology and they were thinking about privacy when our constitution was implemented. It's important. It's essential. And our rights and liberties don't necessarily have a meaning if we don't have clear laws that protect them. We have a constitutional right to privacy, but if we don't have that enumerated in individual laws, then we don't have, citizens don't have the tools necessary to enforce that. Alright, so HB603 is the privacy bill that actually got passed. Our speech though is not about saying good job to ourselves we got a bill passed. It's about the one that failed. Still, I'm going to touch on this first. This is cell phone privacy requiring law enforcement to obtain a search warrant before being able to collect location information from electronic devices. This was not considered a big deal at the time because the NSA event had not occurred yet. This was a very short and simple bill. It was one page long. It had emergency opt-outs, like in case you need to respond to a 911 call or a life-threatening situation. So it was a pretty balanced bill that I had, I worked with both sides. I listened to both sides. I'm talking about Republicans, Democrats to get it passed. And it was considered a common sense bill. A lot of people I spoke to afterwards was like, wasn't that already in law? No, no, there's no policy on privacy really, especially with cell phones, things like that. This has passed and has since been considered model legislation. And we originally got the idea from another state that failed to pass it. We got it passed. First one in the country. Now other states are passing it. And that actually makes you feel pretty good in Montana who meets once every two years is in the lead on some of this stuff. Thank you. Thank you. So here's just a few headlines covering that bill across the United States. And it's amazing how much precious is received. And I'm really happy for it. Montana leads the way in new age privacy rights. Montana, anti-spying law, good, more needed. Montana, with Montana's lead, states may demand warrants for cell phone data. If you don't want the government to spy on you, move to Montana. All right. That one, they just went with it. I had no say in that. But one of my favorite things to all these headlines, if you guys check Reddit, I think some of these articles were submitted. And one of my favorite comments was, I don't even know where Montana is. How are they first? Where is Montana? And we're still first. It's excellent. Okay. So cell phone privacy was not the goal. The real story starts with the bill that I will refer to as HB 400, which was the Montana Data Privacy Act. The goal is to use different legislation across the world to create a balanced act to protect data. There's a lot of good ideas. Why not put them together and form something that will protect the average citizen, constituent. The real battle over HB 400 is what gives us the insights into what everybody has to face across the states with the privacy policy challenge. So I'm going to talk about a little bit of the policy frameworks of HB 400 because we knew we were embarking on a large journey. And we figured six, 12 months ago, however long it was, that we probably weren't the first ones to go, hmm, privacy is important. So we looked at a lot of other different frameworks that we wanted to talk about. And there's a lot of really excellent model laws if they were passed or not on individual states and foreign countries that are excellent fodder for basing it off of. So first, we looked at California Civil Code. And in it, we got a really excellent idea and it reads, each agency shall maintain in its records only personal information, which is relevant and necessary to accomplish a purpose of the agency. And this is important because it's basically arguing that agencies are only allowed to collect information that's pertinent to them. And so we like that idea. It's the idea that, you know, all these different companies and agencies shouldn't just have these huge drag nets collecting all of this information that they don't need. It's the idea that, okay, business has to get done, but you don't need to go much further than that. Next, we want Massachusetts laws. Massachusetts has some excellent privacy legislation. Part of it says, section two, regulations to safeguard personal information of Commonwealth residents. This is important because we got the idea that if you collect information, you should probably be careful with it. You know, a great example is South Carolina. How many of you guys heard of that breach? Yeah. South Carolina got owned, hard. They lost millions of their residents and citizens' information, names, social securities. I think the whole nine yards, if you have that information, you should probably, I don't know, secure it if you need it. And so this is the argument that for businesses and government that if they do have this information, they shouldn't just leave it on a Windows XP box or something. Some of the hackers in the crowd, right? It's like trivial to steal at that point. You have to actually care enough to make sure it's secure. Next, we got the duty to report known security breach or unauthorized use. This basically gives us the idea that, okay, so now we have companies, hopefully, collecting only the information they need and actually protecting that information. And if they're protecting that information, they should know when they're breached, which means that citizens should be alerted to that. If your information is stolen and you don't know it, you can't react to that. Businesses shouldn't just try and cover it up and go, oh, that never happened, because it did. And it impacts people and is necessary for them to let them know that. Next, we want to determine privacy laws. So a little side note about me is all my grandparents were immigrants. Half of my grandparents from my mom's side are from Italy. From my dad's side, his parents are from Russia. And they had to move away from Russia when communism basically took over and took out the czars, all that good stuff. So I always had a skepticism about, you know, let's look at other historical past issues that have happened. What's happened in other countries? Why is it bad? How can we learn from it? I think it's really good, especially if I'm setting policy to be able to have a little insight into history to make sure we do not repeat our mistakes or other countries' mistakes. Well, Germany's data privacy laws, basically, they have a few things that we looked and liked. And I think the most of the reason why these were created was because the Stasi, when the Cold War era was the secret police were watching over East Germans. It was collecting all this information about them. It was the secret police. So from what I understand, these laws are put in place to protect the German citizens. And that includes preventing organizations from collecting any personal, personally identifiable information without obtaining permission from an individual. And that includes name, birth date, phone number, IP address, personal address, things like that. Then there needs to be permission for the collection of data, which must be specific, including how, where, how long, and for what purposes the data will be used. And then individuals may revoke permissions at any time and policies, procedures, controls must be put in place to ensure that all the organization's data is being collected. This is a major point. This is the consent to have information collected and we'll hit that over and over. It's one of the most important points of our entire piece of legislation. Okay, so the creation process. Uh, you're going, research. Oh yeah, I'll talk about research. Thanks, Comrade Zolaikov. I'm just kidding. So a lot of research went into this. A lot. But that's a good thing because we were able to say, hey, we took a look at what everyone else is doing, how it impacted those other countries. And we could use them as a use case and go, hey look, Germany can do it, why can't we? Because throughout the whole process, lobbyists, business people, everyone just kept going, that's impossible. That's never going to happen. And it's nice when you can have a clear case that goes, yes, it's already been done. And so we did research into what everyone else was doing and into what we wanted to do. And we're going to talk a little bit more about that when we go in depth on HP 400. But basically what we did, we researched the bills, we drafted this lengthy human readable document, something that you and I could understand. And then I kind of tossed it over the fence to Dan to let him handle it. And the best thing about a state with a very low population is I went to college with Eric. That's how I originally know him. He gives me a call. He's like, hey, let's look at this type of policy. We're trying to do this. Well, all of a sudden, I'm the representative and I call legislative services with the draft that he wrote and he put together. And I send it to them who then put it into a bill's form. That is your true form of representative government, in my opinion. So we did, that's exactly what happened. And the legislative services is a group that works for legislators to, like I say, put it in form that can actually become law and goes from our notes sketched out to a basic form of language. It's the foreign language called legalese. Exactly. As far as I'm concerned. So then they send it back. We read it. We say, no, that's not exactly what we meant. We send it back. They do it. And then we send it back until we both think it's pretty good. And then it all came together into four hundred. This is the big bill. This is the mean potatoes of our presentation. This is our basic lining out of what we want to see privacy in not only Montana, but the United States. So we're going to talk about the main points of the bill and then some of the issues that we had getting it passed. I mean, call me naive, I kind of thought, oh, I'll put all these great ideas together and then they'll get passed by government. Turns out it's a little bit more involved than that. So we're going to talk about the main points. A lot of these, you know, it's going to feel like you've already heard them before because I talked about other types of legislation that we had pulled from. So point one of HP 400 was that data subjects must be given notice when their personal information is being collected. Pretty easy, right? It's something that would be fairly easy to implement and fairly easy to do. It's saying that if you are giving your information up and a company is going to be using it, they have to tell you. It's building awareness because a lot of people don't realize that when they get that information or when they go to Safeway and use their Safeway card, which gives them a 5 cent discount, they don't realize that there's a secret transaction going on where the company is basically getting all of their purchase history and then selling it. They need to realize that. They need to be told this is happening. Next is personal information may be used only for the purpose stated and not for any other purpose. And this kind of thing, which is saying that they should only have the information necessary to do their job. So, you know, there's no reason for your bank to be selling information or using it in a healthcare manner. It's basically keeping these things separate and distinct. Next is personal information may not be collected or disclosed without the data subjects consent. As it stands currently, your information is being rampantly bought and sold without even you knowing, without your consent, and that is a problem. You need to have ownership of your data. You need to know where it's going, who has it, why it's being sold. Then we get onto points 4 through 7. Personal information that is collected must be kept secure from any potential abuses. Already kind of talked about this. If you're going to have data, you should protect it. Next, data subjects must be informed as to who is collecting the personal information. You've got to understand who's collecting your information so that if they do have it, you can reach out to them to update that. Data subjects must be allowed access to their personal information to make corrections on any inaccurate data. Kind of one of the ones we slid in there at the end because the idea being your information is being traded all around and it is needed for legitimate business in certain circumstances. Because it's your data, you should have the opportunity to update it. One of the great examples is credit reports. Right now it's kind of a black box on where they get their information from and who knows if it's someone stole my identity and have the opportunity to fix it. And then we jump into data subjects must have a method available to them to hold data collectors accountable for following the principles in this section. And this is one of the most poignant clauses in the entirety of this. It's saying that people now have recourse for when their privacy is taken. They have a recourse for when these companies rampantly disregard for their privacy. They now have legislated action that they can refer to in civil suits if a company violates this. We have it in our constitution but by having it in a law it allows them to do so much more. So that was HP400 in a box. So now we're going to talk a bit about, you know, we had this great idea. We built this giant framework for privacy. What are some issues we have? One of the biggest ones was definitions. And then we had opt-outs and extenuating circumstances and a little bit of things with small business. One of the biggest ones was when we wrote this when you get into a project and you start using the terminology, especially in technology, you just kind of start to use the inside terms. But to someone on the outside, it doesn't necessarily make the same sense. And so to counteract this we try to have all these definitions like agency, blocking, business, collection. And a lot of the legislators just kind of read it and their eyes glazed over. And it doesn't help with phrases like data subject being hard to differentiate from our individual. So we realized we really need to tone down the language of the bill from Montana at least for it to be understandable by representatives and citizens alike. Okay, so I'm going to go back to the politics side of it. Please don't get political and too motivated on your side of the aisle versus what I stand for. I am a conservative Republican. The Republicans had the house in the Senate. This bill had to keep that in mind because Republican conservatives are they listen a lot to make sure that it's a business friendly environment so it can stay competitive so they don't want to over regulate industries. Well, there are a few overreaching clauses and this is probably the biggest one that we had in that bill which was probably a little bit too far, which I actually think is too far myself now that I've really read it focused on it. And I'll read it as quick as I can. A business may not refrain from conducting commerce with an individual solely if the individual refuses to consent to the business's collection, processing or use to the individual's personal information except when the personal information is genuinely needed for the business to provide the service or product requested to complete a financial transaction or to comply with the law. Basically this says if you want to get a cell phone plan with a cell phone company and they say, hey, we are going to collect your information, you say no, you're not and you don't give consent, well it still has to give you a cell phone plan since their business isn't focused on, since their business isn't focused on that information that they're collecting. And that's wrong because if you don't want to work with them, if you don't want to consent well, I don't believe that the business still has to offer everything up. You are now informed to collect your information, you're going to go to the competitor who's saying, hey, I'm not collecting your information, you're going to start buying their services. That's wrong. Another one was the small business burden. Can small businesses comply? Say we have a local mom and pop shop that collects your information, your address, your credit card information, whatever. There's some things that they're collecting. Well do they have the ability to have it all secure? Are they putting it in a secure location or are they keeping it on their desktop, which they also use of the business on Excel spreadsheet, which can easily be lost. I don't have a, I'm not important, that I stand for, that I'm too concerned on either end of it because this was really a philosophical conversation that we were having in the house. Does it hurt smaller business? Well, the question is, should they be getting information and collecting it if they cannot keep it secure? One of the many issues and points that were brought up. Okay, so now we're going to talk about from the political side the people issues that I had to deal with. This includes leadership issues, the extensive pushback from lobbyists, the fact that it was considered too long at 26 pages and that the representatives didn't really understand it or read it. It's not all doom and gloom though, because Daniel does have a really nice slide I'm going to hit next for you, just because I like it so much. Okay, so this is the bill. We have two days to get, or the first page of it anyway, we have two days to get signatures put on it. I received 37 signatures from the House and the Senate. Out of 150 individuals, the Senators and Representatives in Montana, I got 37 signatures about a fourth who were supportive of this. This was on both sides of the aisle and I didn't get to talk to everybody. I was trying to speak to members of the Appropriations Committee where I was trying to get the bill put into so it could be heard in that committee, so I had a better chance of surviving. I wasn't completely idealistic thinking everybody would like it. I knew the committee would have to go to to get it passed beyond so it could then get heard on the House floor and then sent to the Senate and hopefully signed. This was a really good achievement believe it or not. These co-sponsors they may not support everything in the legislation but they support the idea of it and that's one thing that's great about Montana. Both sides of the aisle, some of the people who would not be in the same room together and thus are forced to have their names on this bill. Okay, leadership issues. Conservative leadership was in the House and the Senate. I'm in the House, I'm a House representative so I was begging that this bill mine this really important bill that no one else really cared about at that point because they were worried about they're making Montana more job friendly or doing some of the taxes. We had a 300-some million dollar surplus that they worried about how we're going to spend it or we're going to get back. Their focus was on different issues. Mine was about down here on the priority list of importance. So they promised that my bill would end up in the Judiciary Committee. The Judiciary Committee is where we talk about gun bills, gay rights, abortion bills, sex slavery. I mean all the hot items, the press was always in there. This is a committee where they battle it out and you can believe and you can bet that this committee is very stacked on the Republican and Democrat side. It's the people more worried about liberties and rights than they are about lobbyists telling them what to do. And since privacy I think is a big rights issue, this was the perfect bill or perfect committee for my bill. It's also a committee that a lot of people don't want their bills to go into because it's where their bills tend to die. I was begging to have it in there. Please put my bill in appropriations. Well in the end leadership was not concerned about it and my bill is starting to cause some issues because there's a lot of a big business special interests that were pushing against it from the start and so the bill ended up being put in the Business and Labor Committee to be killed. Ah . So we're going to talk about the lobbyist side of things. I do not really like lobbyist or a lot of special interests. They're hard people to love. They're like the same class as meter light maids. Well I'll tell you one thing, side exactly. From a side note, politicians think they're really smart so they know if they appeal the special interest they'll get help for campaigns, they can get reelected and then they can serve again and then they'll do what they need for the special interests to get more money to then serve again and then it's like why the hell are you in politics is my question if that's really what you're standing for. Well I had some issues with them because some of the representatives in Business and Labor Committee especially serve as easy votes to their sponsors. They're like this isn't my issue. I'm serving because of one big issue. So I'm going to do what you want along the lines for all these other ones. They hear a bill like oh here's three bullet points. It's bad. It grows government. All those things. I'm going to kill it. Well this was painted from a lot of the bigger lobby groups as more regulation and growing government. It was a bad bill and as a conservative Republican they were just paying me as a rhino a sellout, a moderate like oh Daniel this is just bad legislation and we need to get rid of this. In reality they were concerned about losing their ability to profit from consumer information. They make a lot of money from it. There's really no standards. So they don't want standards put on it yet and this is the conversations that some of us had behind the doors. The funny thing is we're trying to put standards in place that will protect the business and says saying it's illegal to collect information like some individuals want to do. We're just trying to have a balance to make sure people have their rights involved. Well they didn't want any of it and they didn't want to have the pushback to kill some type of legislation. I obtained a very quick reputation with my quick tolerance for lobbyists and I learned later on from a nicer older gentleman who's been around the block that they called me the mad Russian and I guess they were kind of right in some regards. Okay so also the understandability problems. Partially a generational problem. Politicians tend to be old. They're living in the house of representatives. So young Democrats or Republicans knew what we were talking about on this privacy issue. They knew how far technology has gone in the last 10-15 years. I mean I am not a techie guy ironic that I'm speaking at DEF CON. Eric is the guy I rely on for that but even I understand that this is a big issue that we need to work on and at least protect some rights if we can. That's the way I'm looking at it. There were older representatives in Labor committee who helped kill the bill in the end. That barely knew how to use computers that didn't have a smart phone. I mean some barely used their phones at all. It was very interesting that they're the ones that we're trying to appeal to and they don't know what we are talking about. Also there's a lack of awareness on the privacy issue. Not an important issue. There are bigger issues. Like I said we had $307 million to spend. That's a lot more fun spending other people's money than trying to protect people's rights. Here's a really quick story I'll have on the side. There was a bill that we called the Facebook bill. It was more than just Facebook. It would prevent employers from collecting employees login information, passwords, things along those lines. The city of Bozeman was doing it for a while until they got sued. There were other organizations saying hey you want to work for me. I need your login information, your password to search through your email account, search through your Facebook. To me it's the same thing as hey you want to work for me, I got to search through your house and your underwear drawer first. It's a little bit too much. So we're just trying to put some guidelines in place. It passed the senate 48-2. It got killed in the business and labor committee. Let me go back. Passed the senate 48-2. This was a very controversial senate that got some national headlines for how much they hit people. Besides two of them for this legislation. Business and labor committee it goes to there. The business lobby tells a lot of the business and labor guys this is bad legislation it needs to be killed. I heard a story on how there was a guy a representative in his 70's from what I understand barely knew what Facebook even is. Not much how to hack it. He barely knew what it was. He heard that he asked a younger guy a younger representative hey this is bad legislation. The younger guy who appeals to lobbyists and does basically plays the political game the exact opposite of me plays it he told them oh this is a really bad bill. This is really bad it's really bad for business we need to kill this bill. And there's your policy setting right there. Older guy doesn't know what he's doing. Younger guy says kill it because you know what he's more worried about getting a better voting record at the end. The bill sizing issue. The bill is 26 pages long and it's all new legislation this is considered a big bill by Montana standards. Obama's Affordable Care Act I really don't care again what side you are on with that issue but that bill itself is a thousand pages. That's a big bill in my opinion. This is 26 pages in Montana legal speak in a sense that it's really easy to understand Montana code. You can read it not having any law experience and just read it and understand exactly what the code's simple. This bill is considered 26 pages long and that was way too long and it was complex sense to it. We would have to have our own privacy standards for Montana than the rest of the country. Which is what we wanted so then it's what we wanted because then we wanted other states to follow our legislation. If we can do it then you can do it. It also proposed a lot of new ideas in one document and if things you don't understand that are new can be so we ran into those issues. Now let me go on the committee meeting. There were two proponents. I was a sponsor so I spoke first. There were two proponents of this bill. One was Eric so thanks for showing up to that one. I figured I should probably wake up to that one. And ACLU I was so happy someone was sitting next to me in that meeting. The irony is that as a conservative Republican I'm usually over here the ACLU is over here but now it's not only me a few of us are trying I think they're ignoring us for a while because we're bothering them so much. We're trying to find more legislation like this because we agree on privacy legislation to work on. So I'm very thankful they're supportive and that now they're willing to work on other legislation. The cell phone privacy bill they're also big supporters of. So I'm very happy about that. There's some reaching across the aisle for you. The line of opponents were supposed to be the guys in my group camp usually in politics. And that includes the Montana retail association the Montana telecommunications association there are multiple insurance companies Montana auto dealers association the Montana bankers association multiple hospitals the chamber commerce Montana collectors association and the Montana data association. I mean if that room would have also exploded there would have been no more lobbyists for the business front in Helena. It was so absurd that they literally queued to say the same thing. It was like they were lining up between each other like raising their hand it's it was more than said on why they didn't like it which was just basically it hurt business. Yeah well and as a new representative I think they really wanted to prove a point to me as well that hey you're not going to be doing what we need you to be doing then this is what's going to happen. I am a very slow learner so I guess next time we'll see what happens. Also the committee meeting let me just touch on one thing on politics say you are all about privacy legislation you're with me you know all about it well as representatives we deal with legislation across all these different areas so how much do you know about farming okay there's a farming bill how much do you care about it I'm from roundup Montana and I still wouldn't trust my my views on farming to know what this legislation is going to get passed so I have to depend on someone else it's not really my issue this sounds good there's it's a short bill it's three three main points for it three main points against it I'm hitting ten twenty bills a day I'm trying to read understand pass so this was basically their farming bill in that sense they were not concerned about privacy rights it's not an issue it's a non-issue issue so on the doors I knocked on a lot of doors for my campaign no one really is talking about privacy rights okay they're talking about money they're talking about taxes they're talking about jobs no not this issue so the committee members were pretty much unengaged so in a roundabout way thank you president for bringing awareness to the issue yeah gotta look at the silver lining just a little bit okay so the end result was that it was tabled in committee da da da like I said it's in the wrong committee in the first place and nearly all the lobbyist that that got along with the Republican side were supportive were not supportive of any type of privacy legislation they're like well you know we want to work with you to get it when they talked with me about before the bill was presented they wanted to be exempt from it they don't want it to apply to them and that's not really what we're trying to do we're trying to make sure that personal information belongs to the individual uh the bill was too large and most legislators didn't understand the premise of why we need this legislation like I said before it was a non-issue issue and then again it was also HP 400 was called was considered growing government and creating unnecessary laws I was considered all of a sudden a big government conservative and I was I just whatever that they can call they could label it however they want uh that was fine I prefer the nickname mad Russian for you yeah me too nice so the end result was sadly the demise and death of HP 400 but like a phoenix from its ashes we will rise again with more policy and more effort um what we did and what we realized is we tried way too much uh 26 pages for Montana is about 25 pages longer than most other bills so we're gonna try and break it down we realized that at that time privacy didn't affect people directly it wasn't something that they could tangibly see and touch and be afraid of or happy about uh and so we were two or three months ahead of our time uh and then we didn't really compromise and Dan you know more so is I want to thank him for being solid and not compromising on privacy kinda he was there the whole way to make sure that we had the full privacy but what we also realized is at a certain point you know businesses still have to operate and we can't just put on a lot of legislation to you know to make privacy better on the citizen right side but make it so burdensome that a small business can actually operate so we realized you know we still need to work with these people and then some additional thoughts we were new to the process 26 years old first time serving there's still a lot to learn room ahead to grow there's a lot of informal opportunities that we didn't quite realize how to be done we didn't fundraise apparently you need money to push ideas uh I know however we're working on it and we didn't have a motivating story that basically you know people could latch on to we didn't have a story that people could look at and go oh my gosh this is why I need privacy and to a limit extent we now kind of have that story with prism so there were some funny unexpected results that came out of it okay so this is an award that I received from another fellow representative the order of the black helicopter for representative Daniel Zola call for the outstanding conspiracy from the man in the yellow hat and he gave me a black helicopter as well I set it right here on my desk for the rest of the session which is funny because have you talked to him since he did that? yeah actually yeah I spoke to him and he said he's sorry and he definitely supports my legislation now so so another thing was that lobbyists took me a little less serious some took me more serious against anything I was doing they spoke to me because they knew I could care less on their stances that I was not okay with the whole special interest thing not keeping other people in mind so I get taken a little bit less serious by some who just don't really speak to me at all those are the ones I probably respect a little bit less anyway and then there's some that I talk with and they make sure where I'm at and they see where I'm at it's a good thing also a lot of groups and representatives especially know my views on special interest I am not serving for that of special interest I'm serving for what I think is best for people that's what I thought government was supposedly for and you know what my reelection will be a little tougher but that is why I'm there and now I'm getting a lot of support so it's fine so like I said we're revising the strategy we're going to break it up we're going to break it down into seven individual topics so that each one can have a compelling story so we can build support so we can work with people we're going to create clear cases for each new bill we're going to work with businesses to ensure that they understand our goals and that we understand their hardships ellipses to a point right because at a certain point business would rather just not worry about it I've got their information I'm not going to worry about securing it and so it's about building a balance but we have a goal I'm going to let Dan talk a little bit about it okay consent it's only two pages about it's just the first part of the bill consent is the most important part because it says that this information being collected is actually your information not the people or the organizations the departments that collect it it's not their information it's still yours so in consent implies just that if you give consent most people will give the consent anyway that this actually does belong to me it's the first step on a ladder to privacy and if there's time we've got some more laws on the books that Dan has thought about really quick there's the protecting sources of the press I think this is one of the most important ones we're playing around with this one still thank you course amendment like I said we need to start legislating our rights it's a sad time that we have to do that but since we've realized that we need to start today and that includes protecting the press and then there's also allowing citizens to travel black boxes from their cars something along those lines you're driving around you should not be having collecting evidence against yourself for possible future cases last one is banning automated license plate scanning and collection for the state of Montana Montana has it red light cameras are currently already banned in Montana so we are just continuing that protection for it oh you go for it we're in our final minutes so we're speeding up it leads to model privacy legislation Montana is now a test bed for privacy it's a test bed for this legislation so other states can go when their lobbyists tell them this is never going to happen you can go Montana did it states rights setting a legal precedent for privacy and working with citizens and not lobbyists that's what we're working for so thank you it's hard to get angry this early in the morning but we're almost done and I'm going to read you something from Wired magazine that gets me a little annoyed a little angered if you will and so I think you will too when you hear the Obama administration for the first time responded to the spy gate lawsuit telling a federal judge the wholesale vacuuming up of phone call metadata in the United States is in the public interest does not breach the constitutional rights of Americans and cannot be challenged in a court of law I put emphasis on the very last bit of that the executive branch is telling the judicial branch that they cannot challenge them and I submit that when the people can no longer challenge the government that government cannot necessarily be called a democracy thank you and at the end of the day all of us are responsible for the policies that we live under so there's still power in the states and we need to pay attention but do more than pay attention do more than voting you hear people say I submit take it one step further become a legislator get involved in policy because you can make an impact we already have laws based on two people that have full-time jobs and felt like making a difference so with that if you feel like donating to him exactly when you stand up and by dimension he's inspired me to run for the next session as well so Eric and I will both be running this next time in Montana the whole thing is if you stand up to special interests sometimes but Montana has really low contribution limits of like $160 a person so the whole thing is when it's that low I can say goodbye to those guys and hello to people across the United States who support this type of legislation want to see it be done somewhere and actually see it put through and so we also included our friend Bryce Bennett he's actually a democrat so if you're very I won't donate to a republican we care about privacy that's what we care about so if you want to make an effort and you want to do something with dollars right here or if you want to contact us and work with us on legislation we love that too so guys thank you