State Issues

View the interactive map showing bills that PBSA is tracking.

PBSA's government relations programs are designed to:

  • Advocate for the screening profession.
  • Represent the interests and concerns of screeners and those in the screening profession.
  • Facilitate broad member participation.
  • Provide a strong unified voice for screening through legislative and regulatory representation.

PBSA's government relations team tracks screening-related legislation in all 50 states. The involvement of members is vital to the success of our grassroots efforts in all states. We encourage all PBSA members to use the information provided on the Legislative Action Center to take an active role in addressing the issues facing screening. We also encourage participation in PBSA Advocacy Day.

Download the 2018 Advocacy Toolkit containing material to assist PBSA members in developing strategies to educate legislators on topical issues affecting screening.

Bills introduced in state legislatures each session are reviewed, including but not limited to public record access, data security, Ban the Box, available identifiers, and expungement. The committee meets on a monthly basis to review current legislation and regulatory activity with the membership.

If you have encountered difficulty accessing complete public record information, please report the issue to GR.access@thepbsa.org.

For further information on PBSA's government relations activities and positions, contact brent.smoyer@thepbsa.org.

 

Recent Comments

October 3, 2019
PBSA Comments on Massachusetts SD 341 and Request for Amendment
On October 7th, 2019, the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure of the Massachusetts Legislature will host a public hearing on SD 341 (S 120), which is a Massachusetts version of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). The language of the bill is similar to the CCPA that passed in 2018. PBSA has reached out to the bill sponsors requesting similar amendments to those seen in California AB 1355 this year.
August 16, 2019
Arkansas Litigation Update - NAPBS Wins Summary Judgment Motion
Earlier this week Judge Piazza ruled that Bentonville, AR District Clerk, Jennifer Jones, violated the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) when she withheld court records and refused to release them to professional background screeners. After multiple attempts to legally obtain public record information for background screening purposes, NAPBS pursued litigation against the District Court of Benton County - Bentonville Division in July of 2018.
July 10, 2019
AR Litigation Update NAPBS vs Jennifer Jones Reply Brief
AR Litigation Update NAPBS vs Jennifer Jones Reply Brief
July 10, 2019
Brief in Support of Defendant's Response to NAPBS' Motion for Summary Judgment
Brief in Support of Defendant's Response to Motion to Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgement Brief in Support of Defendant's Response to NAPBS' Motion for Summary Judgment
July 10, 2019
Defendant's Response to Motion for Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgement
Defendant's Response to Motion for Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgement.
July 8, 2019
Draft Framework of Online Privacy Act of 2019
In order to ensure privacy protections for consumers while also providing screening professionals the tools they need to help keep our communities safe, NAPBS suggests the following provisions be included in federal privacy legislation
July 5, 2019
In its summary-judgment brief, NAPBS demonstrated that it was entitled to both declaratory and injunctive relief.
In response, Jones contends: (1) there is no actual controversy between herself and NAPBS; (2) NAPBS failed to exhaust administrative remedies; and (3) NAPBS cannot show irreparable harm. (Jones Br. 15-18, 27.) The Court should reject each of these arguments.
April 16, 2019
Response to Request For Information Regarding Feedback on Data Privacy, Protection and Collection
The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and Various State Corollary Statutes Currently Provide Extensive Consumer Safeguards To Control the Use of Data. As an initial matter, we would like to discuss the role of today's consumer in the background screening process as regulated by various federal and state statutes. It is important to note at the outset that an employer may not procure or cause a consumer report to be procured for employment purposes unless (1) "a clear and conspicuous disclosure has been made in writing to the consumer" and (2) "the consumer has authorized in writing the procurement of the report?" 15 U.S. C. 1681(b). Thus, in the context of employment-related consumer reports, the FCRA preserves the right of the consumer to control whether such a report can be compiled on his/her behalf.
March 11, 2019
NAPBS Comments MD SB 613
My name is Linda Mack, I am President of Global Investigative Services, Inc. a consumer reporting agency in Rockville, Maryland, and I come to you today to testify on behalf of the National Association of Professional Background Screeners (NAPBS).
March 15, 2018
NAPBS Comments on Bentonville, AR District Court's Refusal to Provide Records
Recently, the Clerk of the District Court for Bentonville has begun denying record requests that would be used for background screening purposes. The Clerk's justification is what we believe to be a gross misinterpretation of Administrative Order 19 issued by the Supreme Court. Specifically, the Clerk has indicated that it is denying requests as being "compiled information" under Section VI of the order. We believe this misinterprets the order two ways. First, a request for access to records in a particular case is not a request for a compilation of records as defined in the order. Second, even if it were, Section VI provides no basis for a clerk to deny access, so long as the requester specifies the records being requested and is willing to pay for them. We therefore view the Clerk as violating Administrative Order 19 and the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act, both of which assure access to court records.

Previous Comments

Jul. 08, 2019
Representatives Eshoo and Lofgren - Draft Framework of Online Privacy Act of 2019

Jul. 05, 2019
In its summary-judgment brief, PBSA demonstrated that it was entitled to both declaratory and injunctive relief. (J.Jones)

Jun. 11, 2019
Brief in Support of Defendant’s response in Opposition to Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and cross-motion (J.Jones)

Jun. 11, 2019
Defendant's Response to Motion for Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion (J.Jones)

May. 07, 2019
Comment Regarding Proposed Rulemaking on the Qualification of Drivers; Employment Application

Apr. 16, 2019
PBSA Senate Banking Comment Letter (Response to Request For Information Regarding Feedback on Data Privacy, Protection and Collection)

Mar. 11, 2019
PBSA Comments MD SB 613

Mar. 05, 2019
PBSA Comments on HB 2871 – Data Broker Registration

Feb. 28, 2019
NJ Senate Bill 3452 – Commentary and Concerns

Jan. 17, 2019
PBSA Comments Regarding European Data Protection Board Guidelines

Nov. 30, 2018
PBSA Comments on New Rules Related to Access to Judicial Records

Nov. 12, 2018
PBSA Comments to CFPB Regarding Summaries of Rights Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act

Nov. 9, 2018
PBSA Comments on National Telecommunications & Information Administration’s Approach to Consumer Privacy

Aug. 20, 2018
PBSA Comments on the Department of Housing and Urban Development Disparate Impact Rule

July 20, 2018
PBSA's Proposed Change to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and PACER Federal Court Record System

June 8, 2018
PBSA Comments to CFPB on Consumer Complaints

May 21, 2018
Joint Letter to Veto Vermont House Bill 764

May 17, 2018
PBSA Comments on the Future of the Social Security Number

April 9, 2018
Joint Comments on Vermont House Bill 764

April 5, 2018
PBSA Comments on H.R. 5192, the Protecting Children from Identity Theft Act

March 28, 2018
PBSA Comments Regarding Modernizing the Consent Based Social Security Number Verification (CBSV) System

March 28, 2018
PBSA Comments on the CFPB's Civil Investigative Demand Process

March 15, 2018
PBSA Comments on Bentonville, AR District Court's Refusal to Provide Records

March 6, 2018
PBSA Comments on the PACER System

March 6, 2018
PBSA Comments on Consent Based Social Security Number Verification (CBSV) System

Feb. 16, 2018
PBSA Comments on Maryland House Bill 848

Feb. 15, 2018
PBSA Comments on Vermont House Bill 764

Feb. 9, 2018
PBSA Comments on Maryland House Bill 541

Feb. 5, 2018
PBSA Comments on the Third Substitute Draft of Washington HB 1904

 

By closing this banner, scrolling this page, clicking a link or otherwise continuing to use our site, you acknowledge that you accept our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.