“Ni de droite ni de gauche”: A Primer on the French Legislative Election

By: Emily Beiser (Posted 6/21/17)

La République En Marche, the party of the newly elected French president Emmanuel Macron, won 306 of 577 seats in the National Assembly (lower house) on Sunday, June 18th, 2017, giving it a majority of 53%. En Marche, or On the Move, in English, was only founded as a social-movement-cum-election-campaign last April and officially declared a party upon the election of President Macron (who shares his initials—E.M.—with that of the party) this May. En Marche’s win in this election has come at the downfall of the parties which historically held the majority: Le Parti Socialiste on the left, and Les Républicains, on the right. An estimate by the French Newspaper Le Monde suggests just 148 of the representatives (called deputies) elected in 2012 were reelected this year, making this not only an assembly of a new party, but also an assembly of freshmen deputies – three quarters of the assembly.

1280px-2t_lc3a9gislatives_2017_en-svg

What do the results of this legislative election mean for France?

First, we must understand how French elections work. The French term, called the quinquennat, lasts five years. The presidential and legislative terms overlap nearly perfectly, save the six weeks between the presidential election and the legislative election.  Each election is two rounds; the first round requires a majority to win. If no candidate has the majority, which is generally the case, the two candidates with the most votes face off a week later in a second vote. This presidential election cycle was divisive: with each of the top four presidential candidates getting between 19% and 25% of the vote in the first round, though Macron won with a hefty 66% in the second round against the far-right Marine Le Pen. The legislative elections which followed six weeks later showed En Marche’s prominence yet also had the lowest turnout of any legislative elections in the history of the 5th Republic, with just 42% of registered voters voting. By contrast, the previous election, in 2012, saw a 57% turnout rate. The low turnout, unusual for France, means many deputies won with approval from less than 30% of the registered voters.

President Macron claims that his party is “ni de droite, ni de gauche,” or “neither left nor right, but firmly centrist”.

Though a former head of economy for the socialist and deeply unpopular President Hollande, Macron’s economic policy is seen as leaning to the right due to his past work at an investment bank and his support of what he calls the “uberization” of the economy – namely, a flexible workforce which receives fewer protections. En Marche and Macron claim centrism due to leftist standings on social issues including “the family”, refugees, and gender equality. This support of gender equality is reflected in Macron’s choice of gender parity within the cabinet and in En Marche’s selection of legislative candidates, of which over 50% were women. While En Marche lost just 17 of the seats where they ran candidates, the French legislative assembly is at a record of 38% women, up from the previous assembly’s 26%.

The French left has seen a sharp reduction in deputies and a new leftist party, La France Insoumise (or Rebellious France), has proposed a new political system via a 6th Republic. Yet La France Insoumise only won 17 seats. The Parti Socialiste, the established left wing party of former President Hollande, won just 29 seats, making the election a devastating loss compared to the 258 won in 2012. This loss may be due in part to the extreme unpopularity of former President Hollande. Near the end of his time in office, a poll by Le Monde found just 4% of respondents were satisfied with his actions. A former member of cabinet for Hollande—though never a member of Le Parti Socialiste—President Macron retains support for parts of the fading party, endorsing another former Hollande cabinet member, Myriam El Khomri, in a legislative race in which En Marche had no candidate. En Marche’s majority suggests neither collaboration nor cohabitation will be necessary, but it remains to be seen how Macron will lead his new party.

On the right, Les Républicains, formerly known as L’Union pour un Mouvement Populaire in the 2012 election, won 113 seats, a decrease of 72 seats from 2012, despite scandal surrounding party leader François Fillon’s use of public money while Prime Minister. As the party with the second most seats in the Assembly, it remains a significant stronghold of the right. The far-right Front National has a high profile and power to move debate towards the right, especially after Marine Le Pen, the party leader, was in the second round of the presidential elections against Macron. It won just eight seats, but saw an increase compared to winning two seats in 2012.

En Marche’s majority in the National Assembly may not be paralleled by the Senate; just half of the Senate is up for election in September, and it is elected indirectly by officials, with a disproportionately strong rural vote. However, as the National Assembly is the more powerful of the houses in practice, a majority in the assembly solidifies President Macron’s power after a divisive Presidential election. Moreover, it concretes En Marche’s own viability. As the figurehead, father, and namesake for the party, Macron’s performance as president and party leader will be key in the future of the party during and after his tenure as leader.

Emily Beiser is a summer intern in DMGS’s Philadelphia office. She currently in a dual BA program at Sciences Po in France and Columbia University in NYC. 

Election Recap: GA-06 and SC-05 Special Elections, and the British Parliamentary Election

Over the past month there have been several high profile and very hotly contested special elections in the United States, including in Georgia’s 6th Congressional District and in South Carolina’s 5th Congressional District. Each one of these races filled a void left by a Trump cabinet appointee and saw record amounts of money being spent. In addition, earlier in June, the British Parliament held a snap Parliamentary election, that could be the sign of more political instability in the UK following last summer’s Brexit vote. We have compiled a breakdown and analysis of each of these races below.

Georgia’s 6th Congressional District 

Republican Karen Handel defeated Democrat Jon Ossoff to win Georgia’s Sixth Congressional District during the culmination of a hotly contested special election on Tuesday June 20th. Billed as a referendum on President Donald J. Trump, the highly visible race became the most expensive congressional election in United States history, attracting approximately $60 million, according to Issue One, a nonpartisan advocacy group. That money includes funding for the April 18 special election, as well as the June 20 runoff. Outside groups spent more than $27 million on the election, with pro-Handel organizations spending roughly 2.5 times more than pro-Ossoff groups.

With 52 percent of the vote, Handel fills a seat vacated by former Rep. Tom Price, who now serves as the Health and Human Services Secretary in the Trump administration. Handel’s win makes her the first Republican congresswoman in Georgia history. Similarly, she was the first Republican Secretary of State elected in Georgia after a victory in 2006. In 2010, she narrowly lost the GOP gubernatorial nomination before becoming the Senior Vice President of Public Policy at the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. However, she resigned in 2012 after the organization reversed a plan to cut ties with Planned Parenthood. After a failed senate bid in 2014, Handel announced her candidacy for the sixth district’s seat in February 2017. Before Tuesday’s runoff, Handel and Ossoff competed in a special election on April 18. Both failed to grab a majority of the vote. Ossoff, who was one of five Democrats received 48 percent, while Handel was one of eleven Republicans and only garnered 18 percent.

Their respective performances set the stage for a heavily funded race that attracted an intense level of national media.

With $23.9 million spent on both the special election and the runoff, Ossoff came within 10,000 votes of claiming a reliably Republican district located in the Northern Atlanta suburbs. Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich held the seat from 1979 to 1999, while Price consistently won the district with more than 60 percent of the vote since his initial victory in 2004. However, Trump only won the district by two points in November–the same margin of victory for Handel. GOP ads attacking Ossoff hammered the former congressional aide and documentary filmmaker for a lack of experience and living outside the district. The ads also focused on funding he received from west coast donors.

Handel will likely face another intense challenge during the 2018 midterm elections.

South Carolina’s 5th Congressional District

Republican Ralph Norman defeated Democrat Archie Parnell in another special election Tuesday night. Norman fills a seat vacated by current White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney. While Northam won the reliable conservative district 52 to 48 percent, it pales compared to Mulvaney’s 21-point victory in November. Moreover, Trump won the district by 18 points.

Norman has served as a hardline conservative in the state legislature since 2009, and has already promised to join the House Freedom Caucus. Parnell, a former Goldman Sachs and Exxon Mobil employee, saw the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee pour $300,000 into his race, while the Georgia contest received $5 million. The National Republican Congressional Committee spent less than DCCC in South Carolina, while pouring more than $6.7 million into Handel’s race.

The British Election of June 2017

On June 8th, 2017, each of the United Kingdom’s 650 Parliamentary constituencies elected new Members of Parliament (MPs) to the British House of Commons.  Under the terms of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act of 2011, an election was not scheduled to be called until at May 7th, 2020, however on April 19th, 2017, Prime Miniser Theresa May called for snap elections in the wake of growing discontent.

Although Prime Minister May’s Conservative party had been approximately 20 points ahead in the polls of the Labour party, what had occurred was anything but, and resulted in what has been described as one of the most dramatic collapses in British political history. In a surprising result, the Conservatives received a net loss of 13 seats, with 42.4% of the vote, while Labour received a net gain of 30 seats, with a 40.0% of the vote.

UK election 2017.PNGThis was the closest result between the two main parties since February 1974, and the highest percentage of the vote for an opposition party since 1970. Although the Prime Minister May was invited by the Queen to form a Government, it is currently unclear how long she will retain power, given the overwhelming numbers the Labour opposition government has seen. With rising unrest over social issues, international issues, and of course, the backlash over last year’s Brexit vote, Theresa May’s time as prime minister may in fact be short lived.

Danny Restivo and Brett Goldman Contributed to This Report. Posted 6/21/17

Primary Preview: New Jersey and Virginia Gubernatorial Elections

By- Danny Restivo (Posted 6/2/17)

New Jersey- June 6th, 2017

On June 6, New Jersey Democrats and Republicans will cast a vote for their respective party’s gubernatorial nominee in the 2017 election. In May, a Quinnipiac University poll showed Democrat Phil Murphy, former ambassador to Germany, and Republican Kim Guadagno, lieutenant governor, as clear favorites to succeed Chris Christie. While Guadagno and Murphy have taken the lead, 57 percent of Garden State voters remain undecided, according to Quinnipiac. A Stockton University survey released on May 25 showed 34 percent of Democratic voters remain undecided, while 31 percent of Republican voters had not supported a candidate. Here are the top candidates seeking their party’s nomination.

Democrats

philip_d-_murphy Phil Murphy is the former ambassador to Germany under President Barack Obama from 2009 to 2013. Prior to his ambassadorship, the Boston-born and Harvard-educated Murphy worked at Goldman Sachs and headed the Frankfurt office from 1993 to 1997. In 2014 he served as a principal of Murphy Endeavors, a business management consulting company located in Red Bank. Meanwhile, he started his own progressive nonprofit advocacy group. Murphy has $15 million of his own funds to help fuel statewide campaign efforts, tripling his competitor’s. His progressive campaign message includes the establishment of a public bank of New Jersey to help spur investment in small business and infrastructure. As the favorite to win the party nominee, Murphy has 21 county endorsements, near unanimous support from Unions, and a campaign staff that includes a number of high level political operatives. According to Quinnipiac, Murphy has drawn 26 percent of Democratic voters, while Stockton has placed his total at 34 percent.

Jim Johnson- Although he’s polled at 7 percent, according to Quinnipiac (10 percent jimjohnsonaccording to Stockton), Johnson may serve as the biggest threat to Murphy’s candidacy. He’s centered his campaign rhetoric on ethics reform, while promoting himself as an outsider in New Jersey’s political system. Johnson served as a Treasury Department Official in Bill Clinton’s Presidential administration, before practicing corporate law in New York City. During that time, he also served as Chairman of the Brennan Center of Justice at New York University, where he worked on Civil Rights, law enforcement and gun control issues. Johnson has pledged to maintain benefits and pension plans for government employees and retirees. Additionally, he’s also pushing a $15 minimum wage hike (Murphy has also signaled support for a $15 minimum wage), while vowing to reduce residential property taxes and increasing affordable housing. Johnson also advocates free community college tuition for students who come from families with incomes under $90,000. Under Johnson, tuition assistance grants for college would expand.

John Wisniewski As a 19-year assemblyman from Middlesex County, and Chairman of wisniewskithe Bernie Sanders Campaign in New Jersey, Wisniewski is the most progressive candidate in the 2017 Democratic primary. Unfortunately, Hillary Clinton won New Jersey Democrats by a 2-to-1 ratio.  Like Sanders, he’s advocated for tuition free college, as well as a single-payer healthcare system. Wisniewski was also a driving force behind the investigation of the Bridgegate Scandal. As the Chair of the Transportation and Independent Authorities Committee since 2002, Wisniewski has championed funding for a number of statewide transportation projects, sponsored legislation for minimum wage increases, property tax relief and helped to pass the Garden State Manufacturing Act. According to Quinnipiac, Wisniewski has received 5 percent support among Democratic supporters.

raymond_j-_lesniakRaymond Lesniak- . Senator Lesniak is one of the longest-serving politicians in New Jersey history with 39 years of experience. Lesniak has been a fierce advocate of progressive causes like the abolition of the death penalty, animal rights, marriage equality, environmental initiatives and the expansion of drug treatment centers. His path to the Governor’s seat remains the most difficult with small funding and a miniscule staff. Moreover, his announcement to run came after he said he wasn’t running.  The Elizabeth native currently has 4 percent support among Democrats, according to Quinnipiac.

Republicans

Kim Guadagno- Governor Chris Christie’s Lieutenant Governor Kim Guadagno remains 2016_lg_officialthe favorite to win the Republican nomination with 23 percent of Republican support, while Stockton’s survey places her party support at 34 percent. However, with support for Governor Chris Christie at an all-time low, Guadagno has made attempts to distance herself from the current Governor. She rejected his support for Trump, and said she’d reverse Christie’s decision to take New Jersey out of a regional compact to combat air pollution. When Governor Christie signed a legislation increasing the gas tax, she opposed the move. In a debate with her opponent, Jack Ciattarelli, she received repeated criticism for working with Christie. Guadagno has pledged to audit the state government in attempt to eliminate waste while addressing property taxes. She’s also stated plans to increase funding for transportation projects as well as repairs for the State House. Guadagno has a significant level of State level executive experience which her competitors lack. While Christie stumped for himself and Donald Trump on the campaign, Guadagno served as the state’s active Governor for more than 500 days. New Jersey law stipulates that anytime the governor is out of state, the Lieutenant will serve as the acting executive.

Jack Ciattarelli— The six-year assemblyman represents residents in Somerset, Hunterdon, Middlesex and Mercer counties. Additionally, Ciattarelli owns and operates Galen Publishing, a medical publishing company. Like Guadagno, Ciattarelli aims to ciattarelli2jpg-2a48ab720635c81ecorrect the price of property taxes in New Jersey, but unlike Guadagno, he wants to alter the way public schools are funded. Ciattarelli has long-chided Christie and continues to tie Guadagno to her old boss. He’s received seven county line endorsements, but his support remains in rural areas with a comparatively small number of registered Republicans. To defeat Guadagno, Ciattarelli will have to chip in to her support base, which consists of a number of Christie supporters.

Virginia- June 13th, 2017

Along with New Jersey, residents of the Old Dominion will cast their vote for a new Governor in November 2017. Five candidates—two Democrats and three Republicans—are vying for their respective party’s nomination on June 13. Ralph Northam, Lieutenant Governor, will square off with former congressman Tom Perriello for the Democratic nomination. According to a recent Washington Post-Schar School Poll, 40 percent of Democrats support Perriello while 38 percent support Northam. The two-point difference is well within the poll’s 10-point margin of error. On the Republican side, former National GOP Chair Ed Gillespie has clear path to the nomination with double digit leads over his opponents, State Senator Frank Wagner and Corey Stewart, chairman of the Prince William County Board of Supervisors. However, even if Gillespie clinches the nomination, his path to the Governor’s seat remains challenging. According to the Washington Post-Schar School Poll, Gillespie significantly trails both Perriello and Northam in a head to head match (Tom Perriello by 50 percent to 37 percent, and Ralph Northam by 49 percent to 38 percent). Trump’s low approval rating may give the Democratic nominee a boost, but the new Governor will most likely inherit and state legislature dominated by the GOP. In any event, Virginia remains a state with strong bi-partisan streak when it comes to the state’s top executive.

Democratic Primary

xirzugki_400x400Ralph Northam- As Lieutenant Governor to Governor Terry McAuliffe, Northam usurped the role of heir apparent until Perriello announced his candidacy in January. Many of dubbed the race as an extension of the Clinton-Sanders fight in Virginian. Northam has received endorsements from state party leaders like McAuliffe, and Democratic Senators Tim Kaine and Mark Warner.  Additionally, every Democrat in the state legislature has backed Northam and every Democratic congressman except one has supported him. While his opponent rides a wave of anti-Trump sentiment, Northam remains a centrist Democrat who admitted supporting George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004. However, the former U.S. Army doctor has shuffled further to the left since becoming state senator in a rural district in 2007. As a Virginia legislator and a lieutenant governor, he helped ban smoking in restaurants, worked with victim’s families of the Virginia Tech shooting to curb gun control and helped legalize cannabis oils. As Governor, Northam said he wants to offer tax credits to businesses with paid family leave. He also wants to revise the state’s grocery tax, which he says would cost $67 million. He’s also suggested decriminalizing possession of marijuana. During a debate with Perriello, Northam touted his relationship with Republican legislator saying “I look forward to the relationships I already have in Richmond and continuing that process in the upcoming four years.” As of March 31, Northam had $3.3 million in campaign funds.

Tom Perriello- The former congressman was elected to represent Virginia’s fifth 220px-perriello_official_portrait_28cropped29congressional district in 2008. However, his support for the Affordable Care Act cost him his seat two years later. Following his term, he worked for a progressive nonprofit before heading to the State Department in 2014. After announcing his candidacy in January, he quickly aligned himself with the party’s liberal messaging. Perriello has positioned himself as a policy-oriented progressive who supports free community college, paid family leave and universal pre-kindergarten. He’s also railed against a gas pipeline through Virginia. Meanwhile, Perriello has received outside support from Senator Elizabeth Warren (Mass-D), Senator Bernie Sanders (Vt-I) and several Obama aides. Their support comes in a state where Hillary Clinton won nearly two-thirds of the Democratic electorate against Sanders in 2016. Furthermore, more than half of Perriello’s $2.2 million in campaign funding has come from massive donors outside the state, including contributions from George Soros. While Perriello has championed progressive causes, his voting record on abortion issues and gun rights while in congress has come under fire.

Northam has outspent Perriello on television advertisements in Northern Virginia by $720,000 to $410,000. While 40 percent of the electorate lives in this area, support is split with 36 percent undecided. While Perriello leads Northam among Democratic voters ages 18 to 39 by 20 percent, the Lieutenant Governor leads by 16 points among those ages 65 and older. They run evenly among voters in between, but the older crowd fits the profile of likely voters, giving Northam a qualitative advantage on primary day.

Republican Primary

Ed GillespieEd Gillespie- The former counselor to George W. Bush and Chairman of the Republican National Committee ran against Senator Mark Warner in 2014. Gillespie’s performance surprised many (he lost by less than one percentage point). Prior to his run, he was a lobbyist in Washington, D.C., and provide government affairs service for Tyson Foods. His critics from the right have said he helped push legislation friendly to illegal immigrants. As part of his platform, Gillespie aims to cut income taxes by 10 percent over three years, improve government efficiency and ethics oversight, ban personal use of campaign funds, while strengthening second amendment rights and abortion restrictions. According to a May poll by Washington Post-Schar School, Gillespie has strong support among all registered Republicans. With $3.3 million in campaign funding, the former RNC chair has 38 percent support while a quarter remain undecided.

2012 Official Portrait Chairman StewartCorey Stewart- Known more for his pro-Confederate antics rather than his policy chops, the chairman of the Prince William Board of County Supervisors promises to crack down on illegal immigration while protecting Virginia’s Confederate symbols. As Chair of President Trump’s Campaign in Virginia, Stewart was fired for staging a protest at the State’s GOP headquarters. The anti-establishment Stewart wants to phase out the income tax, outlaw abortion without exception and slash state spending. The firebrand Stewart has attacked Gillespie repeatedly for receiving more than $1 million to lobby for Tyson Foods when allegations of smuggling illegal immigrants to arose. With slightly more than $400,000 in campaign funding, Stewart has 18 percent support among Virginia Republicans.

Jack Wagner – Originally elected to the Virginia House in 1992, then to the State Senate in 2000, Wagner has a significant level of experience in Virginia politics. As a Virginia Beach resident representing the 7th district, he sits on the Commerce and Labor, General Laws and Technology, Rehabilitation and Social Services, and Transportation committees. While Stewart and Gillespie want to cut state spending, Wagner maintains the budget is lean enough—citing a $1.2 billion shortfall in 2016. Wagner wants to increase the gasoline tax to subsidize infrastructure projects. He also wants to create accredited vocational programs in high schools that will support technical training for new jobs. Similar to his opponents, he opposes abortion in all instances except in the case of rape or if the mother’s life is endangered. With $178,000 in campaign funds, Wagner has 15 percent support among registered Republican voters.

DMGS Harrisburg Executive Director Named in Pennsylvania Power 100 List

Patty Mackavage, Harrisburg executive director with Duane Morris Government Strategies, was recently recognized by City & State PA as one of the 100 mostIMG_1230 politically influential Pennsylvanians in 2017. City & State PA, a media outlet covering Keystone Politics at the state and local level, credited Patty’s legislative work with three different governors, her diverse clientele and her knowledge of various issues impacting Pennsylvanians. Ranked at No. 60, Patty’s experience includes secretary and deputy secretary for legislative affairs in the administrations of both Governor Mark Schweiker and Governor Ed Rendell, as well as serving as legislative director for the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue during Governor Tom Ridge’s administration. With an expertise in the state budget process, and public finance/economic development, Patty now represents clients’ issues before the state legislature and local governments throughout Pennsylvania.

The 2017 City & State PA Power 100 list includes state and local officials, as well lobbyists, CEO’s, philanthropists, labor leaders and a number of other influential leaders in Pennsylvania. For a complete list of City & State PA’s Power 100, please visit City & State PA.

IMG_1229
Patty Mackavage with Ron Boston (L) and Stacy Gromlich (R) from the DMGS Harrisburg Team

 

Technology Briefing: Hacking Vehicles

By Danny Restivo (Posted 5/3/17)

A few months ago, we looked at the legislative developments surrounding driverless vehicles–something that nearly all 50 states are thinking about. As driverless vehicles become reality and states continue to grapple with regulatory challenges, more threats have emerged, including the ability for hackers to take control of someone’s car whether they’re driving it or the car drives itself.

Recent technological developments have allowed drivers greater accessibility and convenience than ever before. Whether it’s a WiFi hotspot, a mobile car starter application, a locator connected to your phone or a computer located under the hood that monitors maintenance, new technology has given consumers and technicians a level of sophistication that was once the work of science fiction.

Unfortunately, a greater degree of convenience means an increased level of vulnerability. In August 2015, two hackers compromised a tech reporters’ vehicle on the highway (The Wired reporter was working on a story about the dangers of car hacking and was aware of their attempts). From a remote location, the two hacked into the reporter’s 2014 Jeep Cherokee and controlled the vehicles steering and brakes from a computer more than 10 miles away. Ultimately, the reporter’s car ended up in a ditch (no one was injured). The story grabbed public attention and Fiat Chrysler recalled more than 1.4 million vehicles, including Ram, Dodge, Jeep and Chrysler vehicles. A similar organized hack occurred in June 2016 when a British security firm purchased a 2017 Mitsubishi Outlander and successfully disabled the vehicles alarm system. Nissan, Tesla and Chevy have all experienced similar breaches in their vehicles computer systems.

The hacks underscore a growing concern among regulators and legislators that automakers haven’t safely created communication systems. In light of these security vulnerabilities, the FBI, The Department of Transportation and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a public service announcement in March 2016.

“While not all hacking incidents may result in a risk to safety – such as an attacker taking control of a vehicle – it is important that consumers take appropriate steps to minimize risk,” the statement said. “Therefore, the FBI and NHTSA are warning the general public and manufacturers – of vehicles, vehicle components, and aftermarket devices – to maintain awareness of potential issues and cybersecurity threats related to connected vehicle technologies in modern vehicles.”

They added: “Vulnerabilities stemming from wireless communication, such as a cellular phone or tablet connected to the vehicle via USB, Bluetooth, or Wi-Fi, can put drivers at significant risk,” the statement also included several best practices for minimizing cybersecurity risks:

  • Ensure vehicle software is up to date
  • Be aware of making any modifications to vehicle software
  • Exercise discretion when connecting third party devices to a vehicle
  • Be aware of who has physical access to your vehicle

If you end up a victim of a car hack:

  • Check for outstanding vehicle recalls or vehicle software updates
  • Contact the manufacturer or authorized dealer
  • Contact the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration
  • Contact the FBI

The NHTSA and the FBI also suggested that automakers and auto companies should consider the full life cycle of their vehicles, while creating a rapid response and recovery system to help stem cybersecurity incidents. With the introduction of autonomous driving technology by companies like Tesla Motors, Uber, and others, yet another layer of vulnerability has complicated the issue. In September 2016, the NHTSA issued a framework for states to regulate self-driving cars, but critics fault it for its lack of focus on car hacking. A 2016 report from the Government Accountability Office, an independent watchdog organization, said the Department of Transportation had not taken enough steps to help prevent car hacking.

“Until [DOT] develops such a plan … the agency’s response efforts could be slowed as agency staff may not be able to quickly identify the appropriate actions to take,” the report stated.

Shortly after hackers showcased their ability on a 2014 Jeep Cherokee, Senators Ed Markey (D-Mass) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn) introduced the SPY Act of 2015 (Security and Privacy in Your Car).  The proposed legislation would have created a uniform regulatory standard for vehicle communication, while protecting a driver’s privacy data. The bill would also have created a “cyber dashboard” to inform the public of how well the vehicle protects drivers’ security and privacy.  While Markey and Blumenthal’s legislation did not make it out of committee during the 114th Congress, they recently reintroduced the SPY Act legislation in March as S. 680, along with a reintroduction of the Cybersecurity Standards for Aircraft to Improve Resilience (Cyber Air) Act (as S. 679 in the 115th Congress).

“This critical legislation will help protect the public against cybercriminals who exploit advances in technology like wireless-connected aircraft and self-driving cars,” said Blumenthal in a release following the reintroduction. “As technology rapidly advances, we must ensure that auto and airline industries protect their systems from cybersecurity attacks. Security and safety cannot be sacrificed as we achieve convenience and promise of wireless progress.”

Markey and Blumenthal cited a need to reintroduce the legislation because of an increased vulnerability in our transportation systems. After Uber unveiled plans to use driverless cars in Pittsburgh in September, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration unveiled a federal framework for the technology to prosper, giving states a significant degree of sovereignty. However, some believe the NHTSA’s mandate didn’t go far enough in solving technological vulnerabilities in vehicles. Conversely, tech researchers and developers fear any federal regulatory framework will not ensure safety because cyber technology often outpaces the law, making hacks more accessible.

In a bipartisan effort, the House introduced a new piece of legislation to help safeguard drivers. Representatives Ted Lieu (D-CA) and Joe Wilson (R-SC) have cosponsored the Security and Privacy in Your Car Study Act of 2017. Compared to the senate bill, the House bill would only perform a study of best practices.

While federal lawmakers debate the best path forward, some states have taken their own steps to improve cybersecurity in vehicles. In Michigan, home of the American auto industry, state lawmakers have decided to use deterrence as a weapon against car hacking. In August, the state senate unanimously passed a law that would increase the penalty to life in prison if the interference of a vehicle’s computer system resulted in death. According to state law, there’s a 10-year sentence and $50,000 fine for anyone who tampers with the computer system of a driverless vehicle that results in injury.

Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe announced a public-private commission in May 2015 to help protect state troopers against cyberattacks. Just prior to the announcement, The Old Dominion became the first state to create its own information and analysis sharing organization to help prevent against cyber-attacks. As part of its public safety initiative, researchers hacked into two Virginia State Trooper vehicles; a 2012 Chevrolet Impala and a 2013 Ford Taurus. Researchers from the University of Virginia and a few private tech companies, hacked into the vehicles control system before meddling with the gear shift, instrument panel, car locks, trunk and accessing the vehicles Bluetooth and key fob. While the organized hack was an attempt to raise awareness about the seriousness of car hacking, Governor McAuliffe continued a call for voluntary partnership between private and public entities in an effort to prevent car hacks.

While Michigan and Virginia pursue preventative action against car hacking, many state legislative bodies have tabled the issue. Every state has some sort of law on computer hacking, but none (besides Michigan) have laws that specifically deal with hacking vehicles. Meanwhile, New York University, University of Nevada, North Dakota State University, and others, have taken steps in research and development to create cybersecurity systems for self-driving cars. Furthermore, The Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee has begun experimenting with electronic control systems to help protect the federal government’s automotive fleet.

“Car hacking remains a significant issue for automakers and regulators, but it hasn’t spurned the federal government into action, just yet” says Brett Goldman, DMGS Manager of Special Projects. He adds that “it’s safe to say that at some point in the future, car hacking will receive greater public scrutiny, but whether that comes as an issue of legislative and regulatory foresight or as a reactionary measure to the unthinkable remains to be seen.”

 

Looking Ahead: The Intersection Between Cyber Security Regulation and the Financial Sector

By Danny Restivo

On September 13, The New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) proposed a law calling for all regulated financial institutions in the Empire State to enact a list of cybersecurity measures.[1] The proposal requires banking, insurance, and financial services companies under the jurisdiction of the NYDFS to adopt and maintain a strong cybersecurity program.

Among the guidelines, the proposed regulation requires organizations (termed as “covered entities”) to designate a Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) to oversee cyber security programs and procedures. The mandates also include oversight measures for information shared by or with third parties, including law firms, accounting services, and marketing groups.[2]

“New York, the financial capital of the world, is leading the nation in taking decisive action to protect consumers and our financial system from serious economic harm that is often perpetrated by state-sponsored organizations, global terrorist networks, and other criminal enterprises,” said Governor Andrew M. Cuomo in a statement from the New York State Department of Financial Services. “This regulation helps guarantee the financial services industry upholds its obligation to protect consumers and ensure that its systems are sufficiently constructed to prevent cyber-attacks to the fullest extent possible.”[3]

Currently, the proposed regulation is open to a 45-day public commenting period after it was published on September 28 in the New York State Register. If the proposal is adopted, covered entities will have 180 days from January 1, 2017 to comply with its requirements.
The proposal aims to protect consumers, as well as financial institutions from an increase in cyber-attacks. In 2015, large banks in the Philippines, Vietnam, Bangladesh and Ecuador experienced major hacks that netted millions for cybercriminals.[4]  In light of these high-profile incidents, a number of large financial institutions have invested in secure digital infrastructures. As a result, many organizations already fall in-line with New York’s proposal. However, many smaller covered entities have not made the same investments, and if the law is approved, they will be forced to make costly upgrades.[5]
Critics opposed to the regulation say the new guidelines overlap with mandates set forth by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC), an interagency that includes the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.[6] Although the FFIEC proposal has many of the same requirements, the NYDFS goes further in calling for cyber security assessments, notification of authorities within 72 hours of a breach and the appointment of a CISO.

While Cuomo dubbed the legislation a “first-in-the-nation,” other states have enacted similar regulation and guidance regarding cybersecurity. The Massachusetts’ Standards for the Protection of Personal Information of Residents of the Commonwealth requires every business holding personal information on residents to comply with certain security safeguards.[7] Moreover, state authorities around the country have provided organizations with similar instructions for the adoption of cybersecurity standards. In California, the Attorney General’s office publishes an annual report that includes specific practices for “reasonable security measures” that align with the states information security statutes. These recommendations are not requirements, allowing organizations the flexibility to craft a cybersecurity program that best responds to their industry-specific vulnerabilities.[8]

Eric Martins and Brett Goldman of DMGS agree: “Ultimately, the NYDFS is far more prescriptive than any current state-authored regulation,”  said Martins. While organizations outside the Empire State may want to ignore the NYDFS proposal, other governmental agencies have recognized the need to establish “minimum standards” for the protection of consumer-sensitive information.[9] If approved, New York’s cyber security regulation will be the first and it will serve as an important model for other the efforts of other states’ that pursue comparable legislation. “I think the bigger question here” adds Goldman, “is how quickly other states will take notice and make sure that their financial institutions and other businesses are proactive in protecting themselves from Cyber vulnerabilities”

[1] “Governor Cuomo Announces Proposal of First-In-the-Nation Cybersecurity Regulation to Protect Consumers and Financial Institutions.” New York Department of Financial Services, Sept 13, 2016. https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-proposal-first-nation-cybersecurity-regulation-protect-consumers-and

[2] Bucsescu, Marle and Waxman, Matthew. “NY State Cyber Regulations for Banks.” Lawfareblog.com, Sept. 19, 2016. https://www.lawfareblog.com/ny-state-cyber-regulation-banks-model.

[3]Cuomo

[4] Pagliery, Jose. “Global Banking System: What you need to Know” CNN Money. May 28, 2016. http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/27/technology/swift-bank-hack/

[5] Taylor, Harriet. “Critics are Skeptical of New York’s Proposed Financial Security Laws.” CNBC. September 26, 2016. http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/26/critics-are-skeptical-of-new-yorks-proposed-financial-cybersecurity-rules.html

[6] Jacob, C. Reade; Mao, Mark C.; Raether, I. Ronald Jr., and Taylor, Ashley L. “NY Proposes Regulations Requiring Financial Services Companies to Implement Cyber Security Measures.” Consumer Financial Services Law Monitor. September 26, 2016. http://www.consumerfinancialserviceslawmonitor.com/2016/09/ny-proposes-regulations-requiring-financial-services-companies-to-implement-cyber-security-measures/?utm_source=Mondaq&utm_medium=syndication&utm_campaign=View-Original

[7] Jacob, C. Reade; Mao, Mark C.; Raether, I. Ronald Jr., and Taylor, Ashley L

[8] Harris, Kamala.  “California Data Breach Report: February 2016.” California Department of Justice.
https://oag.ca.gov/breachreport2016

[9] Roberts, Jeff John. “Look Out Companies, Here Comes the Cyber Regulations.” Fortune, September 25, 2016.
http://fortune.com/2016/09/25/cyber-regulations/

Brett Goldman edited this report

NJ Legislative Alert: S2533 Contractors Registration Act

S2533 Contractors  Registration Act is a proposed piece of legislation concerning the requirements of residential general contractors and home renovators. This law aims to better protect the consumer while also updating regulations to ensure contractors are fully covered while completing jobs in a safe and legal manner.
S2533 seeks to:

  • Require contractors to carry a bond amounting to a minimum of 50,000 dollars to provide restitution in the event of a violation of “Contractor’s Registration Act”
  • Rewrite the contractor’s “notice to consumer” regarding the work agreed to be completed with the intention of allowing the consumer a better understanding of state regulation and easier avenue to cancel the work
  • Ensure contractors complete jobs by creating a series of fines of up to 20,000 dollars

Current Status: Referred to Senate Commerce Committee
For more information, please contact Brett Goldman with DMGS at 215-979-1326 or emailbjgoldman@dmgs.com

Billy Hoffer Contributed to this Alert