- HOME
- About
- Topics
- Angelides
- Arnold Schwarzenegger
- California Attorney General Race
- California Congressional Races
- California Democratic Party
- California Governor Race 2010
- California Legislative Races
- California Lt. Governor Race
- California Secretary of State Race
- California State Budget
- California State Controller
- Campaign Finance Reform
- Campaigns
- Cell Phones
- Children and Families
- Consumer Rights
- Corporate Accountability
- Criminal Justice
- Death With Dignity
- Disaster Preparation
- Discrimination and Civil Rights
- Economy/ Economic Crisis
- Education
- Elections and Voting
- Electoral College
- Energy
- Environment
- Farm Animal Cruelty Ballot Measure
- Flood Control
- Food Safety
- Gas Prices
- Governor's Election Race
- Gun control
- Health Care
- Health Insurance
- Hiram Johnson's Corner
- Housing
- Human Rights
- Humor
- Immigration
- Infrastructure
- Initiative Reform
- Insurance Commissioner Race
- Labor
- Language and Politics
- Legal System
- Media and Communication
- Minimum Wage
- Open Government
- Pharmaceutical Companies
- Politics
- Preschool
- Presidential Election 2008
- Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act Prop
- Prison Reform
- Privacy
- Privitization
- Prop 11-Redistricting/Reapportionment
- Prop 12--Veterans Housing Bond
- Prop 1A--High Speed Rail
- Prop 2--Treatment of Farm Animals
- Prop 3-Children's Hospital Bonds
- Prop 4 Waiting Period and Parental Notification
- Prop 5--Non-violent drug offenses
- Prop 6--Police and law enforcement spending
- Prop 7 and 10-Alternative Fuel and Energy Bond
- Prop 8 and-Marriage Equality
- Prop 85 Parental Notification
- Prop 86 Tobacco Tax
- Prop 87--Alternative Energy
- Prop 9 Parole
- Prop 90
- Prop 91--Transportation Funding
- Prop 92- Community Colleges
- Prop 93--Term Limits
- Props 94-97--Tribal Gaming
- Props 98 and 99
- Racial Disparities
- Responsible Lending
- Retirement Benefits
- Site of the Day
- Solar Initiative
- Structure of California Government
- Taxes
- Toxic Chemicals
- Transportation/Transit
- Water
- Westly
- Workers' Compensation
- Stories
- Governor Signs Legislation To Prevent Loss Of Healthy Families Coverage For Over 900,000 Children
- Townhall Meeting Focuses on At-Risk Babies and Toddlers
- State Park Cuts Lack Logic
- Conservation Organizations Oppose California Policy That Would Give Carbon Credits for Forest Clearcutting
- WellPoint and Its Subsidiary Have Waged Campaign to Derail Health Reform
- Article Repeats Right-Wing Myth About State Spending
- Can Obama Orate His Way Out of Another Crisis?
- Furlough Issue Comes To Head This Week at UC
- Sean Hannity Spreads Dangerous Misinformation about California Water
- Daring To Get It Right: Legislature Says 'No' To Dangerous Last Minute Water Policy Proposal
- Weekly Radio Address: Galgiani, Coto Report Progress In Bipartisan Delegation’s Meetings With Key Cabinet Officials And Congressional Leaders On Budgetary And Policy Issues Critical To California
- A Missed Opportunity: Economic Recovery Should Start With the Prisons
- Directory
- Donate
- Contact Us
RSS Advertise Here
Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.
Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.
Our latest headlines
- Weekly Radio Address: Assembly Lead Water Negotiators Huffman, Caballero Discuss this Week’s Historic Agreement to Solve California’s Water Crisis
- Feinstein Once Again Flirts With Entering the Governor’s Race
- A Good Health Care Bill Emerging from the House
- Schwarzenegger Applauds Passage of Peripheral Canal/Dams Water Package
- "Historic" Water Deal Draws Both Praise and Criticism
- Republican State Senators Vote for Administrative Chaos, Backdoor Cuts in IHSS
- Assembly Budget Committee Follow-up Informational Hearing on Implementation on IHSS Program Changes
About Us
David Greenwald, Editor. (Contact David.)
CFC Education Foundation, Publisher. (Contact us.)
Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column?
Contact David here.
About California Progress Report.
Founded by Frank D. Russo (Publisher and Editor, 2006-08).
Sponsors
Books
Protecting Privacy of Children, Rights of Parents Unfinished in California
By Zack Kaldveer
Consumer Federation of California
In 2005 a tiny school district in Northern California inadvertently ignited a statewide debate over the appropriate use of modern technologies in the school system. The technology in question was Radio Frequency Identification, or RFID, which the district had embedded in student badges without parents' knowledge. The children were required to carry these tracking devices or suffer suspension.
Controversy erupted when parents discovered that the new badges - which function somewhat like a GPS system - exposed their children to stalking, tracking and identity theft. Worse, the children were “chipped” without parental notice or consent. The district had intended to use the technology to remotely monitor student movement on campus; even installing readers on the bathroom doors. Parents rightly objected, strongly, but it wasn’t until a media firestorm was ignited that the district backed down.
Had the district engaged parents in a conversation before installing the RFID-enhanced ID system the community’s sensitivities and concerns could perhaps have been adequately balanced with the districts goals of enhancing campus safety and improving attendance recording.
Unfortunately that’s not how it happened, but that’s how it should have happened.
Given the controversial nature of RFID technologies, and the inherent risks associated with it, school districts should be required to notify parents and get their consent BEFORE “chipping” their children.
Schools are already required to get parental permission for sex education, field trips, and in some cases, student cell-phone use on campus.
If the Sutter case illustrates nothing else, it’s that parents, not schools, should decide whether children must carry a tracking devise. Mechanical devices might be useful for tracking cattle, but when it comes to our children, RFID’s are no substitute for teacher and school staff responsibility.
Parental notification and consent would also provide an important check on district incentives to use invasive RFID-systems. Because schools receive funding based on attendance, a financial incentive exists to closely monitor student presence on campus. But there is a line that can be crossed – RFID monitors in the bathroom, for example – between sensible oversight and invasion of privacy.
Absent a countervailing force in defense of student privacy, the district’s natural tendency will be to secure its interests at the expense of the students’. Parents can only function as this countervailing force if they are granted their rightful seat at the table. Currently, no such right exists!
The Governor had an opportunity to rectify this injustice in the form of Senate Bill (SB) 29 by Senator Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto). The legislation was specifically crafted as a response to the Sutter County incident and to ensure that in the future schools notify parents and get their consent before embedding students with RFID-enabled tracking devices.
This pragmatic measure – remarkably and painstakingly moderate so as to be in tune with the Governor’s general sensibilities - was supported by nearly every state legislator and organizations spanning the political spectrum from the ACLU to the Liberty Coalition to the Parents and Teachers Association to the Consumer Federation of California.
Nonetheless, the Governor vetoed the bill – and missed an important opportunity to ensure child safety, protect personal privacy, and defend the rights of California parents.
This issue is far from over. The rapid evolution of RFID technology and its uses makes it essential that we draw common sense lines now. We look forward to renewing, and winning, this debate in the near future. California parents and their children are depending on it.
Zack Kaldveer works for the Consumer Federation of California, http://www.consumercal.org/ a non-profit advocacy organization. Since 1960 CFC has testified before the California legislature on dozens of bills that affect millions of consumers. CFC also appears before state agencies in support of consumer regulations.
Comments
new world order, any body!!!!conspiracy theory, yeah!right!
Posted by: jesse at November 18, 2008 11:07 AM
Whoa! This is serious stuff - reminiscent of Nazi Germany. How can this kind of thing happen in the US in 2008? The public is quitely being distracted by Sarah Palin while parents' and childrens' civil liberties are being violated. We can't let the Governor's veto end the battle a balance between children's safety and our basic privacy rights. Kudos to Zack Kaldveer for exposing an important issue.
Posted by: Eve Visconti at November 18, 2008 03:03 PM
Sorry, comments are temporarily disabled. We're doing a bit of server maintenance on the commenting area. We'll be back up and running shortly. Thank you for your patience.
Get Email Updates
Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.
© 2008 California Progress Report Our copyright and fair use policy.
Powered by Mandate Media. Logo design by Jane Norling.
