Proponent Testimony on H.B. 482
By Linda Woggon
Vice President of Governmental Affairs
Ohio Chamber of Commerce
Before the
House State Government Committee
May 22, 2002

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I am Linda Woggon. I serve as Vice President of Governmental Affairs with the Ohio Chamber of Commerce.

As I’m sure you know, the Chamber is Ohio’s largest and most diverse statewide business association, representing over 5000 companies of all sizes and from all segments of business and industry. The Ohio Chamber, as well as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and local Chambers in nearly every community across our country, are strong proponents and protectors of our free enterprise system.

I am here today, to present proponent testimony on HB 482, the Electronic Government Services Act. We believe this bill acknowledges and supports the efficiencies that can be gained through the application of new technologies to government services while providing an important safeguard to help ensure a healthy and competitive private sector. Both of these elements are important to our free enterprise system.

Last week you heard testimony from representatives of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) a national organization of state legislators that drafted this model legislation. I think it is important to note, that although HB 482 as it is currently before you, mirrors the ALEC model bill, Rep. Buehrer, the bill’s sponsor, is open to suggestions that will improve the bill and make it workable for both Ohio governmental agencies and private sector enterprises.

HB 482 identifies and tries to address an on-going challenge that has the potential for taking on broad new dimensions with the advancement of technology. Over the years, members of the Ohio General Assembly have considered a number of bills aimed at discouraging government competition with the private sector. Now, HB 482 focuses that discussion on the public/private competition that is arising in the arena of electronic commerce.

As a proponent of this bill, I’d like to share with you what we believe the bill does and does not do. But, first let me say that I think we can all agree there is rarely a bill introduced in this legislature that can’t be interpreted diffently by everyone who reads it. In large part, that’s what makes the legislative process so challenging. Forging agreement among divergent interests on complicated issues, phrases -- even words is the essence of our public policy process. So with that said, let me share our interpretation of this bill.

HB 482 is not a bill about privatization. Privatization is the process of contracting with a private company to provide a governmental function and that’s not what this bill is about. This bill does not require a governmental agency to contact with a private sector company to perform a governmental function, nor does it prohibit government from fulfilling its governmental function even when private sector companies provide the same or similar services.

Also, the bill does not prohibit a governmental agency from providing electronic services to the public that go beyond its traditional governmental function so long as there are not two or more competing private enterprises providing the same services.

The bill does, however, place procedural constraints on a governmental agency when it intends to provide an electronic commerce service outside the scope of its normal governmental function that is already provided by two or more competing private enterprises. In this situation the bill does not prohibit the governmental agency from providing such a service, but it does establish a process of public notice and evaluation before the agency proceeds.

If a governmental entity decides to provide an electronic commerce service that is beyond the scope of its normal governmental function and that service is already provided by two of more private enterprises, it seems to make good sense to carefully evaluate that governmental decision through a public process. That’s why the Ohio Chamber supports this bill.

As I stated earlier, Rep. Buehrer has invited all of the parties interested in this legislation to recommend procedural revisions that may make HB 482 more workable while still achieving its goals.
We believe it may be possible to craft a public notice and hearing process similar to the one employed by the Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review (JCARR). As you know, JCARR provides a forum for both public input and legislative oversight. It ensures that the public receives notice of proposed agency rules, has an opportunity to comment on them and allows lawmakers to ensure that an agency’s proposed rules are within the rulemaking authority that was statutorily delegated. A similar process would seem to meet the goals of HB 482.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. I would be happy to respond to any questions you or the other committee members may have.