Senate Staffers Get Up to Speed on RFID

More than two years ago, I suggested to Dorgan that the United States create a national RFID policy, similar to the National Nanotechnology Policy. He was reluctant. His concern was that once you start educating legislators about something, they will want to legislate it. Fair enough. But with some already considering legislation, Dorgan is right that the time is now ripe to bring people in Washington up to speed on the technology.

The Senate Caucus is important because it will help legislators begin to understand the technology and how it is likely to be used. Legislators need to understand the business benefits and potential consumer benefits of RFID—and they need to understand the limits of the technology, as well as how it could be abused.

While I strongly support education, I share Senator Dorgan’s view that it shouldn’t reflexively lead to legislation. Legislation is not needed today, in my view. Some editorialists have taken the stance that the RFID industry is opposing any regulation in an effort to prevent anything from interfering with what the editorialist see as the greedy pursuit of profits. There may be some who take that view. Personally, I think the situation is more nuanced than that.

Dan Engels said it best, in a prepared statement. What we are striving to do, he wrote, is to define the boundaries of what are acceptable and unacceptable uses of RFID. The industry has already defined the use of tracking people without their knowledge as unacceptable, but legislating that could become problematic. There might, for instance, be important exceptions, such as tracking known terrorists. It’s far more sensible to see how the technology is used in the real world and address problems as they arise.

The best thing that legislators could do right now is to get the facts about RFID. Understand the technologies potential and limits. Understand the huge benefits this will bring to businesses and consumers. I commended Senators Cornyn and Dorgan at the event for setting up the caucus. Now I hope they and their colleagues in Washington will take the next best steps: avoid jumping to conclusions, watch the technology evolve, monitor how it's used and be prepared to enact legislation only if it’s necessary to enable companies and consumers to get the benefits of RFID while reducing abuses.

Mark Roberti is the founder and editor of RFID Journal. If you would like to comment on this article, click on the link below.