One Person, Endless Data: Prohibiting Personal Political Viewpoint Data Processing to Combat Voter Suppression

(Excerpt) Polarization in American politics and elections continues to rise, due in no small part to advancing digital marketing technologies co-opted by political actors. In 2016, Cambridge Analytica, a political consulting firm, spearheaded right-wing populist campaigns to political victory in the United States and United Kingdom. The firm reconfigured commercial data processing methods to process personal political viewpoint data (“PPVD”) and perform “psychological manipulation.” While the firm has since dissolved, such practices are still used to manipulate American elections. The European Union (“EU”), also in 2016, enacted the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”). As a comprehensive data privacy reform, GDPR, in part, prohibited PPVD processing. In so doing, GDPR proscribed the techniques Cambridge Analytica used to lead the Brexit movement and Donald Trump to electoral victories. Permitting political campaigns to process PPVD allows them to manipulate voters and suppress turnout in elections. GDPR is a comprehensive defense against a novel threat to the principle of democratic self-government. American data privacy regulations are virtually nonexistent. The EU, unlike the United States, accounted for PPVD processing in its comprehensive data privacy reform package with a specific prohibition. As the world’s largest economy, the United States must also specifically prohibit PPVD processing to combat increasingly effective methods of voter manipulation and suppression. GDPR offers the terms of such a prohibition. To repair the damaged integrity in their elections, the United States must prohibit PPVD processing to combat increasingly effective methods of voter manipulation and suppression. Luckily, GDPR demonstrates a path forward. With minimal modification, Congress can adopt GDPR’s PPVD processing prohibition to protect voter data. This Note first examines contemporary data processing techniques and how those techniques—including microtargeting, the premier data processing methodology—are used to manipulate voters. Later, this Note highlights the perceived efficacy and public opinion surrounding those practices. Further comment is made on the anachronistic data privacy landscape in the United States. Then, this Note suggests adoption of the most relevant provisions of GDPR necessary to protect self-determination in American elections. This Note concludes by reiterating the import of personal political data and underscoring the exigence of the recommended prohibitions.