White House Reiterates Plans To Veto CISPA In Its Current Form; Though For The Wrong Reasons
from the amendments-not-convincing dept
As I'm sure you remember, the House passed CISPA with a few amendments -- some of which may have limited the possible abuses, while at the same time expanding the scope. Right before the bill went up for a vote, the White House stated that it would veto CISPA, if it got to the President's desk. It appears that, even with the amendments, the White House is still not willing to support the bill. White House "Cybersecurity Coordinator" Howard Schmidt appeared on CSPAN reiterating the White House's objections to CISPA, specifically calling out the problematic privacy issues.That said, the White House is still supporting the Lieberman cybersecurity bill in the Senate, which isn't quite as bad as some of the other proposals, but still has plenty of problems. And, most importantly, still doesn't include any clear explanation for why it's needed. It's bizarre and troubling that no one in the federal government seems willing to provide a real justification for any of these bills others than "oooooh, it's scary out there on the internet!!"
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cispa, cybersecurity, veto, white house
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The option proposed was to kill you.... But that's extreme , We will just torture you instead.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"However, for the reasons stated herein, if H.R. 3523 were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill."
You conclude, "the White House stated that it would veto CISPA, if it got to the President's desk"
It's like you took Journalism 101 from Joseph Goebbels. Funny how the C-span (real journalists) have a different take: "The White House recently announced it may veto the House's key cybersecurity bill, which was authored by Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), and passed in late April. "
What you also ignore is the fact that the bill in it's current form (which the President's advisors would recommend vetoing) is very far from a finished product. The bill they may veto is NOT the final bill. This really amounts to election year grandstanding. Of course they can quiet critics by saying they may veto this bill because they know full well that this bill won't be the bill that hits the President's desk. I'd look for something very similar to CISPA to pass right before winter recess when all of the election year bullshit has ended.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Reasons
2. "Cybersecurity" contractors are a good source of campaign contributions and cushy post-public jobs for reps and staffers alike.
3. To try and prevent/prosecute the next Wikileaks or other online data leaks of politically damaging information
4. Both parties agree on it
5. It falls under the cynical umbrella of "protecting the children"
6. It's unlikely to actually fix anything so it will no doubt need to be "shored up" in the future, giving further opportunities to be seen doing something and give/recieve favors.
7. The public is largely unaware and uninformed on these issues.
Given the above, some form of this bill passing is as inevitable as a Techdirt troll coming back after proclaiming that they are done with this site forever.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I'd look for another internet shit storm around the same time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Reasons
They are done with this site forever!!
[/troll]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Liars, damned liars and politicians.
Obama December 2012: "Achtung! Election won!! Full speed into FREEDOMSUPERCISPA!! Hey, count your blessings - the other side wanted to gas you and then take all your money - we just take way your rights and then take all your money!"
Resistance is futile.
That's all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Republicans in the house (and a lot of republicans in the senate to) strongly oppose the Lieberman version of the bill, specifically because it would add federal cyber security standards for businesses to adhere to in order to protect their data better.
Why do they oppose the security standards? Because it's a 'job killing big government regulation' on businesses in their own words.
So... how exactly can CISPA protect us from cyber security attacks if big businesses with lots of data about consumers on their servers (the kind of data CISPA is met to protect) continue to have weak security guarding that information because the businesses decide it's just too expense to spend the extra money protecting it properly?
Sure, it might make it a bit easier AFTER a cyber attack for the government to get the information necessary from those companies to find out who did it, but it won't stop the attack from happening in the first place! And really, if a big corporation is hacked and has lots of data stolen do you really think they'd tell the federal government "we're not giving you information you need to catch the hackers who did this to us" without CISPA being passed?
To me, this all looks like a blatant attempt by some big businesses to shift blame for any cyber attacks away from the business being attacked and onto the government, with as little work for the business as possible. That way if a company gets attacked they can point to CISPA and say "it's the governments fault for not stopping them, we've been sharing lots of information with them to prevent something like this from happening".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Liars, damned liars and politicians.
A lot of people in this Country are getting very angry at Washington and these people are from all sides of the Political Spectrum.
Righties & Lefties hate being controlled and a large percentage of all Citizens are not happy with the Government.
Internet gives Washington the Cancer a good excuse for taking even more Rights away from Citizens.
We have Patriot Act,NDAA, and we have these bozos who lie and swear that we do not ever torture people.They even debate Waterboarding and stuff like that is not Torturing someone.
Many of us realize that when you put all these losses of Rights together they add up to a very bad picture.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Liars, damned liars and politicians.
Politics in the US (and many other countries) has been completely co-opted by business dollars and businesses rule the peoples' lives through sham politics and sham politicians and by stoking distractions while they rob people blind.
The whole caveman left/right fer us/agin us game these days is just a part of a ploy to keep the sheeple distracted while they're robbed of everything by (and enslaved by) the Oligarchs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Good attitude. Do you know how CISPA came to be?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Thanks for tossing that in. Your post started off looking like it was going to make a point worth hearing and I was planning on reading it. I'm glad you made that comment early, to tip me off that the rest of your thoughts aren't worth reading before I wasted the time to actually read them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I don't fully understand your title
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The cake is a lie >:O
U.S.A
FEMA camps
Re-Education camps
False Flag
Monitoring
surveillance
President: Fascist & Socialist
Secret Prisons
People spying and reporting on their neighbors.
Assassinations
Black Bagging (Kidnapping)
The list goes on...
Just like Nazi Germany, Hitler had people bagged or killed if they did not agree with him. He had concentration camps (FEMA camps USA) he had camps that people go their not liking Hitler or not know who he is and after their out they loved him as if he was their hero. Hitler did false flag (9/11 USA) to go to war. Hitler told People to spy and report their neighbors if they feel they are a threat. (The U.S Gov is doing the same thing).
I highly encourage every one to look around and look at back at history.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The cake is a lie >:O
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The cake is a lie >:O
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The NDAA-style Veto
[ link to this | view in thread ]