Harry Reid Wants To Try One More Time To Force Cybersecurity Bill Through Congress

from the good-luck-with-that dept

Mon, Nov 12th 2012 2:33pm — Mike Masnick

Despite the fact that his last attempt to shove a questionable Cybersecurity Act through Congress failed miserably, rumors are spreading that Harry Reid (perhaps at the urging of the White House) is going to try to use the lame duck session of Congress to try to get the flawed Cybersecurity Act through Congress once again. Given that those against the bill haven't seen any changes, it's hard to see a different result happening this time around, but you never know how last minute horse trading will fall out.

Reid is aiming to bring the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 to the floor at the end of next week after the Senate votes on Sen. Jon Tester's (D-Mont.) sportsmen's bill, according to Senate aides.

It appears that Reid's strategy is to try to make Republicans who voted against the bill "soft" on terrorism if they don't support the bill:

Last month Reid vowed to bring the cybersecurity bill to the floor in the lame-duck session, saying that Republicans "will have one more chance to back their words with action, and work with us to pass a bill."

This, of course, is silly. "Action" for the sake of action is dumb. Especially when it leads to passing a questionable bill that will have a negative impact on civil liberties and is targeting a problem that still has not been adequately laid out in any detail.

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: congress, cybersecurity, harry reid, senate

19 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Atkray (profile), 12 Nov 2012 @ 2:45pm

Another example of why I increasingly believe that "gridlock" in Washington is a good thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- vegetaman (profile), 12 Nov 2012 @ 4:47pm
  
  Re:
  Indeed. Can you imagine the circus if only one party ruled all, and we had to suffer the end result of every one of their stupid ideas?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- gorehound (profile), 12 Nov 2012 @ 5:41pm
  
  Re:
  Last month Reid vowed to bring the cybersecurity bill to the floor in the lame-duck session, saying that Republicans "will have one more chance to back their words with action, and work with us to pass a bill."
  
  DAMN These A-Hole Politicians.Reid you should feel lucky I even bothered to Support your Democratic Poop Party.Vote GOP get screwed.........Vote Dem get screwed.
  Next Election I am done with this stupid Garbage and will Vote for who best will Serve me and my Family.
  Vote for either Big Party and Be Controlled.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 12 Nov 2012 @ 3:39pm

One comment per hour (per person), as I suggested long ago...
as a way to limit idiocy. But here it's due to lack of interest. -- If you don't get more interesting items, Mike, I'm going to leave! Done it before, you know that I will! Don't dare me!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chris-Mouse (profile), 12 Nov 2012 @ 3:54pm
  
  Re: One comment per hour (per person), as I suggested long ago...
  Go ahead, I dare you to leave!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- silverscarcat (profile), 12 Nov 2012 @ 4:36pm
  
  Re: One comment per hour (per person), as I suggested long ago...
  No one's forcing you to stay.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The eejit (profile), 12 Nov 2012 @ 11:30pm
    
    Re: Re: One comment per hour (per person), as I suggested long ago...
    Well, I dunno, I hear the Ebon Dragon is into torture...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 12 Nov 2012 @ 4:43pm
  
  Re: One comment per hour (per person), as I suggested long ago...
  By "going to leave", do you mean "going" as in "piracy is going to kill the music industry"?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Alana (profile), 12 Nov 2012 @ 7:26pm
  
  Re: One comment per hour (per person), as I suggested long ago...
  Friend, the first step into fixing an addiction is admitting you have one.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Nov 2012 @ 4:20pm

If you don't get more interesting items, Mike, I'm going to leave!

Please with sugar on top? Need a boot in the ass to help convince you?

I'd say it has more to do with your constantly being reported than the articles. Nice to see your nonsense disappear so the grownups can talk.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 12 Nov 2012 @ 4:26pm

One wonders which cybersecurity firm Harry Reid has a cushy job lined up at.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Nov 2012 @ 4:27pm

someone should start calling him a terrorist
someone should start calling him a terrorist
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
skinny poppy (profile), 12 Nov 2012 @ 5:03pm

Harry Reid: Less freedom, more junk mail for all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Beech, 12 Nov 2012 @ 5:59pm

Harry Reid (read with voice of a ballpark hot dog vendor): "High paying lobbyist job! I got your high paying lobbyist jobs here! Only one vote needed! Lots of you are close to unemployment and could use a high paying lobbyist job!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pixelation, 12 Nov 2012 @ 7:58pm

Crook?
"chairman of the Nevada Gaming Commission"

Translation... In debt to the mob.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rekrul, 13 Nov 2012 @ 1:18am

It appears that Reid's strategy is to try to make Republicans who voted against the bill "soft" on terrorism if they don't support the bill:

How is he going to make them "soft" on terrorism? :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That One Guy (profile), 13 Nov 2012 @ 1:42am

To any republican senators that may read this:
(Feel free to use the following to deal with this nut-job)

I oppose this, and similar bills not because I am 'soft' on terrorism, but because I refuse to do the job of the terrorists for them by inflicting harm on the public I am supposed to represent, through poorly worded and poorly thought out bills aimed at dealing with a threat that hasn't been established to be a serious threat, or one that cannot be dealt with through already existing processes and procedures.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Nov 2012 @ 6:01am

given what has happened recently with the ex-director of the CIA and now another general in a high security position, Reid wants to get a cybersecurity bill through that deals with people in high profile positions that could impact national security and leave the ordinary, 99.99999% innocent people alone. as usual, keeping tabs on those that do nothing is easier than on those that could prove very costly, in more ways than one!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Aztecian (profile), 13 Nov 2012 @ 10:29am

Advisors
Doesn't the poor man have any advisors or interns or maybe a janitor or some guy wandering around aimlessly to tell him how ignorant and perhaps dim witted this all makes him appear?

This ain't computer science, y'know.

I think maybe Reid needs to get out more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]