ALERT: CISPA Passes House, moves to Senate - Contact ur Senators and Reid to STOP CISPA

[Brian4Liberty]

People are saying on Twitter it passed the House. Are they confused because it passed the Committee?

 

[Created4]

Reports are it DID pass the House: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75670.html

 

[tsai3904]

Reports are it DID pass the House: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75670.html

That article is from 2012.

The House passed a resolution that set out the rules to debate the bill. Many people confused that as the House passing the final bill.

The final vote on HR 624 is tomorrow.

 

[Spoa]

Final Vote is tomorrow.

Four GOP Representatives even voted against the motion to proceed to debate the bill: Jones, McClintock, Rohrabacher, and Stockman. I expect they are sure that they will vote against it tomorrow since they didn't even want to debate it.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll109.xml

 

[Spoa]

Dan Bongino (ran for senate last year and running for MD-GOV in 2014) tweeted against CISPA:

Dan Bongino ‏@dbongino 56s
#EndCISPA , but only if you value your liberty & privacy. #tlot

Visit his campaign site here: http://bongino.com/

 

[tsai3904]

House just passed HR 624, CISPA.

[TABLE="width: 100"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Y[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]N[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]R[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]196[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]29[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]D[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]92[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]98[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Total[/TD]
[TD]288[/TD]
[TD]127[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Roll call:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll117.xml

 

[WarAnonymous]

Roll call:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll117.xml

Congratulations to Ohio! Every house rep minus Tim Ryan(D) voted for this awesome bill!

 

[pmbug]

Sent the following to Randy Weber (TX-14) this morning:

I read this morning that you voted for CISPA ( http://gizmodo.com/5994997/every-representitive-who-voted-for-cispa-and-how-to-contact-them ). Words fail to adequately express my disappointment. I am not a "14 year old tweeter" and I'm extremely troubled by the invasion of privacy issues raised by CISPA (Please check with the Electronic Frontier Foundation [ eff.org ] for more info). Congress can and should do better. While I hope that the Texas delegation to the Senate does a better job in representing the citizens of this State, I realize I will need to be more active in contacting your office in the future to express my concerns before you vote on troubling legislation - something I rarely had to do when your predecessor held the office.

Anyone on this forum not know who his predecessor was?

 

[FSP-Rebel]

Mullin really turned out to be a disappointment in many more ways than one. Mulvaney, Chaffetz and Schweikert still inconsistent and such a shame they would vote for this. H/t to Bentivolio for voting No and obviously all of our other trusted allies who don't need to be named did their duty.

 

[sailingaway]

bump for Senate action

 

[sailingaway]

 

[WhistlinDave]

Got this response from Feinstein. To be honest it sounds good at first, but then some of the language toward the end kind of concerns me a little. I wonder if she's dancing around real reform in the same way her 2013 NDAA amendment seemed to still leave open a loophole in the language to keep indefinite detention without due process legal. Here is her e-mail response. Am I worrying about this wording for nothing? (Part that concerns me in bold.)


"Dear Mr. ......:

Thank you for your letter concerning the "Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act" (H.R. 3523). I appreciate your taking the time to write and welcome the opportunity to respond.

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act was introduced in the House of Representatives on February 13, 2013 by Representative Mike Rogers (R-MI). The bill would, among other things, establish procedures to allow the Intelligence Community to share cyber threat intelligence with the private sector.

I agree with the authors of the House bill that our nation faces a serious and growing threat from cyber attacks and espionage—threats to both our national security and our economy. Effective cybersecurity requires that information on cyber threats and defenses in our government's hands be passed to the private sector, and that information from industry be shared with the government.

At the same time, it is critical that our efforts to improve cyber security include robust privacy protections. In particular, we must ensure that our constitutional rights and liberties are protected, and place proper limits on the government's use of cyber security information that it obtains from the private sector.

Last Congress I authored the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2012 (S. 2102). While that legislation accomplished many of the same goals as the House legislation, it included robust privacy protections and safeguards against the private sector abusing information sharing authorities. As Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I will shortly be introducing a bill on information sharing which allows sharing of cyber intrusion data with the government with full immunity. In this way we hope to encourage a major effort between the public and private sector to share data so that cyber intrusion can be prevented.

Once again, thank you for your letter. I am pleased that you are engaged in this important issue and hope you continue to inform me of issues that matter to you. If you have any additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact my office in Washington, D.C. at (202) 224-3841, or visit my website at http://www.feinstein.senate.gov.


Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator"


What exactly does "cyber intrusion data" include? Does that include when the government wants to cyber intrude on my data with immunity? (I know I should probably research the wording of whatever she is proposing... Just wanted to post the response and as I'm typing this, now realizing I just need to look into it more.)

Edit: And I just now realized the bill referenced in the first paragraph isn't the same bill number we're talking about here for CISPA... ?? I used a pre-made form for CISPA on a site to send her a letter, I wonder... I think I need to re-do a new letter to her just to be sure. As they say on the news, "F***ing Sh**."

 

[MelissaWV]

~b~u~m~p~

 

[sdsubball23]

do you guys believe if this passed, that our ability to discuss the liberty movement online would be threated?

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Make those phones ring off the hook.

 

[pmbug]

do you guys believe if this passed, that our ability to discuss the liberty movement online would be threated?

Your ability would not be threatened, but it might be chilled. This bill gives FedGov a powerful tool to track anyone expressing political dissent (of any flavor).

 

[DGambler]

Your ability would not be threatened, but it might be chilled. This bill gives FedGov a powerful tool to track anyone expressing political dissent (of any flavor).

Private VPN in another country + TOR would help in situations where you want maximum privacy. Couple that with PGP for your emails and for the most part you should be protected.

 

[Lucille]

CISPA DOA in the Senate, For Now
http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/25/cispa-doa-in-the-senate-for-now

A representative of the Senate committee that would have to hold hearings on the cybersecurity bill CISPA, passed last week by the House, said the committee won’t be taking the legislation up, according to U.S. News. President Obama has threatened a veto, though the Democratic chairman of the committee Jay Rockefeller, certainly echoes the administration when he says CISPA is nevertheless important.

The White House’s veto threat, meanwhile, isn’t couched in a call to limit federal power, nor even in a defense of privacy, but to make sure corporations are “held accountable.” The White House is satisfied that the legislation charges the federal government with protecting privacy, essentially policing itself, but also wants corporations to be required to remove certain personal information from data shared with the federal government.

But the problem with CISPA is the sharing of data itself; terms of service govern the privacy of data shared voluntarily between consumers and corporations. As supporters of CISPA claim those corporations want this legislation, the solution would seem not to require it. Companies are free to include provisions in their privacy policies allowing for data sharing with the governments, just as consumers are free to reject them. As for the companies themselves, their cybersecurity would seem to be their responsibility, not an excuse to extend federal powers into the private sector. Hacking and other cyberattacks are already federal crimes after all.