[Abaronos]

At least Obama is threatening to veto it but the man does have a history of caving to special interests.

CISPA cybersecurity bill gets veto threat from Obama

The White House came out strongly Wednesday against a bipartisan but controversial House bill designed to protect the country's infrastructure from cyberattack, warning that President Barack Obama would veto if it passes in its current form over civil liberties concerns and other worries.

"The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 3523, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, in its current form," Obama's Office of Management and Budget said in a statement. "If H.R. 3523 were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill."

OMB said that the administration was "committed to increasing public-private sharing of information about cybersecurity threats" but said the process "must be conducted in a manner that preserves Americans' privacy, data confidentiality, and civil liberties and recognizes the civilian nature of cyberspace."

Morever, it said, the legislation "fails to provide authorities to ensure that the nation's core critical infrastructure is protected while repealing important provisions of electronic surveillance law without instituting corresponding privacy, confidentiality, and civil liberties safeguards." OMB specifically cautioned that, in its current form, the measure fails to set up "requirements for both industry and the government to minimize and protect personally identifiable information."

"Citizens have a right to know that corporations will be held legally accountable for failing to safeguard personal information adequately," OMB said, adding that the legislation "would inappropriately shield companies from any suits where a company's actions are based on cyber threat information identified, obtained, or shared under this bill, regardless of whether that action otherwise violated federal criminal law or results in damage or loss of life."

The bill's chief authors--House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers and the panel's top Democrat, Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger--unveiled a raft of amendments on Tuesday aimed at defusing the privacy concerns.

The two lawmakers issued a joint statement Wednesday saying that "the basis for the administration's view is mostly based on the lack of critical infrastructure regulation, something outside of our jurisdiction."

"We would also draw the White House's attention to the substantial package of privacy and civil liberties improvement announced yesterday which will be added to the bill on the floor," they said, stressing that key lawmakers guiding the measure to a vote in the House "have agreed to a package of amendments that address nearly every single one of the criticisms leveled by the administration, particularly those regarding privacy and civil liberties of Americans. Congress must lead on this critical issue and we hope the White House will join us."

[KuevDulin]

He's not a far right Nazi but he most certainly does play the lobbyist game like the rest of him.

[portoskins]

Republicans forced it through the house. We should all remember who is against civil liberties and wants the government to be able to track everything you do online, every post you make, every search you do. What a crock of ****.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/26/29...e-passes-cispa
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/112-2012/h192

[ggandibazz]

Of course if they passed the original SOPA they would have tried to pass a second one any way to include all the other goodies they want so you're damned either way.

[MasdMnPa]

Why would Obama veto a bill that increases his powers?

[esdfsdflast]

What's the score in the Senate? Obama is feigning veto, I expect him to bait and switch like he did with NDAA.

The Senate bill is entirely different. Supposedly it doesn't require ISPs to keep a log of everything everyone does nor does it require ISPs to share that information without a warrant as the House bill does. The Senate does want to create national standards to prevent cyber attack which is supposedly aimed at China which has government run hacking groups which steal both government and industry private data.

[nickayary]

Where do you get this stuff? Everything I've heard is it won't pass in the Senate plus Obama said he'll veto it if it does. It's just another Republicans hate freedom bill being blocked Dems (though about 40 dems took the special interest money and decided to join Republicans in ****ing over regular people).

[Wrasialat]

Democrats bad, Republicans really really bad.

[IoninnyHaro]

No, because Romney is even worse. I'd probably use some sort of protest vote like the Green Party or maybe Peace & Freedom. Not that it really matters since this state is blue as can be.

[peemovvie]

No, because Romney is even worse. I'd probably use some sort of protest vote like the Green Party or maybe Peace & Freedom. Not that it really matters since this state is blue as can be.

Yep, so blue it elected Arnie. Twice.

(Though no one will contest that California is likely in Obama's pocket)

[whatisthebluepill]

He was actually a moderate Republican and pro-choice. Exactly the type Republicans need nationally if they want to come back from the insane asylum.

[soprofaxel]

Republicans in favor of abortion would never be able to win nationally.

Can't he just do what Romney did and lie?

[dubballey]

but was hypothetically for it temporarily for the sake of Massachusetts, not against it in general and only for it for the presidential election.

That's the stance he took re: Romneycare when it was brought up in the GOP debates. Said he supported it because he was in a "liberal" state that had popular support for it. Romney is a political weathervane, whichever way the wind blows, he follows.