CISPA passed 248 to 168 in House

[sailingaway]

EFF Live Tweets ‏ @EFFLive Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
#CISPA passed, but the fight moves on the Senate, where the bills are much different. Read EFF's early analysis:

EFF Live Tweets ‏ @EFFLive Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Sad day for privacy. #CISPA passes the House 248 to 168.

So they DID move it up a day, while Ron was speaking at UT (or is just about to start). Not that one vote would have made a difference.


story:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75670.html

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll192.xml


---- AYES 248 ---

Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Cardoza
Carney
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Cooper
Costa
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Hochul
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paulsen
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Towns
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)



---- NOES 168 ---

Ackerman
Akin
Amash
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barton (TX)
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (UT)
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brooks
Brown (FL)
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carson (IN)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Conyers
Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Fleming
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Gibson
Gohmert
Gosar
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hall
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Landry
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Luján
Lynch
Mack
Marchant
Markey
Matsui
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rehberg
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rohrabacher
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Simpson
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Visclosky
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth

---- NOT VOTING 15 ---

Blumenauer
Bucshon
Canseco
Davis (KY)
Filner
Hirono
Holden
Maloney
Marino
McHenry
Paul
Pence
Rangel
Sires
Slaughter

[Anti Federalist]

LOL @ people who think Republicans generally are more in favor of freedom.

Both sides want authoritarian control, just slightly different flavors of it, that, perversely, compliment each other.

[Dorfsmith]

Can't believe my Congressman (Gosar) voted NO. He's not usually known for being liberty minded.

[JK/SEA]

Prez might veto...why?....i was watching the amendment votes, and it seemed the amendments watered it down some. Is this why his majesty might veto?..

[Immortal Technique]

Jason Chaffetz is pro big government #CISPA

[JK/SEA]

Amash got his amendment passed.

[Immortal Technique]

CISPA Just Got Way Worse, And Then Passed On Rushed Vote


Up until this afternoon, the final vote on CISPA was supposed to be tomorrow. Then, abruptly, it was moved up today—and the House voted in favor of its passage with a vote of 248-168. But that's not even the worst part.

The vote followed the debate on amendments, several of which were passed. Among them was an absolutely terrible change (pdf and embedded below—scroll to amendment #6) to the definition of what the government can do with shared information, put forth by Rep. Quayle. Astonishingly, it was described as limiting the government's power, even though it in fact expands it by adding more items to the list of acceptable purposes for which shared information can be used. Even more astonishingly, it passed with a near-unanimous vote. The CISPA that was just approved by the House is much worse than the CISPA being discussed as recently as this morning.

Previously, CISPA allowed the government to use information for "cybersecurity" or "national security" purposes. Those purposes have not been limited or removed. Instead, three more valid uses have been added: investigation and prosecution of cybersecurity crime, protection of individuals, and protection of children. Cybersecurity crime is defined as any crime involving network disruption or hacking, plus any violation of the CFAA.

Basically this means CISPA can no longer be called a cybersecurity bill at all. The government would be able to search information it collects under CISPA for the purposes of investigating American citizens with complete immunity from all privacy protections as long as they can claim someone committed a "cybersecurity crime". Basically it says the 4th Amendment does not apply online, at all. Moreover, the government could do whatever it wants with the data as long as it can claim that someone was in danger of bodily harm, or that children were somehow threatened—again, notwithstanding absolutely any other law that would normally limit the government's power.

Somehow, incredibly, this was described as limiting CISPA, but it accomplishes the exact opposite. This is very, very bad.

There were some good amendments adopted too—clarifying some definitions, including the fact that merely violating a TOS does not constitute unauthorized network access—but frankly none of them matter in the light of this change. CISPA is now a completely unsupportable bill that rewrites (and effectively eliminates) all privacy laws for any situation that involves a computer. Far from the defense against malevolent foreign entities that the bill was described as by its authors, it is now an explicit attack on the freedoms of every American.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120426/14505718671/insanity-cispa-just-got-way-worse-then-passed-rushed-vote.shtml

[AngryCanadian]

This is how Liberty dies :(
I am not surprised hard core neo cons aren't talking about this.

[sailingaway]

Prez might veto...why?....i was watching the amendment votes, and it seemed the amendments watered it down some. Is this why his majesty might veto?..

some are saying so, but I think it is because it is an election year and he is losing progressives to Ron. He figures he could always pass it next year, I'm sure.

[hazek]

Amash got his amendment passed.

What was it?

[WilliamShrugged]

Of course do it on the day where most will be thinking of the NFL draft.

[Marenco]

Of course do it on the day where most will be thinking of the NFL draft.

Just like when the Federal Reserve Act was passed on Christmas Eve.

[thoughtomator]

it's breathtaking the arrogance, so soon after the SOPA/PIPA debacle

[phill4paul]

LOL @ people who think Republicans generally are more in favor of freedom.

Both sides want authoritarian control, just slightly different flavors of it, that, perversely, compliment each other.

G.D. Right!

[Tiso0770]

By KEITH PERINE and JENNIFER MARTINEZ | 4/26/12 7:17 PM EDT

The House passed the controversial CISPA cybersecurity bill on Thursday, defying a White House veto threat and throwing the issue squarely into the Senate’s lap.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) said the bill was “needed to prepare for countries like Iran and North Korea so that they don’t do something catastrophic to our networks here in America.”

The final tally was 248-168, enough to pass the bill but not enough to override the threatened veto. Forty-two Democrats voted for the measure, and 28 Republicans voted against it.

The administration and Democratic critics opposed the bill because of privacy and civil liberties concerns. The other main sticking point was that, unlike a Senate bill by Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), CISPA would not mandate new security requirements for a critical infrastructure network.

But the measure enjoyed support from some Democrats — who weren’t happy with their colleagues’ opposition to the bill, nor with the White House.

“It was disappointing, I think it could have been handled differently,” Rep. Jim Langevin, (D-R.I.), a CISPA co-sponsor, said of the White House move. “To do it at this stage I don’t think it was very helpful to get an information-sharing bill through.”

Langevin and other supportive Democrats say CISPA is needed to counter the possibility of a major cyberattack.

"This is not a perfect bill, but the threat is great," Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.), Rogers’s chief Democratic ally, said on the House floor on Thursday.

Speaker John Boehner said Thursday that the White House was in "a camp all by themselves." Nevertheless, most Democrats voted against the bill.

“CISPA would trample the privacy and consumer rights of our citizens while leaving our critical infrastructure vulnerable,” an administration official said Thursday in response to Boehner. “We need Congress to address this critical national and economic security challenge while respecting the values of freedom, privacy, openness and innovation so fundamental to our nation.”

The House adopted several amendments to the bill before passing it, including one by Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) that added a five-year sunset to the bill.

But lawmakers voted to reject a motion to recommit by Rep. Ed Perlmuttter, who sought to add language specifying that nothing in the bill could be construed to allow employers and the government from mandating that employees and job applicants disclose confidential passwords without a court order. The defeated motion also would have added language saying that nothing in the bill could allow the government from blocking access to the Web through “the creation of a national Internet firewall similar to the ‘Great Internet Firewall of China.'”

The tech sector immediately applauded the House action on Thursday.

“We strongly urge the Senate to swiftly take up this issue because the United States cannot afford to wait to improve our nation’s cybersecurity posture,” TechAmerica CEO Shawn Osborne said in a statement. “Standing pat will only further risk our national security.”

But civil liberterians were unhappy with the outcome.

“Cybersecurity does not have to mean abdication of Americans’ online privacy. As we’ve seen repeatedly, once the government gets expansive national security authorities, there’s no going back,” ACLU legislative counsel Michelle Richardson said. “We encourage the Senate to let this horrible bill fade into obscurity.”


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75670.html

[kathy88]

There's a Jihadist inside every one of our computers! And they have NUKES!

[Tiso0770]

There's a Jihadist inside every one of our computers! And they have NUKES!

Uh OH!!!:)

[sailingaway]

my rep, Berman voted no. Good!

[DanielLV]

The republicans overwhelmingly supported this bill. At the same time they act like the party concerned with cutting spending. Does anyone have any idea how much CISPA will cost to regulate the internet?

[Lishy]

WHAT! WHAT!

WHAAAAAAA!???????????????????????????????


THAT ISN'T EVEN HOW COMPUTERS WORK!!!!!!!!

[Anti Federalist]

it's breathtaking the arrogance, so soon after the SOPA/PIPA debacle

Not to me it isn't.

The system just doesn't even care anymore, it's not even going through the motions anymore.

Used to be, it would wait a few months or years before it "lateraled" on you and accomplished the goal.

Now, they just steamroll us all.

[Drex]

My rep voted yes.. and so did the other two jokers in Nebraska. They will all be getting phone calls tomorrow.

[sailingaway]

Yeah, I posted in general politics about it. They rushed it up a day, it was scheduled for tomorrow. Ron was on his way to UT to speak, so he didn't vote. They say they made it WORSE in amendments.

[GeorgiaAvenger]

Had there been a big effort against it like SOPA, it may not have passed.

[Anti Federalist]

Freshman "Tea Party" NH representative Frank Guinta - AYE

Long time NH GOP machine representative Charlie Bass - AYE

Rest assured Shaheen-D and Ayotte-R will both vote AYE in the Senate.

NH's federal representation is atrocious.

[Anti Federalist]

My rep voted yes.. and so did the other two jokers in Nebraska. They will all be getting phone calls tomorrow.

Which will be ignored.

[Restore America Now]

Good work, Tonko. :)

[angelatc]

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) said the bill was “needed to prepare for countries like Iran and North Korea so that they don’t do something catastrophic to our networks here in America.

Ugh, He's mine. And he's as much a dick in person as he is in Congress, too. He's ex CIA and makes absolutely sure that his constituents are scared to go to sleep at night.

[Lishy]

THE INTERNET DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY! THIS BILL IS INEFFECTIVE FOR CYBERSECURITY!

WHAAA

WHAAAA????????????????????????????????


If facebook gets hacked, I don't give a fuck! But my friend who MAKES webservers and hosts domains doesn't want this "cybersecurity" bullshit! He could handle his own content, and doesn't need to fear "North Koreans" and "iran"!

[John F Kennedy III]

And this ladies and gentlemen is what happens when the majority of people don't pay attention to politics. And when the majority of people who do pay attention to politics are herded like sheep by the clowns on the Idiot Box.

I'm so pissed right now.

[jmdrake]

LOL @ people who think Republicans generally are more in favor of freedom.

Both sides want authoritarian control, just slightly different flavors of it, that, perversely, compliment each other.

But don't you know? It's for the children. /sarcasm.

[Tiso0770]

My fellow Americans....NOW will you fight for Ron Paul and Liberty?!.

[John F Kennedy III]

The 3 Reps we can trust, Paul, Amash and Jones voted no :)

Well Paul didn't vote, but we know how he would've voted.

I'm hoping Rand or Mike Lee don't surprise me.

[jmdrake]

By KEITH PERINE and JENNIFER MARTINEZ | 4/26/12 7:17 PM EDT

The House passed the controversial CISPA cybersecurity bill on Thursday, defying a White House veto threat and throwing the issue squarely into the Senate’s lap.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) said the bill was “needed to prepare for countries like Iran and North Korea so that they don’t do something catastrophic to our networks here in America.”


The same federal government that can't secure a stealth drone from Iranian (and Chinese?) hackers supposedly is going to protect the entire Internet? :rolleyes:

[The Free Hornet]

Google et al didn't rise up against this one because the bill grants the cooperative corporations immunity to collect most any data (even if they have posted 'privacy policies' yapping about what they won't do or how they value your privacy).


Cybersecurity Bill FAQ: The Disturbing Privacy Dangers in CISPA and How To Stop It (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/04/cybersecurity-bill-faq-disturbing-privacy-dangers-cispa-and-how-you-stop-it)

CISPA destroys these protections by declaring that any provision in CISPA is effective “notwithstanding any other law” and by creating a broad immunity for companies against both civil and criminal liability. This means companies can bypass all existing laws, as long as they claim a vague “cybersecurity” purpose.

[sailingaway]

crude as it may be, some are trying to get #fucktheHouse trending on twitter....in case anyone was interested

[puppetmaster]

amodei from nevada voted for it.....scumbag gop.....I met him and he reeks of BS

[kathy88]

My rep, Thompson, voted yes. Tool.

[kathy88]

crude as it may be, some are trying to get #fucktheHouse trending on twitter....in case anyone was interested

A challenge? Involving the F bomb? I'm in. Later.

[Lucille]

it's breathtaking the arrogance, so soon after the SOPA/PIPA debacle


Not to me it isn't.

The system just doesn't even care anymore, it's not even going through the motions anymore.

Used to be, it would wait a few months or years before it "lateraled" on you and accomplished the goal.

Now, they just steamroll us all.

And ROTFLTAOAU.

The Banksta Bailout:

http://www2.nationalreview.com/dest/2008/09/28/28bailout4.600.jpg


There's a Jihadist inside every one of our computers! And they have NUKES!

LOL

[Brian Coulter]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_J9m0r9H4Vhg/TRNuynMPNEI/AAAAAAAAAtM/JrhozRGTquo/s1600/mob_440.jpg

[Immortal Technique]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_J9m0r9H4Vhg/TRNuynMPNEI/AAAAAAAAAtM/JrhozRGTquo/s1600/mob_440.jpg

^^^^^

[seekingliberty]

I am shocked that McNerny voted No.

[No Free Beer]

I called my congressman today and told him that if he didn't vote no, I would do everything in my power to make sure he wasn't reelected.

he listened.

[No Free Beer]

Chaffetz

Tea Party. Romney supporter.

#asshole

[Feeding the Abscess]

And this ladies and gentlemen is what happens when the majority of people don't pay attention to politics. And when the majority of people who do pay attention to politics are herded like sheep by the clowns on the Idiot Box.

I'm so pissed right now.

This is what happens when you have a ruling class, period.

[Kluge]

My rep had a TON of Facebook messages telling him not to vote for it and he did it anyways.

[dannno]

---- AYES 248 ---

Bachmann


Wow, what a tool.

[No Free Beer]

ten reps says Rubio votes FOR it...

[Feeding the Abscess]

I'm thinking of running for Congress as a totalitarian. I'm betting I'd get more votes that way than if I ran as a libertarian.

[No Free Beer]

I have a question though...

How do we protect ourselves from Chinese cyber attacks?

I am AGAINST this bill because I know the real truth. But in general, how do we (the gov) do it?

[JK/SEA]

This bill sunsets in 5 years. Not sure what amendment it was, but this was passed.

[Kluge]

This bill sunsets in 5 years. Not sure what amendment it was, but this was passed.

The Patriot Act did too.......

[DamianTV]

I have a question though...

How do we protect ourselves from Chinese cyber attacks?

I am AGAINST this bill because I know the real truth. But in general, how do we (the gov) do it?

If it is information that cyberterrorists either seek to acquire or damage, then wouldnt it be easier and safer to not have that information out there to begin with? Essencially, what they are trying to do is create a gold mine of digital information and expect no one to go after it. They may as well take all the gold in Fort Knox (that isnt there any more), put it in the middle of Queens, and put one inept security guard there to protect it and expect no one to try to take it. Private Information is the New Gold in the 21st century, and it is harvested out of you by making it convenient for you to give up your privacy.

But that isnt the worst of it. There are too many that think that this is "The End" of the Internet as we know it. It isnt. Things are going to get much much worse from here on out. Next month, they will probably try to tack on a bunch of more bills that further increase their unlawful surveillance activities because those bills are "sponsored" by those who stand to financially benefit from having even more access to how you live your life. So just because this bill got through, dont expect more bills of this nature to just summarily stop. This has taken off of the privacy cliff, and we are going get smacked in the face with more and more and more anti privacy bills until we hit rock bottom and have cameras in every room in our homes, including our showers under the false pretenses of being there "for our protection".

[Czolgosz]

No blood, no freedom.

[JK/SEA]

i guess its too late to unplug and toss the 'puter in the dump.

resistance is futile.

[DamianTV]

i guess its too late to unplug and toss the 'puter in the dump.

resistance is futile.

http://farm1.staticflickr.com/166/379597714_7e44c8c557_z.jpg?zz=1

[Anti Federalist]

This has taken off of the privacy cliff, and we are going get smacked in the face with more and more and more anti privacy bills until we hit rock bottom and have cameras in every room in our homes, including our showers under the false pretenses of being there "for our protection".

They already are, and they have names like iPhone, iPad, XBox Kinect, webcams and so on.

[JK/SEA]

Do the Amish have computers?...i wonder if they could use a retired baker to make bread?...

[CJLauderdale4]

My Congressman (Mo Brooks R-AL) was one of the 100 co-sponsors. We email bombed him last week, and what do you know, we got a Tea Party candidate who co-sponsored this crap to actually vote "No".

Man that feels good!!!

[angelatc]

re: Amash
Tea Party. Romney supporter.

#asshole

Uhm, wot? He didn't even vote for the bill. And I'm pretty sure he hasn't endorsed Romney.

[LibertyEagle]

Mine voted yes. *&&^^^&***&^^%%$$$###@@@

[No Free Beer]

re: Amash

Uhm, wot? He didn't even vote for the bill. And I'm pretty sure he hasn't endorsed Romney.

Chaffetz or whatever did

[Kluge]

re: Amash

Uhm, wot? He didn't even vote for the bill. And I'm pretty sure he hasn't endorsed Romney.

Amash voted no. And I haven't heard a thing about who he's endorsed, if anyone. I follow him pretty closely b/c I'm looking to possibly move to his district.

[cubical]

As long as they don't take away the NFL draft it doesn't affect me.

[bunklocoempire]

One yea and one not voting in heavily internet dependent and ACLU friendly HI. :rolleyes:

:mad:

Days like this I say let it all crash.

[GunnyFreedom]

Renee Ellmers hates America. :mad: Time to send her home in disgrace.

[kuckfeynes]

If there's one silver lining it is that the government is still a minority.
This will just drive more people to encrypted networks like Tor.
They will probably try to make services like that illegal under this law, but they will be powerless to enforce it.
Like marijuana, they may catch a few careless ones here and there, but they will never have the manpower or efficiency to put a dent in its overall use.

[Melissa]

Ugg my congressman and I think all Republicans in my state voted yes..Lots of work still here to do

[Indy Vidual]

Insanity: CISPA Just Got Way Worse, And Then Passed On Rushed Vote

Up until this afternoon, the final vote on CISPA was supposed to be tomorrow. Then, abruptly, it was moved up today—and the House voted in favor of its passage with a vote of 248-168. But that's not even the worst part.

The vote followed the debate on amendments, several of which were passed. Among them was an absolutely terrible change (pdf and embedded below—scroll to amendment #6) to the definition of what the government can do with shared information, put forth by Rep. Quayle. Astonishingly, it was described as limiting the government's power, even though it in fact expands it by adding more items to the list of acceptable purposes for which shared information can be used. Even more astonishingly, it passed with a near-unanimous vote. The CISPA that was just approved by the House is much worse than the CISPA being discussed as recently as this morning.

Previously, CISPA allowed the government to use information for "cybersecurity" or "national security" purposes. Those purposes have not been limited or removed. Instead, three more valid uses have been added: investigation and prosecution of cybersecurity crime, protection of individuals, and protection of children. Cybersecurity crime is defined as any crime involving network disruption or hacking, plus any violation of the CFAA.

Basically this means CISPA can no longer be called a cybersecurity bill at all. The government would be able to search information it collects under CISPA for the purposes of investigating American citizens with complete immunity from all privacy protections as long as they can claim someone committed a "cybersecurity crime". Basically it says the 4th Amendment does not apply online, at all. Moreover, the government could do whatever it wants with the data as long as it can claim that someone was in danger of bodily harm, or that children were somehow threatened—again, notwithstanding absolutely any other law that would normally limit the government's power.

Somehow, incredibly, this was described as limiting CISPA, but it accomplishes the exact opposite. This is very, very bad.

There were some good amendments adopted too—clarifying some definitions...


Insanity: CISPA Just Got Way Worse, And Then Passed On Rushed Vote
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120426/14505718671/insanity-cispa-just-got-way-worse-then-passed-rushed-vote.shtml

[The Northbreather]

The fact that they're using Iran as a possible threat is a joke. Just another example of blowback spun into a threat to the US. The real story is that the US/Israeli created cuputer virus Stuxnet was deployed in Iran last fall and now our mighty leaders are scared that they'll do the same to us.

No mention of why they're worried or who it was that started the cyber battle (us...again). Much like 9/11 "those crazy foreigners are out to get us for no reason"

Even if they pulled something they wouldn't have the tech to do anything substantial, were not talking about china here.

Quick pass Cispa so we can be saved from those crazy Iranians who hate our computers for their freedoms.

[HOLLYWOOD]

amodei from nevada voted for it.....scumbag gop.....I met him and he reeks of BSYeah, he's truly a POS NEOCON. He's gotta go!

CISPA: Patriot Act for the web – Internet activist
http://rt.com/usa/news/cispa-patriot-web-swartz-081/

Published: 27 April, 2012, 02:27

http://rt.com/files/usa/news/cispa-patriot-web-swartz-081/afp-photo-gannon-david.n.jpg

AFP Photo / David Gannon

TRENDS: CISPA (http://rt.com/trends/cispa-bill-internet-freedom/)
TAGS: Politics (http://rt.com/tags/politics/), Law (http://rt.com/tags/law/), Internet (http://rt.com/tags/internet/), Information Technology (http://rt.com/tags/information-technology/), USA (http://rt.com/tags/usa/), Security (http://rt.com/tags/security/)

With the House of Representatives' approval of the controversial CISPA bill, Internet users are worried about possible consequences. RT spoke to Internet activist Aaron Swartz, who said CISPA could be used to spy on people.


*RT: Can you explain the difference between this legislation and the previous controversial bills aimed at combating piracy?
Aaron Swartz: The previous bills were about giving the government the power to censor the Internet. And this is more like a Patriot Act for the Internet. It sort of lets the government run roughshod over privacy protections and share personal data about you, take it from Facebook and Internet providers and use it without the normal privacy protections that are in the law.


RT: So as far as individuals are concerned, is it worse than the previous ones?

AS: Yes, it’s worse because it does allow the government to shut down websites for ‘national security' reasons. It does have all the censorship problems the previous bill did. But it also goes much further and allows them to spy on people using the Internet, to get their personal data and e-mails. It’s an incredibly broad and dangerous bill.


RT: It’s not popular amongst Internet users, but it is popular with big companies like Facebook, IBM, and Microsoft – they’re backing CISPA. How can protesters compete with major corporations and companies like that?
AS: Well, it’s true. Big corporations are supporting the bill, especially big corporations that make money off of violating people's privacy. So it’s not a big surprise they’re in favor. But we’re seeing that the same way grassroots efforts were able to stop SOPA – despite millions of dollars of Hollywood lobbyists behind it – are now also being able to stop this bill. I mean everyone said, this is just a consensus in Washington, you couldn’t do anything. And now, even the White House is coming out against this bill with strong language, much stronger than they used against SOPA.


RT: The Obama administration is planning to veto the bill despite the fact that over two hundred in Congress are supporting it. Is this more about political point-scoring or preserving online privacy?

AS: I think the White House is obviously interested in repairing its reputation. But I think there are some people in the White House who really do care about privacy. The fact is, when they looked at this bill and investigated it, they saw how incredibly bad it was and that forced them to speak out.


RT: This bill, though, at the end of the day is meant to enforce cyber security and prevent threats. If these are real threats, then surely the US does need something to safeguard against them. What’s your alternative?

AS: Well the thing about this bill is it doesn’t really have any protections against cyber threats, all it does is make people share their information. But that’s not going to solve the problem. What’s going to solve the problem is actual security measures, protecting the service in the first place, not spying on people after the fact. So what I’d like to see is what a bunch of security experts have proposed – a bill that really does secure computer systems, makes them harder to attack, rather than one that involves more spying and watching people.


RT: Across Europe, we’ve seen thousands come out to protest the planned global Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, or ACTA. But depending on Friday’s vote in Congress, do you expect the same kind of response in the US over CISPA?

AS: We’ve already seen quite an outcry. I don’t think it’s going to be on the level we’ve seen in other countries. Almost a million people have signed a petition on the Internet. Many representatives have spoken out against it. This is a tougher fight, no question, because it’s harder to go up against this notion of cyber terrorism that they’re using. But I think we’re making a lot of progress and I think we’ll see the bill eventually defeated.


CISPA was introduced in the House of Representatives last November by Mike Rogers (R-MI) and has since been amended on a number of occasions. Numerous critics, including World Wide Web founder Tim Bernars-Lee and Representative Ron Paul, continue to criticize its overly broad wording, which would permit private companies to submit personal user data to the government.

Congress had previously failed to approve SOPA and PIPA, which sought to bar access to websites containing illegally published copyrighted information. The bills were shelved in January, after a day of protests by major Internet companies, during which Wikipedia and Reddit among others remained inaccessible for 24 hours.

An international equivalent of SOPA and PIPA, ACTA was signed by eight countries plus the EU and all of its members. However, the agreement was met with a bevy of protests throughout Europe and has so far not been ratified by any country

[James Madison]

Ugg my congressman and I think all Republicans in my state voted yes..Lots of work still here to do

Buchson was a no vote. But I'm sure he would have voted yes given the chance. At least we have a good primary challenger in district 8.

[row333au]

Well organize a class action against the politicians (charge them for malfeasance and corruption - treason against the citizens and general public) and to reverse this decision and for deceiving the people.

The action of such as internet services google, yahoo, bing, facebook and etch (with your internet provider) that they can own their subscribers and users private and public information as well as to monitor/record/profile activities including the abuse of cloud memory, the cookies and allowing to legally hack in your computer systems to be able to keep and see what's inside your PCs, tablets and internet phones; and then share those with the government private and intelligence organizations.... this will also authorize private parties to shut downs internet services and manipulate censorship....

[Inkblots]

Thought for the day:

“Democracy is also a form of worship. It is the worship of Jackals by Jackasses. It is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”
-H. L. Mencken

[Sullivan*]

Seriously surprised to see Rehberg voted no.

I'm serious. This is absolutely ridiculous. I'm sure the only reason he voted against it was because he knew it would pass anyway.

[DamianTV]

They already are, and they have names like iPhone, iPad, XBox Kinect, webcams and so on.

Oh, apparently without an iPad (what is that, like an iTampon?) you're behind the times! Now they have Interweb Ready TV's with Cameras and Mic's built right in for your (in)convenience, Internet Ready Refrigerators, and Internet Ready Washing Machines! All preinstalled with FarceBook apps for your (in)convenience! The Internet Ready Toilet (that analyzes your urine to see if you have any drugs in your system, or are just flushing a dime bag) and conveniently scans your urine for any and all "anomalies" and uploads it to a central location that you can check with your iDevice, as well as letting all of your FarceBook buddies know you just flushed a whole Dime Bag while the cops were kicking in your front door is right around the corner. Get yours today for the low low price of $12,999.99 (financing available)!

Privacy prevents the Coersion of Corruption.

[Sola_Fide]

Buchson was a no vote. But I'm sure he would have voted yes given the chance. At least we have a good primary challenger in district 8.

Geoff Davis was a no vote who would have voted yes as well.

[anaconda]

My rep Barbara Lee voted no. I'll send her a thank you.

Update: Sent "thank you" email.

[kcchiefs6465]

My rep voted yes.. and so did the other two jokers in Nebraska. They will all be getting phone calls tomorrow.

My rep told me the vote wasn't until tomorrow (today). I will be surely calling. I am chipping teeth I am so f-ing tired of this bs.

[DamianTV]

It may be time to start voting with your feet. As in, bust your foot off in their asses, and not in a figurative sense.

Hold on, someone is knocking at my door...

[csu1987]

We need to Vote out every cock sucker that votes for this shit and put them on notice.

[Lishy]

Honestly? WTF are they THINKING!?

OKAY OKAY I GET IT, THIS IS "NATIONAL SECURITY!"

But still. What the heck are they even thinking specifically under that umbrella!?

[tuggy24g]

So Do we still have a chance with the senate or is it going to pass?

[green73]

LOL @ people who think Republicans generally are more in favor of freedom.

Both sides want authoritarian control, just slightly different flavors of it, that, perversely, compliment each other.

Both sides are comprised of morons--quite literally (http://ronpaulnews.net/2008/11/officials-flunk-american-history.html)--who will do anything their bidders want. The smarter ones are usually such deviants that they are blackmailable. There's no room for promotion for a good person, hence only shit rises to the top.

[Tudo]

Traitors

[JebSanderson]

Jason Chaffetz is pro big government #CISPA

Same with Flake and Labrador (surprised by that one)

[JebSanderson]

Amash voted no. And I haven't heard a thing about who he's endorsed, if anyone. I follow him pretty closely b/c I'm looking to possibly move to his district.

He endorsed Ron Paul a while ago.



U.S. REP. JUSTIN AMASH OF MICHIGAN ENDORSES RON PAUL FOR THE PRESIDENCY
Rising star, limited government advocate prefers Paul
LAKE JACKSON, Texas – The Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign announced today that U.S. Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) has endorsed Dr. Paul’s candidacy for President of the United States.

Said Rep. Amash:

“No person in public office has done more to secure the liberty of the American people than Dr. Ron Paul.

“Time and again, Dr. Paul has been right, and the conventional wisdom has been wrong.* For decades, he has warned about the dangers of deficit spending and government’s reckless expansion of the money supply.* He has warned about the unforeseen consequences of sending our troops into unnecessary wars.* He has warned about sacrificing our freedoms for empty promises that government will protect us from harm.

“Long before millions joined his cause Dr. Paul realized that constitutional limits on government are the greatest achievement of the American people. *He has refused to vote for unbalanced budgets, ever-expanding government powers over our personal lives, and short-term economic Band-Aids of which so many other politicians on both sides of the aisle are hopelessly enamored.* Vote after vote, Dr. Paul has stood up for the regular American with no political connections and no one else to trust in government.

...

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2011/09/20/u-s-rep-justin-amash-of-michigan-endorses-ron-paul-for-the-presidency/

[angelatc]

Amash voted no. And I haven't heard a thing about who he's endorsed, if anyone. I follow him pretty closely b/c I'm looking to possibly move to his district.

He's awesome, and I know a liberty loving pediatrician in that area, too. But the election might be close - the GOP did some redistricting and as the newbie, he got the short end of the stick.

[HOLLYWOOD]

He's awesome, and I know a liberty loving pediatrician in that area, too. But the election might be close - the GOP did some redistricting and as the newbie, he got the short end of the stick.An FYI on your statement to the viewers:

Michigan Redistricting Puts Standout Freshman Congressman Justin Amash at Risk (http://www.rlc.org/2011/06/23/michigan-redistricting-puts-standout-freshman-congressman-justin-amash-at-risk/)
http://www.rlc.org/2011/06/23/michigan-redistricting-puts-standout-freshman-congressman-justin-amash-at-risk/
http://static-l3.blogcritics.org/11/06/23/162239/redistricting-map-2010-640x486.jpg?t=20110623082457

Steve Pestka enters race against U.S. Rep. Justin Amash, stresses 'mainstream' record
http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2012/03/steve_pestka_enters_race_again.html

http://media.mlive.com/grandrapidspress/photo/2012/03/10647171-large.jpg

[Eagles' Wings]

They already are, and they have names like iPhone, iPad, XBox Kinect, webcams and so on.
Are there parents here that don't allow this technology in their homes? The peer pressure to have these is enormous, even for those who are home educated. The balance of independence and security keeps us on our toes.

[qh4dotcom]

The "constitutional" rep Paul Broun voted yes.

Of course the fascist Allen West voted yes.

[AngryCanadian]

So the CISPA passes and CNN doesn't even Report on it?

[Jingles]

Is there a Libertarian running in Pennsylvania's 11th congressional district? I cannot in good conscience vote for Barletta.

[DamianTV]

So the CISPA passes and CNN doesn't even Report on it?

When would the MSM ever report on anything important! In other news... Lindsay Lohan is going to play the part of Elizabeth Taylor, and Rosie O'Donnell disapproves!

[Lindsey]

The amendments mostly made it worse.

Word is Obama may veto. Why?

My thoughts:
1. Election year politics
2. Trying to disarm opposition like he did with NDAA.

[USAFCapt]

Why can't representatives call-in their vote?

[DamianTV]

The amendments mostly made it worse.

Word is Obama may veto. Why?

My thoughts:
1. Election year politics
2. Trying to disarm opposition like he did with NDAA.

Why? A better question to ask is how do you know if Obama is LYING? His lips are moving. Thats Why.

[PreDeadMan]

damn that mother fucking neocon peter king voted yes... that scumbag needs to go away......