Should the president veto CISPA?

nchristine

The new "cybersecurity" bill is up for a vote this week. It essentially gives private companies the right to search your data, including SMS, emails, files stores in the cloud, etc. with the government, without the need for any warrant or judicial oversight. It negates any protections of privacy provided by existing laws such as the Wiretap Act. There is also no requirement that individuals every be notified that their data has been given to any government agency, and it protects the private companies from any sort of legal liability for giving away your data.

There have been critics of the bill, but they ("we" to be perfectly honest) have been dismissed as "a 14-year-old- tweeter in the basement" by Mike Rogers (R-MI), one of the bills cosponsors. To be fair, it does have its supporters, including Facebook and Microsoft. This bill easily passed the House last year, but it got bogged down in the Senate, where a combination of amendments related to abortion and to repeal AHCA aka "Obamacare" ensured that it would never pass.

The president has threatened to veto it this time around. Of course, the fact is that there is a need for security measures, and without a doubt there are many "bad guys" out there using the internet for nefarious purposes. It is a balancing act, obviously. So which way should this go - become the law of the land, or vetoed and sent to the trash heap?

Topic: Government
Answer this Question

Answers

2 total
kreiley
Vote Up (8)

Well, there is certainly a balancing act - legitimate law enforcement goals, such as prevention of terrorism or other violent crime, have to be weighed against the likewise legitimate and constitutionally secured right of citizens to privacy ("to be secure in their persons, papers, ...."). The balance that has existed for a long time has been enforced by the general requirement that government actors must have judicial oversight through the request for and issuance of a warrant before they can legally examine those things in which you have a reasonable right of privacy.

The problem I see (and the same one most opponents seem to have) is that CISPA could allow law enforcement to gain access to your emails, text messages, photos...basically everything you do that isn't sent through the physical mail, without any limits or respect for privacy. Advocates for CISPA say that you don't have any legitimate expectation to privacy in those things anyway, since you are using a third party (your ISP, email provider, etc.) for those things. I personally think that is bogus; everyone expects those things will stay private, as indicated by the use of passwords, and the "private" setting for storage of images.

So, yeah, I think it should be vetoed by President Obama. Until there is some judicial oversight to prevent any law enforcement officer, or perhaps bored clerk, from digging through my digital communications on a fishing expedition for something I MAY have done wrong, I think the proposed law is very bad indeed. I also don't appreciate that ad hominim attack on CISPA's opponents by Congressman Rogers.

jimlynch
Vote Up (6)

Yes, he probably should veto it. But will he? Who knows. All of these politicians are bought and paid for, so it remains to be seen if he'll stand up for the average joe or jane. Somehow, I doubt he will. But that's how it goes down in Washington. We have the best government money can buy. If you've got the cash, you can buy any of them down there.

Ask a question

Join Now or Sign In to ask a question.
A new net neutrality proposal from the U.S. Federal Communications Commission meets the goals of past efforts and does not destroy open Internet principles, as critics have feared, FCC officials said Thursday.
Despite its setbacks in the U.S., Huawei Technologies still expects growth from its carrier business in the nation, and is focusing on the market's smaller network operators to increase sales.
Qualcomm's activities in China could result in regulatory penalties for the chip vendor, this time from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission over bribery allegations.
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission will take public comments before moving forward with a new set of net neutrality rules that sparked controversy when they were leaked in a news report earlier Wednesday.
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission will propose new net neutrality rules Thursday that will allow broadband providers to charge companies like Netflix for preferential traffic management, according to a news report.
Participants in a Brazil-hosted conference on Internet governance laid out an aggressive agenda, with some calling for a policy statement that would condemn Internet surveillance, support net neutrality regulations and create programs to close the digital divide.
Completing the circle of Beltway life, the mobile industry group CTIA has named a former member of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission as its president and CEO.
The evolving nature of cyberattacks demands a more dynamic response, according to government CIOs making an effort to implement real-time, continuous monitoring and reporting for security issues.
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission voted Wednesday to shift US$9 billion over five years from traditional telephone subsidies to broadband subsidies, in an effort to bring high-speed Internet services to 5 million U.S. residents who don't have access.
Texas EquuSearch contends that FAA rules do not bar drones for 'humanitarian use'.
Join us:
Facebook

Twitter

Pinterest

Tumblr

LinkedIn

Google+