9 ms·

The U.S. Senate has blocked the Cybersecurity Act of 2012.

172 points by Empro 14y ago

cyber 14y ago
They were starting to pile on completely unrelated riders, it needed to go regardless of the contents.
- malandrew 14y ago
  I'm starting to think that completely unrelated riders may be far more effective than filibustering. Don't like a proposed law? Pad it with enough crap until everyone thinks it stinks.
  - chipser 14y ago
    Killing a bill with unpopular amendments is indeed a time-honored tradition in legislatures everywhere.
    - aaronblohowiak 14y ago
      ...and then you can say "so and so voted AGAIST GRANDMOTHERS!!!"
    - caf 14y ago
      I'm not so sure. In most legislatures, if you have the numbers to move an unpopular amendment, you also have the numbers to defeat the original bill.
- rdl 14y ago
  I was kind of glad they added both firearms ban and abortion ban to the same bill, making sure it would lose.
jacoblyles 14y ago
It's weird to see the ACLU and the senate Republicans teaming up to block this against the senate Democrats. Positions on executive power completely switch with the party of the Presidency.
- deveac 14y ago
  Yes they do. It's a sobering truth to reflect on.
- roc 14y ago
  I think it's wrong to see the Republicans as being on the citizenry's/the ACLU's "side" in this. Every indication is that this is just their standard-for-the-session move to filibuster anything they can as part of their election strategy.
  - at-fates-hands 14y ago
    I would hasten to categorize this as a Republican thing. Both parties filibuster to try and create opportunity to chastise the other party during election time. It makes me sad to think all of the third party people can't get their stuff together and give us an alternative to the two party system we currently have.
    - crag 14y ago
      "It makes me sad to think all of the third party people can't get their stuff together and give us an alternative to the two party system we currently have." It hard. Because our (the US) system is *really designed for 2 parties. Granted, it sure didn't start out that way. But it's morphed into that. Both parties protect their ground. And both parties use the courts (and local governments) to make it VERY hard for any 3rd party to gain ground.
  - brown9-2 14y ago
    This is correct. If you take McConnell at his word, then the objection on their side was in the process alone, not the content: The Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said that “no one doubts the need to strengthen our cyberdefenses.” “We all recognize the problem, that’s really not the issue here,” Mr. McConnell said. “It’s the matter that the majority leader has tried to steamroll a bill,” he said referring to Senator Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/03/us/politics/cybersecurity-bill-blocked-by-gop-filibuster.html?hp http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/03/us/politics/cybersecurity-...
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
maeon3 14y ago
Where can I see a list of all the unrelated riders added to this cybersecurity act? I heard utah senator was trying to get a ban on abortion in there. What i want is github for all these sneaky slithery little laws that make it through the house and senate onto the books. It's so bad now, I don't even know what the law is, it's changing back and forth so fast. It's making everyone a criminal, even retroactively! Drugs.. Legal! Illegal! Abortion.. Legal! Illegal! Copying a floppy, owning a lobster, downloading a file, braiding hair without a license, filming a cop. I don't know american law and I live here.
- joering2 14y ago
  +1 I am with you!! we need a Wiki for politicians, so year later they cannot claim they were with or against something that is popular/unpopular right now. You know -- sort of transparency website with links to sources to every claim they make. I would love to look into it -- is there any API CrunBase-type with all senators I can tap into?
  - ninetax 14y ago
    Maybe this will help? http://ballotpedia.org http://ballotpedia.org Something that could keep track of that kind of stuff might be hard because everyone has a bias. But I agree tacking is important!
  - fleitz 14y ago
    They will still claim it. And it will still work, because no one but a couple policy wonk nerds actually care. Unless you can make it a theme like "waffles" or "flip-flops". They'll claim it until someone brings a gun to a theatre and then we're all distracted and wondering what they'll do about this situation. Even miraculously if people do care what they are going to say is that they are politicians who are responsive to grass roots movements and what the community wants and that they are changing their position to bring the people's message to corrupt fatcats in Washington. (Ever notice how your politician is honest jim the used car salesman and every other politician is a washington fatcat?)
  - ktizo 14y ago
guelo 14y ago
Notice that this was a battle between pro-business/anti-regulation forces and military/police-state forces. The interests of internet users was, as usual, completely irrelevant.
- jacoblyles 14y ago
  It's easier for small groups to organize than widely disperse ones. See Buchanan/Tullock/Olson. That's why the general interest tends to lose out in Democracy to special interests.
  - WiseWeasel 14y ago
    That failure is not limited to democracy. It's a consequence of the barriers separating government officials from other people, including centralized information media (to which government officials have much better access than citizens) and in the case of democracy, the high cost of running an election campaign, inescapably making the pursuit of money from special interests the primary concern for elected officials. The former barrier is being eroded as people have better access to and influence over the public forum. The latter remains a contentious issue to resolve.
Jgrubb 14y ago
Am I to understand that the reason this bill was blocked was because Obama was for it, thus the Republicans' only move was to block it from coming up for a vote? What kind of bassackwards country am I living in??
- alan_cx 14y ago
  Imagine how the rest of the planet sees it. We are supposed to believe the US is some sort of beacon of democracy and freedom. Oh dear...
- cyber 14y ago
  The kind that has abortion and firearms clauses in a "Cyber Security" bill.
- snowwrestler 14y ago
  No, because cybersecurity is not a voting issue. No one is going to step into the ballot box and think "hey Obama passed that cybersecurity bill, he's got my vote." It's a total niche issue. The GOP opposed this particular bill because big business opposed it, and the GOP tends to line up with them. Big business opposed it because they thought it would allow the government to regulate cybersecurity more strictly.
DanielBMarkham 14y ago
Yay gridlock! Interesting how one week it's a bug, the next week it's a feature.
- lukev 14y ago
  I believe the US government was designed that way on purpose. An efficient government can be a scary thing.
  - DanielBMarkham 14y ago
    You are correct. Madison specifically put in circuit breakers to prevent the mob swinging wildly one way one month, then wildly another way the next. To the degree that politicians have circumvented these circuit breakers, we're turning the system more into a winner-takes-all soundbite/24-hour-news-cycle fight. It's a feature. My (subtle?) point was that when gridlock comes up most people have no idea what they're talking about. Usually "gridlock" just means "my guys are being thwarted by the other guys! That sucks!"
    - Steko 14y ago
      This is revisionist nonsense. There are certain things that supermajorities are required for but the regular business of the Senate was never intended to be part of that. The current reliance on supermajorities is beyond unprecedented in US history and gets worse every decade. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States... http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/79/Cloture_Voting%2C_United_States_Senate%2C_1947_to_2008.svg/480px-Cloture_Voting%2C_United_States_Senate%2C_1947_to_2008.svg.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/79/Clo... What did James Madison and Hamilton actually think of Polish Diet style supermajorities? Matt Yglesias directs us to Federalist 17 (Madison with Hamilton): http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2010/09/28/198661/liberum-veto/ http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2010/09/28/198661/liberum-... Ezra Klein directs us to Federalist 75 (Hamilton): http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/01/the_polish_dietization_of_amer.html http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/01/the_poli...
ericson578 14y ago
yay the government protected us again from the government. oh wait...
techinsidr 14y ago
Probably because our sketchy senators tried to sneak gun control and abortion amendments into the cybersecurity bill: http://www.securityweek.com/gun-abortion-amendments-stall-senate-cybersecurity-bill http://www.securityweek.com/gun-abortion-amendments-stall-se...
nateabele 14y ago
The sad thing is, Republicans probably only voted this down to spite president, but Democrats... seriously? What the hell are you doing on the wrong side of your own party platform?
- 385668 14y ago
  Probably they're listening to the online campaign against the bill. Hundreds of thousands (millions?) have been writing in petitions urging their congresspersons to vote against it. It does seem weird to be agreeing with the GOP though.

172 points by Empro 14y ago

cyber 14y ago

They were starting to pile on completely unrelated riders, it needed to go regardless of the contents.

malandrew 14y ago
I'm starting to think that completely unrelated riders may be far more effective than filibustering. Don't like a proposed law? Pad it with enough crap until everyone thinks it stinks.
- chipser 14y ago
  Killing a bill with unpopular amendments is indeed a time-honored tradition in legislatures everywhere.
  - aaronblohowiak 14y ago
    ...and then you can say "so and so voted AGAIST GRANDMOTHERS!!!"
  - caf 14y ago
    I'm not so sure. In most legislatures, if you have the numbers to move an unpopular amendment, you also have the numbers to defeat the original bill.
rdl 14y ago
I was kind of glad they added both firearms ban and abortion ban to the same bill, making sure it would lose.

jacoblyles 14y ago

It's weird to see the ACLU and the senate Republicans teaming up to block this against the senate Democrats. Positions on executive power completely switch with the party of the Presidency.

deveac 14y ago
Yes they do. It's a sobering truth to reflect on.
roc 14y ago
I think it's wrong to see the Republicans as being on the citizenry's/the ACLU's "side" in this. Every indication is that this is just their standard-for-the-session move to filibuster anything they can as part of their election strategy.
- at-fates-hands 14y ago
  I would hasten to categorize this as a Republican thing. Both parties filibuster to try and create opportunity to chastise the other party during election time. It makes me sad to think all of the third party people can't get their stuff together and give us an alternative to the two party system we currently have.
  - crag 14y ago
    "It makes me sad to think all of the third party people can't get their stuff together and give us an alternative to the two party system we currently have." It hard. Because our (the US) system is *really designed for 2 parties. Granted, it sure didn't start out that way. But it's morphed into that. Both parties protect their ground. And both parties use the courts (and local governments) to make it VERY hard for any 3rd party to gain ground.
- brown9-2 14y ago
  This is correct. If you take McConnell at his word, then the objection on their side was in the process alone, not the content: The Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said that “no one doubts the need to strengthen our cyberdefenses.” “We all recognize the problem, that’s really not the issue here,” Mr. McConnell said. “It’s the matter that the majority leader has tried to steamroll a bill,” he said referring to Senator Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/03/us/politics/cybersecurity-bill-blocked-by-gop-filibuster.html?hp http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/03/us/politics/cybersecurity-...

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

maeon3 14y ago

Where can I see a list of all the unrelated riders added to this cybersecurity act? I heard utah senator was trying to get a ban on abortion in there. What i want is github for all these sneaky slithery little laws that make it through the house and senate onto the books. It's so bad now, I don't even know what the law is, it's changing back and forth so fast. It's making everyone a criminal, even retroactively! Drugs.. Legal! Illegal! Abortion.. Legal! Illegal! Copying a floppy, owning a lobster, downloading a file, braiding hair without a license, filming a cop. I don't know american law and I live here.

joering2 14y ago
+1 I am with you!! we need a Wiki for politicians, so year later they cannot claim they were with or against something that is popular/unpopular right now. You know -- sort of transparency website with links to sources to every claim they make. I would love to look into it -- is there any API CrunBase-type with all senators I can tap into?
- ninetax 14y ago
  Maybe this will help? http://ballotpedia.org http://ballotpedia.org Something that could keep track of that kind of stuff might be hard because everyone has a bias. But I agree tacking is important!
- fleitz 14y ago
  They will still claim it. And it will still work, because no one but a couple policy wonk nerds actually care. Unless you can make it a theme like "waffles" or "flip-flops". They'll claim it until someone brings a gun to a theatre and then we're all distracted and wondering what they'll do about this situation. Even miraculously if people do care what they are going to say is that they are politicians who are responsive to grass roots movements and what the community wants and that they are changing their position to bring the people's message to corrupt fatcats in Washington. (Ever notice how your politician is honest jim the used car salesman and every other politician is a washington fatcat?)
- ktizo 14y ago

guelo 14y ago

Notice that this was a battle between pro-business/anti-regulation forces and military/police-state forces. The interests of internet users was, as usual, completely irrelevant.

jacoblyles 14y ago
It's easier for small groups to organize than widely disperse ones. See Buchanan/Tullock/Olson. That's why the general interest tends to lose out in Democracy to special interests.
- WiseWeasel 14y ago
  That failure is not limited to democracy. It's a consequence of the barriers separating government officials from other people, including centralized information media (to which government officials have much better access than citizens) and in the case of democracy, the high cost of running an election campaign, inescapably making the pursuit of money from special interests the primary concern for elected officials. The former barrier is being eroded as people have better access to and influence over the public forum. The latter remains a contentious issue to resolve.

Jgrubb 14y ago

Am I to understand that the reason this bill was blocked was because Obama was for it, thus the Republicans' only move was to block it from coming up for a vote? What kind of bassackwards country am I living in??

alan_cx 14y ago
Imagine how the rest of the planet sees it. We are supposed to believe the US is some sort of beacon of democracy and freedom. Oh dear...
cyber 14y ago
The kind that has abortion and firearms clauses in a "Cyber Security" bill.
snowwrestler 14y ago
No, because cybersecurity is not a voting issue. No one is going to step into the ballot box and think "hey Obama passed that cybersecurity bill, he's got my vote." It's a total niche issue. The GOP opposed this particular bill because big business opposed it, and the GOP tends to line up with them. Big business opposed it because they thought it would allow the government to regulate cybersecurity more strictly.

DanielBMarkham 14y ago

Yay gridlock! Interesting how one week it's a bug, the next week it's a feature.

lukev 14y ago
I believe the US government was designed that way on purpose. An efficient government can be a scary thing.
- DanielBMarkham 14y ago
  You are correct. Madison specifically put in circuit breakers to prevent the mob swinging wildly one way one month, then wildly another way the next. To the degree that politicians have circumvented these circuit breakers, we're turning the system more into a winner-takes-all soundbite/24-hour-news-cycle fight. It's a feature. My (subtle?) point was that when gridlock comes up most people have no idea what they're talking about. Usually "gridlock" just means "my guys are being thwarted by the other guys! That sucks!"
  - Steko 14y ago
    This is revisionist nonsense. There are certain things that supermajorities are required for but the regular business of the Senate was never intended to be part of that. The current reliance on supermajorities is beyond unprecedented in US history and gets worse every decade. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States... http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/79/Cloture_Voting%2C_United_States_Senate%2C_1947_to_2008.svg/480px-Cloture_Voting%2C_United_States_Senate%2C_1947_to_2008.svg.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/79/Clo... What did James Madison and Hamilton actually think of Polish Diet style supermajorities? Matt Yglesias directs us to Federalist 17 (Madison with Hamilton): http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2010/09/28/198661/liberum-veto/ http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2010/09/28/198661/liberum-... Ezra Klein directs us to Federalist 75 (Hamilton): http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/01/the_polish_dietization_of_amer.html http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/01/the_poli...

ericson578 14y ago

yay the government protected us again from the government. oh wait...

techinsidr 14y ago

Probably because our sketchy senators tried to sneak gun control and abortion amendments into the cybersecurity bill: http://www.securityweek.com/gun-abortion-amendments-stall-senate-cybersecurity-bill http://www.securityweek.com/gun-abortion-amendments-stall-se...

nateabele 14y ago

The sad thing is, Republicans probably only voted this down to spite president, but Democrats... seriously? What the hell are you doing on the wrong side of your own party platform?

385668 14y ago
Probably they're listening to the online campaign against the bill. Hundreds of thousands (millions?) have been writing in petitions urging their congresspersons to vote against it. It does seem weird to be agreeing with the GOP though.