White House Reiterates Plans To Veto CISPA In Its Current Form; Though For The Wrong Reasons

from the amendments-not-convincing dept

As I'm sure you remember, the House passed CISPA with a few amendments -- some of which may have limited the possible abuses, while at the same time expanding the scope. Right before the bill went up for a vote, the White House stated that it would veto CISPA, if it got to the President's desk. It appears that, even with the amendments, the White House is still not willing to support the bill. White House "Cybersecurity Coordinator" Howard Schmidt appeared on CSPAN reiterating the White House's objections to CISPA, specifically calling out the problematic privacy issues.

That said, the White House is still supporting the Lieberman cybersecurity bill in the Senate, which isn't quite as bad as some of the other proposals, but still has plenty of problems. And, most importantly, still doesn't include any clear explanation for why it's needed. It's bizarre and troubling that no one in the federal government seems willing to provide a real justification for any of these bills others than "oooooh, it's scary out there on the internet!!"

Filed Under: cispa, cybersecurity, veto, white house

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 May 2012 @ 9:19am

    So from this statement from OMB:

    "However, for the reasons stated herein, if H.R. 3523 were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill."

    You conclude, "the White House stated that it would veto CISPA, if it got to the President's desk"

    It's like you took Journalism 101 from Joseph Goebbels. Funny how the C-span (real journalists) have a different take: "The White House recently announced it may veto the House's key cybersecurity bill, which was authored by Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), and passed in late April. "

    What you also ignore is the fact that the bill in it's current form (which the President's advisors would recommend vetoing) is very far from a finished product. The bill they may veto is NOT the final bill. This really amounts to election year grandstanding. Of course they can quiet critics by saying they may veto this bill because they know full well that this bill won't be the bill that hits the President's desk. I'd look for something very similar to CISPA to pass right before winter recess when all of the election year bullshit has ended.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.