Hooray for Obama

[LongBlade]

I'm normally not a big fan of the President, but in this case he's making the right call.

New legislation is being considered in Congress that would further erode civil liberties. It goes much too far and apparently the White House has already vowed to veto it if passed.

"The bill establishes an information-sharing regime under which private sector entities may, but are not required to, share information with the government about efforts to gain unauthorized access to their computer systems," former Dick Cheney chief of staff David Addington wrote this week. And while Addington believes the bill could help deal with the lingering treat of foreign powers stealing secrets from American computers, he thinks the bill needs to be fixed to address privacy concerns.

Addington says one section of the bill "actually affirmatively authorizes the government to make use of firearms sales records, tax return records, and medical records shared under the legislation" so long as it abides by rules set by the attorney general, homeland security director and national intelligence director.

The White House has already issued a veto threat should the bill reach President Obama's desk, citing privacy and civil liberties concerns.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/18/electronic-sharing-bill-cispa-would-violate-rule-of-law-critics-argue

[JasonPratt]

I'm not exactly sure how that would "erode" "civil liberties" per se. Corporations and citizens ("private sector entities") have a right to report unauthorized access of their computer networks, don't they?

And isn't the government isn't already authorized to make use of firearm sales records, tax return records (paid to the government!), and medical records (under restrictions set by the AG et al) for investigating criminal activity? How did we arrest and convict Scarface again?

[LongBlade]

The problem is that it removes any liability if the private company makes a mistake.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130417/09330122741/cispa-sponsor-doesnt-want-to-bar-privacy-promises-cispa-does-anyway.shtml

There's nothing wrong with a private company reporting suspect activity.

But this doesn't do that. It actually allows companies to report all data with impunity. Even non-suspicious data is OK to share and you won't be able to sue them if there's harm because the companies won't be liable.

That's the problem.

[JasonPratt]

Ah! I didn't think the article made that quite clear enough.

[LongBlade]

It probably didn't. I had to hit a secondary article to ensure I got the whole picture, too.

In today's day and age I am highly wary of giving up any more information to the government. It's not that I don't trust them to do the right thing - it's that I don't trust them to be competent enough to do the right thing. They have no competition. They suspect everything. That lack judicial oversight. The write their own warrants at will.

Eventually this won't end well.

We need to stop further erosion and start rolling back these powers.

[TheCommandTent]

Wait, we still have civil liberties left to take away?

[LongBlade]

Wait, we still have civil liberties left to take away?

Actually, yes.

For all the lack of electronic privacy, we do enjoy the fact that despite the panty raids on our hard drives, they still need something more than speculation with which to physically haul you into court.

[son_of_montfort]

After the President's signing of the Monsanto bull bill, my support for him has eroded as much as LB's civil liberties. How do we get a bill in the US Congress that basically supports one industry (at the expense of the small-time farmer) that is brought forward anonymously? Seriously, how does an amendment to a bill not have a listed amender? I thought that was required.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Corruption.

[Greybriar]

After the President's signing of the Monsanto bull bill, my support for him has eroded as much as LB's civil liberties. How do we get a bill in the US Congress that basically supports one industry (at the expense of the small-time farmer) that is brought forward anonymously? Seriously, how does an amendment to a bill not have a listed amender? I thought that was required.

According to this, the junior United States Senator from Missouri, Republican Roy Blunt, was the person who slipped in  the rider at the last minute that was known as the Monsanto Protection Act.

Monsanto is evil.

[son_of_montfort]

Thank you for calling this to my attention Greybriar. Nice to see a junior senator bought off so early in his career.

[Greybriar]

You're welcome, SoM. I always like to give credit where credit is due.

Two things (of many) I'd like to see: 1)Monsanto's rider removed and 2)Roy Blunt thrown out of office.