3 votes

Letter from Cong. Bill Young (R) FL Re: His Support of CISPA! - How Would You Respond?

Here's a response from Congressman Bill Young (R) FL who is up for reelection this year. He has been in office FOREVER. Take this letter point by point and show where he is wrong, then email him your answers.

Thank you for letting me know of your opposition to H.R. 3523, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA). On April 26th, the House debated and passed H.R. 3523 by a vote of 248-168. While I appreciate knowing of your thoughts in this regard, I supported this bipartisan bill because it will clarify the ability of private entities and the government to share cybersecurity threat information. Currently, both the private sector and the government analyze threats and adjust their cyberdefenses to the threats and vulnerabilities they see. Ambiguities in current law prevent these actors from sharing this information with each other. CISPA removes these ambiguities and would allow the government to share information with certified private-sector actors and allow these actors to share cybersecurity threat information with other certified private actors and the federal government.
While some people have expressed concerns that H.R. 3523 would violate personal privacy, please be assured that this is not the goal of the legislation. Indeed, the central purpose of this bill is to ensure the security and resilience of a computer system or network, rather than to collect and monitor personal information. This measure was written in a bipartisan and open manner, and the Republican and Democrat leaders of the House Intelligence Committee have worked diligently to seek common ground with privacy and civil liberties organizations on issues such as the definition of cyber threat information and limitations on how the government can use the information that it receives.
Specifically, the information-sharing framework established in this measure is strictly voluntary and would impose no new federal mandates on private citizens or business entities and contains an "anti-tasking" provision that would guard Americans' privacy by prohibiting the government from compelling private companies to hand over personal information. The bill would also allow the federal government to use shared cyber threat information only if: (1) the use is not for a regulatory purpose, and (2) at least one significant use purpose is either for cybersecurity or the protection of U.S. national security and prohibit the federal government from affirmatively searching such information for any other purpose. In addition, this bill encourages companies to anonymize and minimize the information that they do share with appropriate entities.
In addition, several amendments I strongly supported during floor consideration of H.R. 3523 further limit what information can be shared and how any information can be used. Specifically these amendments would:
· Limit government use of shared cyber threat information to only five purposes: 1) cybersecurity; 2) investigation and prosecution of cybersecurity crimes; 3) protection of individuals from the danger of death or physical injury; 4) protection of minors from physical or psychological harm; and 5) protection of the national security of the United States;
· Authorize the federal government to create reasonable procedures to protect privacy and civil liberties, consistent with the needs of cybersecurity;
· Prohibit the federal government from retaining or using information shared pursuant to CISPA for anything other than a use permitted under the provisions in the bill;
· Remove or narrow definitions that could have been thought to cover things that the bill did not intend to cover, such as unauthorized access to a system or network that purely involves violations of a terms of service, to further restrict what information may be identified, obtained, and shared.
I would also like to clarify a misconception that this bill would restrict access to the internet, an issue that was raised in connection to the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) earlier this year. First let me say that I opposed SOPA because it would have violated the unalienable rights of freedom of speech and expression and was nothing more than modern day censorship. Some have said that CISPA would penalize civilians who downloaded music and videos, however please be assured that CISPA was changed to address SOPA-like concerns regarding the blocking of accounts or access to websites believed to be infringing on intellectual property rights. CISPA does not allow for any blocking of websites or content but allows only for the sharing of cyberthreat information. To make this absolutely clear, the phrase "intellectual property" was completely removed from the version of the bill passed on the House floor.
Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. Rest assured that I will continue working to further address any individual privacy concerns that arise as this measure progresses through the legislative process. It is my hope that you will continue to keep me apprised of your interest in legislative matters important to you. With best wishes and personal regards, I am
Bill Young
Member of Congress
Visit my online office at http://www.house.gov/young.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

FU Young Bill

should about cover it.

sounds like what

Rubio sent me when I emailed him about the NDAA