Tick tock says the clock and Congressman Jim Langevin (D-R.I.), who said today that time is running out on passing the Senate's version of the cybersecurity bill. Perhaps he means that time is running out before the general public figures out just how awful it is...
Speaking at West Point, Langevin admitted that there was still "a gulf in opinions" about the government's role in protecting private computer networks and that the divide has become "an increasingly daunting barrier" to passing reforms.
But instead of relenting, he urged lawmakers double down.
"The consequences of inaction are perilously high," he said.
Langevin voted for the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) that passed the House in April. He called the bill an "important step," but added that it doesn't do enough to protect critical infrastructure from attacks.
He went on to say that the federal government should have the authority to require critical infrastructure to meet minimum cybersecurity standards. House Republican leaders oppose cybersecurity mandates because they believe that they would impose burdens on businesses.
Langevin said that controversy over mandates is "one of the primary stumbling blocks" for cybersecurity legislation.
"It has precluded passage of a comprehensive cybersecurity package, and has in fact prevented the consideration of any significant cybersecurity legislation in the Senate," Langevin said.
The White House did not like CISPA, but has backed the Senate cybersecurity bill sponsored by Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine).
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) wants to bring the bill to a vote, but Senate Republicans may try to halt that vote.
While Republicans may oppose it for the wrong reasons free speech and privacy rights advocates will take whatever opposition they can get.
Source: The Hill
*ECA has a related action alert for consumers to contact their representatives, here.