S.773 - Cybersecurity Act of 2009

A bill to ensure the continued free flow of commerce within the United States and with its global trading partners through secure cyber communications, to provide for the continued development and exploitation of the Internet and intranet communications for such purposes, to provide for the development of a cadre of information technology specialists to improve and maintain effective cybersecurity defenses against disruption, and for other purposes. view all titles (3)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: A bill to ensure the continued free flow of commerce within the United States and with its global trading partners through secure cyber communications, to provide for the continued development and exploitation of the Internet and intranet communications for such purposes, to provide for the development of a cadre of information technology specialists to improve and maintain effective cybersecurity defenses against disruption, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Popular: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 as introduced.

Comments Feed

Displaying 121-150 of 224 total comments.

  • jgides 09/01/2009 8:32am

    Correction….I meant drive my car. I’m so angry my fingers are moving faster than my eyes!!

  • ZAPEM 09/01/2009 8:36am

    The solution is vote the people OUT who sponsor these bills. Look at the names on this bill and you can easily see they’ve been part of every scam the gov’t. has been trying to pull. These people have gone beyond arrogant. They think they’re GOD!

  • Comm_reply
    dcgirl 09/02/2009 6:24am

    I would love to vote out those that are sponsoring the bills, however they are not in my state. (But what all the representatives and senators do affect ALL of us.) How do we communicate with the voters that have the power to vote these guys out? What can be done about the blatant unconstitutional actions of both the executive and legislative branches? You sure can’t depend on the judicial branch since much of what they do is unconstitutional as well.

  • joejoejoejoe47 09/01/2009 8:45pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    THis is playbook totalitarianism

  • dcgirl 09/02/2009 6:21am

    Remember that this administration will “not let a ‘crisis’ go to waste”. This is just another way the government is trying to seize complete control of our lives and ensure that they control all speech so that no dissent is possible.

  • bayislandco 09/03/2009 10:22am

    I would oppose this bill if Ronald Reagan were President, much less Mr. Obama. The last time I looked, the control of information is what leads to dictatorships. This is just a bad idea on so many fronts.

  • hocestbellum 09/03/2009 1:47pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    The liberal/socialist movement in this country led by Obama to destroy the Bill of Rights and the Constitution CAN AND MUST BE STOPPED AT ALL COSTS! His agenda is not that different from Adolph Hitler’s.

  • Comm_reply
    justamick 11/11/2009 3:09am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Adolf?

    Liberalism is not necessarily bad. Socialism, yes.

    Everyone is entitled to their own ways of thinking.

  • ssanetwork 09/03/2009 10:57pm

    I suspect the feds (now Socialists) will attempt to “shoe horn” this presumed power in using the Erie Doctrine that extended federal jurisdiction over all matters that traveled in “interstate commerce.” Naturally, information passed on the Internet / Intranets (it could be argued) “travels” in interstate commerce… So … watch out for this approach.

  • dtop2000 09/06/2009 10:31am

    I don’t support this bill for one reason, this bill will allow for the continued sharing of personal information regarding the citizens of this country with foreign entities. It astounds me that data on citizens is so readily shared with other countries via the practice of offshoring/insourcing (h1b). Social security numbers, credit card numbers, addresses, names, birthdays, etc. It is apparent this practice should be deemed illegal. I would support any bill that makes illegal the practices of offshoring/insourcing (h1B) any IT function/data containing the personal information of citizens of this country. If for nothing less, than the peace of mind of the citizens.

  • fortermlimits 09/07/2009 6:46pm

    Freedom of speech is our basic right and they have the gall to want to stop it?? Vote these guys out!!!

  • Theultimateg 09/10/2009 8:01pm

    Anytime I see the title of a include the words “and for other purposes” I can’t help but think to myself what crap are they trying to sneak past the American people.

  • phans4u 09/16/2009 10:09pm

    PLEASE Don’t think about continuing to press this foolishness, Jay-bone. We, the Useless Eater Class, are starting to acquire a taste for criminal elitist types…and a Ravenous appetite, to accompany it. Rockefellers are Well-along, on their way to joining the most-recent, most-insidious, most-durable installment of the Kennedy Debacle, in the trashbin of History.

  • Jrp7046 09/25/2009 12:56pm

    This bill is downright evil and a complete violation of the Constitution. Why even swear to “Protect and Defends The Constitution of The United States of America” if you are just going to walk all over it?

  • mywhitehouse 10/02/2009 7:23am

    All of these clowns are corrupt, please sign our petition. The right is only mad because the left now has the control of the corruption.

    http://mywhitehouse.org/dont-tread-on-me/

  • tonysijr 10/02/2009 10:07am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    I think this bill has some good aspects to it but it also is flawed with some of the language. Sen. Rockefeller should find a way to reword the bill so that it gets to the main point he’s trying to tackle. Protecting the American people is his goal but by regulating the Internet in this manner is all wrong. I oppose this bill!

  • not2behated 10/11/2009 9:41pm

    When will the lunacy end? Wake-up America and smell the socialism!

  • tbgallien 10/16/2009 3:05pm

    Whose house of cards has the most to lose in this light of day? For those who know what I know, this bill makes total sense. Kinda like Nazi mass murderers trying to hide their past deeds and future plans from the people. The German Nazis didn’t have the internet, but they did have books. The fascists of today are one in the same. The internet is the single most powerful weapon to defend ourselves with.
    If Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler, amongst others, had the internet in their time, what would they have done with it? Destroying it, is too obvious. To CONTROL it, in the name of national security is an easy sell to the ignorant masses. Give it a name like CYBER SECURITY. Who can be against that? The saxon game is slow. But that is why it seems to work. Little by little, liberty will fail, if people stay ignorant in apathy. If you fail to wake up, you will love your new home. If you wake up at all, you’ll realize that you’ve lost everything. except freedom.

  • tbgallien 10/16/2009 3:45pm
    Whose house of cards has the most to lose in this light of day? For those who know what I know, this bill makes total sense. Kinda like Nazi mass murderers trying to hide their past deeds and future plans from the people. The German Nazis didn’t have the internet, but they did have books. The fascists of today are one in the same. The internet is the single most powerful weapon to defend ourselves with.

    If Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler, amongst others, had the internet in their time, what would they have done with it? Destroying it, is too obvious. To CONTROL it, in the name of national security is an easy sell to the ignorant masses. Give it a name like CYBER SECURITY. Who can be against that? The saxon game is slow. But that is why it seems to work. Little by little, liberty will fail, if people stay ignorant in apathy. If you fail to wake up, you will love your new home. If you wake up at all, you’ll realize that you’ve lost everything, except freedom.

  • Comm_reply
    LucasFoxx 10/16/2009 3:53pm

    You had me going until you got to:” what would they have done with it?” Then you get a little paranoid. True some big ISP’s have tried to restrict bandwidth for commercial and political reasons. But not that is not the purpose of this bill. There is clearly a need to be able to protect essential services in the event of a crisis and protect essential services from crisis. Maybe this bill isn’t it, but it needs to be addressed. I’m going to pirate this though:” The saxon (sic) game is slow.” Thanks!

  • Comm_reply
    justamick 11/11/2009 3:14am

    Geeze… yet another one. Look, the bill refers to the network security and information system infrastructure of the United States Govt. It seeks to standardize all the Information System Security policies of US Govt agencies. That is all. There is no erosion of civil liberties here buddy. Calm down, go drink a beer and relax.

  • Psalm14 10/21/2009 9:00am

    I feel like I’m waking up in China. What does it take to start the process of impeaching the Idiot in Chief?

  • Comm_reply
    justamick 11/11/2009 3:16am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Well, he hasnt broken any law so there is no way to do that. (although his Czars come close but still dont brake any laws. I think we should watch it carefully and ensure that it doesnt happen.)

  • kcman011 10/21/2009 10:35am

    So, this is basically the iPatriot Act.

  • xerqu 10/29/2009 7:19am

    …to government buildings.

  • TSpringer59 10/31/2009 11:48am

    Any “additional Power” given to any President is a major, MAJOR, mistake. It is exactly the kind of government that we revolted away from 250 years ago. BEWARE, BEWARE!

  • cwhunbun 11/06/2009 4:34am

    Our forefather are turning in there graves on this one! Can we please have an election to vote this man out of office. Are you sure he does not think he is the Messiah ?

  • jpope 11/06/2009 8:53am

    Giving the President “emergency” authority to control the internet? REALLY?!?!?!? HAS ANYONE REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT THIS? WHERE DO MOST AMERICANS GET THEIR NEWS AND INFORMATION THESE DAYS? THE INTERNET!!!!!!! It sounds to me like someone wants to be able to keep the public in the dark.
    This concept grossly over steps the boundaries set in place to keep the government in check.

  • VincentGaines 11/09/2009 10:11am

    Bush would’ve just claimed ‘executive priviledge’ on this and
    rammed it down your throats…

  • Comm_reply
    BenjaWiz 11/17/2009 8:58am

    I couldn’t agree more and we as a people of this nation need to protect our privacy not discard it for BIG Government.


Vote on This Bill

6% Users Support Bill

182 in favor / 2690 opposed
 

Send Your Senator a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments