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 (4)

All Bill Titles

  • Short: Cybersecurity Act of 2010 as reported to senate.
  • 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.

lisalart 11/03/2009 2:43pm
in reply to justamick Nov 03, 2009 4:19am

Thank god!! Glad to see there’s someone else on here who is actually reading the bill!

lisalart 11/03/2009 2:42pm
in reply to rmcc4444 Apr 03, 2009 10:02pm

The world we live in is a bit different from the one Thomas Jefferson lived in.

lisalart 11/03/2009 2:40pm
Link Reply
+ -1
in reply to BLD Aug 28, 2009 12:29pm

Oh yes, we liberals are trying to take over the world. Look where the Republicans’ hands off approach got us. Sorry that you live in such a fear-based world.

justamick 11/03/2009 4:26am
Link Reply
+ -2
in reply to adamc Oct 09, 2009 3:33pm

thank you for clarifying how the law is written.

justamick 11/03/2009 4:24am
in reply to justamick Nov 03, 2009 4:23am

There is a MAJOR difference between raising revenue and spending. Choose your words carefully.

justamick 11/03/2009 4:23am
Link Reply
+ -1
in reply to gotogirl Aug 29, 2009 1:59pm

First of all, cite a source on that ascertation.

Second of all, that is completely false. Case and Point: the health care legislation that Baccus created SPECIFICALLY relates to spending!

Filtered Comment [ show ]

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!

xerqu 10/29/2009 7:19am

…to government buildings.

Filtered Comment [ show ]

kcman011 10/21/2009 10:35am

So, this is basically the iPatriot Act.

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?

LucasFoxx 10/16/2009 3:53pm
in reply to tbgallien Oct 16, 2009 3:45pm

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!

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.

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.

not2behated 10/11/2009 9:41pm

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

Americantiredofit 10/09/2009 3:40pm
in reply to Ocyris Apr 03, 2009 12:55pm

Do we have any Constitutional Law experts that have any input where these bills are concerned? What the hell is going on? What’s going to happen when they decide to shut down the internet for security reasons? This government is not “of the people, for the people, or by the people”. Very scary….

adamc 10/09/2009 3:33pm
in reply to mel Apr 09, 2009 5:16am

Article 1, Section 7: All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Bills not related to the raising of revenue (such as this one) may be introduced in either the house or senate.

Also from Section 7:
Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House…

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!

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/

gedanz 10/01/2009 9:40am
in reply to Ocyris Apr 03, 2009 12:55pm

I agree with Ocyris completely. Of course we have now ALL BRANCHES of our government who each are supposed to check the others. And, of course we all know that ALL Branches of our government are supposed to have READ and FOLLOWED the US Constitution, but it is apparant more and more that they do not do either.

I believe that we all need to focus on a few important issues, rather than the scatter-gun approach we have used in our TEA PARTY group. If I had to pick the one issue which would drive down the size and cost of government while at the same time taking back our liberty and freedom, it would be forcing our Congress, Judicial and Executive branches to follow the darn Constitution.

What do you all think?

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?

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.

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.

pramsey 09/08/2009 2:43pm
in reply to rightwingextremist Apr 23, 2009 4:21pm

I’ve been saying that ever since BHO started campaigning! Glad I’m not the only one that has recognized this parallel. They should make Atlas Shrugged High School reading requirement, if that still exists. Although this has nothing to do with the subject bill, it has everything to do with the general philosophy. Atlas Shrugged and Fountain Head are must reads!

racergirlmere 09/08/2009 5:08am
in reply to Ocyris Apr 03, 2009 12:55pm

Becoming more and more like Russia…..

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!!!

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.

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.

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.


Vote on This Bill

6% Users Support Bill

182 in favor / 2691 opposed
 

Send Your Senator a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments