S.3480 - Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010

A bill to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and other laws to enhance the security and resiliency of the cyber and communications infrastructure of the United States. view all titles (4)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: A bill to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and other laws to enhance the security and resiliency of the cyber and communications infrastructure of the United States. as introduced.
  • Popular: Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Short: Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010 as introduced.
  • Short: Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010 as reported to senate.

Comments Feed

Displaying 1-30 of 39 total comments.

nochosretast 01/30/2011 1:37am

Apparently Egypt turned off access to the internet for their country. It can happen here and looking at egypt, I dont want that to happen here at all

(yes I’m aware that the internet issue in Egypt is just a small portion of the issues in that country.)

americanita 12/12/2010 7:32am
in reply to KenOziah Jun 19, 2010 12:57pm

In case you haven’t noticed, most ppl here are against it. Btw, the GOP AND the Dem’s are supporting this bill. It’s not conservative vs liberal anymore, it’s the working class citizens of America vs their ineffective,oppressive government..

americanita 12/12/2010 7:26am
in reply to zxcvmjg Jul 13, 2010 10:24pm

If it is a joke, it’s a very bad one. Slowly but surely the govt is diminishing our freedoms in the name of “National Securtiy” & other BS. I have a lot of family & friends from Cuba & other “oppressive” govt’s & they all say the same thing..what happened in thier country is starting to happen here on the DL of course they can’t make it obvious b/c they know we would fight it ASAP so they do it slowly, saying that it’s good for us, that it will protect us from the ppl who hate us 4 absolutely no good reason. This is an excuse to CENSOR the internet, to CENSOR Americans.We need to fight this bill-go to www.infowars.com-viewer discretion advised…

agent_509 10/01/2010 2:19pm

This bill is extremely scary and a complete violation of our freedom. This has upset many people on all sides of the political spectrum. This bill needs to be stopped. Any person supporting this is either a complete fascist or doesn’t understand rights and the importance of the Internet. Many people have said this, and they’re right, “This would be worse than almost any cyberattack.”

A_Einstein 08/31/2010 10:04am

Look who is sponsoring the bill. We have Mr Israel Joe Lieberman and Jay Rockefeller who is Rothschild and Bilderberg related.

Both these clowns should not be allowed in our government.

This bill must be defeated. The president can shut down the internet in an emergency if necessary. This is an attempt to take control and censor the internet and establish commercial control by corporations leaving average people without a voice, thereby eliminating free speech and our right to access the truth of what is happening. This is the only media we have that is not government controlled propaganda and we cannot allow them to take it away.

talikarni 08/11/2010 12:06pm

1) Im a a long time computer tech and work for a small ISP.
2) They are able to do it, although it is not exactly easy. They would have to find a way to force private companies to shut down their DNS servers.
Shut down the majority of US based DNS servers and relays, and 95% of the internet is dead around the world. So many countries outside of the US rely on the DNS servers within the US that it would likely shut down the internet.
Yes this is a liberal socialist ploy to control the people. Lieberman is a liberal that claims to be a centrist, his voting record puts him in line with the Democrats 99% of the time.

This would cause a massive Civil War within the US as well as massive world war from countries now shut out from the internet.


JeffWasHere 07/24/2010 1:50pm
in reply to tpcreef Jun 21, 2010 7:03pm

well this may be along the conservative approach…. but the liberals are pushing for it now.

zxcvmjg 07/13/2010 10:24pm
in reply to dennycraine Jun 18, 2010 11:21am

that’s because you’re an idiot who doesn’t understand how the internet works. You can’t just “turn off” the internet,

How the hell do they plan to do this? I mean, specifically how would you go about shutting down the internet? Good luck.
I’m writing a paper for school right now about this. I will probably post it. I told my entire class and my professor about this bill and they all laughed at the idea. This is a joke right?

mom2zna 07/12/2010 8:33am

As an AMERICAN (it matters not if I have conservative, liberal, independent, centrist or “other” political beliefs), I oppose this bill.

Labeling this as a conservative or liberal mandate is ridiculous. It is communism.

MoCroft 07/02/2010 5:32pm

I lived in Siberia for 2 years just after the collapse of the USSR – the communist party maintained just such a “kill switch” on the phone lines connecting our entire region to the outside world. They made all lines go through this one single point, so they could flip the switch if the natives got restless… (they had experienced uprisings in my region before)

zeocrash 06/30/2010 12:48am
in reply to mica1884 Jun 27, 2010 6:23pm

i hate to break it to you but the red sea is still very much full of water

zeocrash 06/29/2010 7:39am
in reply to mica1884 Jun 27, 2010 6:32pm

lieberman is a centrist.

as for this being a push by liberals, it’s not.

The problem with bipartisan politics is that it encourages the group mentality with respect to politics (“either you’re on our side or you’re the total opposite to us”). In reality politics is much broader than just a simple line from left to right. As well as left to right there is also a scale from authoratarianism to libertarianism. It’s possible to be both conservative or liberal and in favour of personal freedoms. Just as it’s possible to be both conservative or liberal and against personal freedoms (hitler and stalin).

mica1884 06/27/2010 6:32pm
Link Reply
+ -1
in reply to zeocrash Jun 21, 2010 6:34am

His daring to move out of lock step with the Democrat party on one issue doesn’t make him anything other than a liberal. You can’t change an old leopard’s spots . . . just the same as Susan Collins isn’t particularly conservative.

Admit it. They own him.

mica1884 06/27/2010 6:23pm
Link Reply
+ -1
in reply to tpcreef Jun 21, 2010 7:04pm

Oh puh-lease. Where do you get off equating limiting government with pushing for an all-powerful nanny state? I’m insulted that you would even try to shove this under a “conservative” label. Not only that, there’s only so much you can stick on Bush, and that trick ran dry along with the Red Sea. Try again.

toolib 06/26/2010 3:26pm


the government is out of control on ALL LEVELS.

mastermeerkat 06/25/2010 12:46pm
in reply to Trisha Jun 22, 2010 4:32am

this bill expands executive power, and obama is just another slimy politicians. hes gonna sign it.

mastermeerkat 06/25/2010 12:45pm
in reply to dennycraine Jun 18, 2010 11:21am

the internet is not based in the US, it has no true base.

critchfield 06/25/2010 11:31am

The internet is used more widely than landlines. It is used for personal banking, our shopping centers use it for each purchase in connection with their accounting, our news and media use it. Shutting the system down would be turning off the world. It would be in essence, turning off the power to humanity and business. There isn’t an act that would justify such action outside a world war. People can’t quit living because terrorists and international espionage exist. These things have existed millennia. Believe me, our government has the means to protect itself and each of us are responsible for protecting our own information and not sharing information that would put our identity at risk. The government is there to protect our boarders, that its citizens may enjoy freedom. If you want any other kind of government, hand over your all your belongings. They’ve all but got them now. We need sensible smaller government, not a Dictator. This bill will give us exactly that.

diegueno 06/22/2010 8:50am
in reply to Trisha Jun 22, 2010 4:32am

With all due respect, your faith in Obama is naïve. Any POTUS seems to want to accumulate as much power as possible for himself and the office in that order.

diegueno 06/22/2010 8:48am

A bad idea from an even worse sponsor

Trisha 06/22/2010 4:32am
in reply to tpcreef Jun 21, 2010 7:03pm

I agree completely. If it makes it through Congress, I think Obama will veto it. I think we need to make it clear to him and everyone in Congress that we are opposed to this. Let them know we aren’t fooled by the fear tactics.

tpcreef 06/21/2010 7:04pm
in reply to KenOziah Jun 19, 2010 12:57pm

As a liberal, I have to tell you that you are misinformed. We do not want this bill, and this bill is not one based in liberal principles. I believe that this bill follows conservative principles, and it honestly reminds me of Bush and the PATRIOT Act.

tpcreef 06/21/2010 7:03pm

This bill is a threat to our freedom, and provides the government with too much power over one of the last truly free mediums. First, government passed the PATRIOT Act, a shameful piece of American legislation. This is a bill that is being proposed out of irrational fear and it needs to be stopped.

As a liberal, I vehemently oppose this bill. This is not a bill based in liberal principles, but follows the conservative approach to defense. This is an extension of the abuse of power we saw with the PATRIOT Act. This is unconstitutional and needs to be stopped.

Trisha 06/21/2010 6:44am
in reply to KenOziah Jun 19, 2010 12:57pm

Right, because liberals are always the first to limit freedoms. Try again.

Trisha 06/21/2010 6:41am
in reply to Trisha Jun 21, 2010 6:39am

To clarify – I mean that it is physically possible. I am absolutely against the government having the authority to do this.

Trisha 06/21/2010 6:39am
in reply to dennycraine Jun 18, 2010 11:21am

You do realize that other countries block access to much of the internet don’t you? It seems to me that if they can do it, then the US could do it too.

zeocrash 06/21/2010 6:34am
in reply to KenOziah Jun 19, 2010 12:57pm

I’m not entirely sure how this is a push by liberals. lieberman isn’t particularly liberal.

zeocrash 06/21/2010 6:30am
in reply to ikester8 Jun 19, 2010 9:00am

Indeed, shutting down the internet in the US is the same logic as nuking new york to make sure it’s inhabitants aren’t killed by terrorists (i admit i added some comic exageration, but the principal is the same)

zeocrash 06/21/2010 6:27am
in reply to watkins11 Jun 18, 2010 6:04am

there is no way that this bill can be created to preserve people’s freedoms. the bill it’s self is an attack on people’s freedoms. You say it’s important to protect against attacks on the internet. This bill will allow the government to take down the internet within the US, disrupting communications in a way that most cyber attackers could only dream of.

voter517 06/20/2010 10:27pm

Shutting of ALL of the interet?? U mean not just united states but 100% of internet??? If so, united states definetly shouldn’t have right to shut off the internet!! But if it would be JUST united states, it would still be wrong for the country itself and the other countries because over 50% of websites are from united states and lots of people are dependent from internet. It’s like that because our world is all build around electricity and almost everything works with electricity, we are depend from electricity. If all electricity would suddely have taken off, what would we have? Dead people (without electric devices that keep them alive), junk, crap, sucides, broken cars (because lights doesn’t work), out of order-hospitals, no defense-systems against criminals….. Closing internet is smaller thing than closing electricity, but effect would be still breaking for many many systems….

Vote on This Bill

4% Users Support Bill

22 in favor / 486 opposed

Send Your Senator a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments