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 1-30 of 224 total comments.

Ocyris 04/03/2009 12:55pm
Link Reply
+ 33

I’ve been looking for this one. Where in the constitution is the congress given the power to regulate the flow of information? Simple it isn’t and that’s the point. This is another enormous grab for power by the federal government in the “Public’s Interested” when it is completely against the same. As many know security on the internet requires administrator to be very agile and independent. Adding a federal bureaucracy on top of it all would be the same as trying to break dance with a dead elephant strap to your back. Or perhaps to be bipartisan dead elephant and donkey.

rmcc4444 04/03/2009 10:02pm
Link Reply
+ 20

Enough is enough. What is it going to take for you people to get off your couch and do something? Join a group and get active for gods sake. Where do you people draw a line in the sand and say enough is enough?

This is AMERICA. Things are so out of whack they we aren’t even looking at the real issues. Do you think Thomas Jefferson had to get a marriage license? A concealed carry permit? A permit to organize on public streets?

Time is running out. If you think I’m an alarmist I suggest you keep doing your research until you get it.

cadaverousmob 04/07/2009 6:17pm

The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 was introduced by Sen. John Rockefeller.

“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nation will accept the New World Order.”—David Rockefeller

“…to shape a New World Order…”—Nelson Rockefeller

“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during these years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government…The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable…”—David Rockefeller

Koristar 02/19/2010 11:27am
in reply to justamick Dec 14, 2009 3:24am

justamick asked,“Who, exactly, should control the Government’s Cyber security standards for it’s own agencies?”

answer: Their own government I.T. Administration department! If the government agencies truly are getting hacked by the Chinese or whoever else, then they need to get on the ball and hire more competent programmers to secure “their own” networks.

How exactly by passing this bill is the government going stop these “foreign hackers”? Because the government servers get hacked, we should give up our freedoms on the internet? NO!

cordesa 08/29/2009 3:58pm
in reply to Ocyris Apr 03, 2009 12:55pm

I agree. This bill reaches too far.

I like the aspects that promote “Cybersecurity Standards”, however giving the government CONTROL… NO.

cadaverousmob 04/07/2009 6:17pm

“For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure–one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”—David Rockefeller

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?

ourfreedomnow 09/02/2009 5:36pm
in reply to Ocyris Apr 03, 2009 12:55pm

We are the United States of America. Not Iran. These are the sorts of tactics used in totalitarian and dictatorial nations. The first rule of a coup is to seize and control all communications. When the “government” in Iran didn’t want their population communicating they shut down the internet. Is this what our current administration and lap dogs want for us, the People? They can’t handle the truth and all they seem to want is power. We need to do everything in our collective power to make sure that anyone who supports this nonsense is removed from office for ever.

jml6m 06/06/2009 7:45am

After reading a large part of the bill, it’s obvious that most people in this thread have not. I’m not necessarily for the passing of this bill, but the extra funding going towards cybersecurity training/jobs is a big plus in my opinion. However, it’s obvious that the government aims to be too involved with the internet, and I’m with everyone else, I don’t want a regulated internet.

But remember, the internet is a global phenomenon and is ever changing. In no way could the government keep up with it (or terrorists for that matter), and I wouldn’t be too worried about government control if the bill does get passed.

Opomon 03/12/2010 4:11pm
in reply to gosox5555 Jan 03, 2010 4:59am

Yes, this is dubbed by many as the “Necessary and Proper” clause. It has been used throughout the history of our country to create new rules impeding on certain people’s freedom’s either for the good or bad of our country depending on your opinion. It pretty much means that our government can do whatever they want if we let them, even if in some ways it goes against rights granted to us by our founding fathers.

cblythe 04/05/2009 4:07am

The proposal of S 773 is a tremendous breach of the Constitution, period. The only places where the government has authority over the free flow of information is in dictatorships.

Read your history (esp. H.L. Mencken). Wilson did the same thing during his terms with the U.S. Post Office.

So, yes Virginia, it CAN happen here.

InksLWC 08/28/2009 9:07am
in reply to mel Apr 09, 2009 5:16am

Legislation can be introduced in either the Senate or the House. Legislation never bypasses the upper or lower house. If this bill passes the Senate, it would have to be voted on by the House too.

mel 04/09/2009 5:16am
in reply to rmcc4444 Apr 03, 2009 10:02pm

This is an extremely alarming development, we all agree. But after we ‘get off our couch’, what do we do? I, you and all others commenting here recognize the threat, and understand ‘something’ must be done, BUT WHAT!?!!!!!!! WHAT!!!? I implore you to tell us WHAT????!!

I have always understood that the House of Representatives was where all legislation is to be introduced. But it seems that bills are being drafted and bypassing the House as we see with these two S.773 & S.778. Besides calling our treasonous senators on this (mine being B. Nelson of Florida who actually is co-sponsor to these bills!)faxing them, e-mailing them, TEA party protests, mailing and e-mailing all of my friends, family and e-mail contacts……………what else do we do?? You provoke but you don’t offer any suggestions for those of us who have long given up our cushy sofas! I await your lead, or do you only rattle cages and await others to lead? Mel

4freespeech 02/15/2010 5:06am

It’s very simple people. In the upcoming elections, DO NOT VOTE FOR A REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT!!! Both of these parties have been ruining this country for decades!!!! With the exception of Ron Paul, all of them are out for themselves and they are destroying our country!
Time to vote Libertarian. At least they understand the constitution!

js8883 02/11/2010 7:14pm

Completely 100% OPPOSED to this bill. Looks like 94% of the people agree with me. Way to absolutely NOT be “representatives.”

BenjaWiz 12/24/2009 4:36pm

justamick, Why can’t they use the pat act 1,2,3? there are a lot of provisions and or amendments in there for protecting the government agency’s no? or is it your a Republican and are in the field of Information System Security IS and have a vested interest in the bill.

Koristar 04/01/2010 5:56pm
in reply to LucasFoxx Mar 29, 2010 4:51pm

Amazing how sheeple dream up unintelligible crap to support fascist bills like this one.

Yep, LucasFoxx, This is a big deal, stepping on our rights is no doubt a big deal to American patriots. This “security bill” flat out disregards/abridges our first amendment! Why can’t you see that. Do you even care about our bill of rights? Are you even an American? You don’t sound like one. Yes, I do have to question you. Even if you did sat down and read this bill, you just seem not to care about the crap it brings. We don’t need a youth core to tattle tale on people that the government deems to be bad. We don’t need the government to decide what websites can or can not be on the web. We don’t need thumbscans or eyes scans or some kind of liscense to be able to access the web! I just don’t get people like you.

dancrosoft 02/11/2010 6:44am

I have absolutely no words to explain how insane this bill is. Blatant violation of free speech.

nmeagent 03/29/2010 6:12pm

This bill would possibly be constitutional if it only applied to servers and infrastructure owned by the federal government. They do not have the authority to designate private property as ‘critical infrastructure’ and then regulate the hell out of it. Designation of property as ‘critical infrastructure’ for the sake of some mythical concept of ‘national security’ does not trump private property rights! Otherwise, we truely have a fascist system in which the government can and will dictate how and when we use our property. It’s cybersecurity infrastructure today…what will it be next month, next year, or a decade from now? Where will you draw the line?

ericiscool 02/11/2010 11:59pm
in reply to cordesa Aug 29, 2009 3:58pm

I agree, this bill is too much. It’s pure communism these guys are promoting!. fight against it!.

countupir 11/13/2009 1:56pm
in reply to xerqu Oct 27, 2009 8:24am

You didn’t read this bill at all. Net neutrality is a completely different issue.

jpw 02/13/2010 12:22pm

Google: "Jay Rockefeller wish the internet was never invented quote. This guy is all about power.

Smokey10 02/15/2010 4:32am

We are now in a Kleptocracy, a government of the elite, by the elite and for the elite. If they’re not busy taking our money they’re busy taking our rights and using fear to do that. Ron Paul is the only politician that makes sense and his ideas are what we need to stop this power grab. Less government, smaller banks and enforcement of existing regulations are all that’s needed. What would you do if someone were trying to rob you? Just stand there and let it happen? That is exactly what’s going on with what our Gov is doing to us, so don’t ask what can we do, ask yourself what would you do, find like minded people and get out there and organize. Can’t the While House set up a private intranet for security??!!

tjgmba 08/30/2009 6:53am
in reply to InksLWC Aug 28, 2009 9:07am

Find a 10th Amendment movement in your state and join. If there’s not one, start one. The 10th is the last amendment in the BoR and says:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

There are numerous movement spreading quickly across the country. Here is ours in MO: http://www.meetup.com/Missouri-Sovereignty-Project/.

You can also go to TAC and keep track of the movement:

The 10th is already institutionalized in the Constitution and we intend on institutionalizing its “effects” into the fabric of as many states as possible. When we get 20-25 states who go far beyond these “resolutions” being passed, we can literally marginalize the federal govt.

But believe me, we know this is a decade-long job. But we will never give up.

Thomas Grady, Founder
Missouri Sovereignty Project

mfitzy111 04/08/2009 7:24am

This is a bill that would give the government control of free speech on the internet. 1A denied. Jay Rockefeller said that the internet should have never been invented- we’ll we know he ment it should have never been given to the dumbed down masses, who are using it to educate themselves and learn what the Rockefeller kabal has been doing since they came to america- control. you know Jay you can’t control the idea of freedom- it’s too late. we know all about you and what your doing so give it up.
russians and chinese hacking our networks, yeah right
ever heard of non-networked and firewalled computers. I have. this bill is about controlling free speech pure and simple. The elites don’t like what they hear so they want to shut it down.

DRSparktrician 06/23/2010 6:17pm

Is Stallin hiding in our Senate? Has Carl Marx been resurected? What has happened to this nation?

The very thought of a member of our government thinking about something like this sickens me.

Mrs_B 04/10/2009 11:35am

Sec. 14(a) Public Private Clearinghouse: “DESIGNATION- The Department of Commerce shall serve as the clearinghouse of cybersecurity threat and vulnerability information to Federal Government and private sector owned critical infrastructure information systems and networks.”

(b)The Secretary of Commerce(1)shall have access to all relevant data concerning such networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access."

CATCH THAT? The Dept. of Commerce is in charge of cybersecurity and is given access to ANY & ALL networks & nobody can say no to them!! What the heck nonsense is this, oh Senators???

BenjaWiz 12/24/2009 4:36pm

such as getting paid more money, etc.

BenjaWiz 12/16/2009 5:51am

Justamick, Network Security should be taking care of by qualified professionals such as those in the field of networking, etc not BIG Government mandates.

gotogirl 08/29/2009 1:59pm
in reply to mel Apr 09, 2009 5:16am

You are partially correct about legislation originating in the House, but only legislation pertaining to spending must originate there. The Senate is free to introduce legislation that is not related to spending.

Vote on This Bill

6% Users Support Bill

182 in favor / 2692 opposed

Send Your Senator a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments