CISPA Passes US House, Despite Privacy Shortcomings and Promised Veto

An anonymous reader writes with a story at the Daily Dot: "Despite the protests of Internet privacy advocates, the controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) passed the House of Representatives Thursday. The vote was 288-127. ... CISPA saw a handful of minor amendments soon before passage. A representative for the EFF told the Daily Dot that while they were still analyzing the specifics, none of the actual changes to the bill addressed their core criticisms. ... But also as was the case the year before, on Tuesday the Obama administration issued a promise to veto the bill if it reaches the president’s desk without significant changes." Techdirt has a short report on the vote, too — and probably more cutting commentary soon to follow.

Comments

Veto ???

[retech]

I doubt, sincerely, that he'll veto this. Talk and actions are entirely different things. And he's got just as much ass to kiss as anyone else. He'll spin it just like everything else and say: "We're going to keep an eye on this...." Just like he's done before. But, once it's law no eyeball watching will do a damn thing to stop the ball from rolling.

Re:Veto ???

[MyFirstNameIsPaul]

He also said he would veto the NDAA. When it comes to power of the police state, no publicly elected official who matters is opposed.

Re:Veto ???

[fustakrakich]

Yeah, his record on kept promises is pretty dismal, not that it really matters. Nobody cares enough to vote the Party out of power.

Re:Veto ???

[cffrost]

I find myself at an impasse. I can vote for the party that makes the right promises then doesn't keep them, or the party that makes all the wrong promises and does keep them. This leaves me vacillating between futile hope and grotesque masochism.

That's a false dilemma. Voting for Democrat/Republican is not your only choice. Keep voting for liars, thieves and sociopaths, and that's what you'll always wind up with.

Where are the guys that make the RIGHT promises and keep them? Where are they hiding those guys?

In the third parties. They might not win, but you'll maintain whatever integrity you have, and you'll send an important message.

Oh! Right. I forgot. You can't buy the right guys. Therefore you can't sell them to the public.

If they're on the ballot, you can vote for them — spread the word.

90%

[MickyTheIdiot]

90% was the percentage of the American people that thought reasonable background checks should have been passed.

Put aside what you think about that sort of thing and ask yourself... is this the way things are supposed to work? We live a country that is supposed to be ruled by the majority (through elected officials) with respect to the rights of the minority. The legislation respected the right of the minority and then some.

The Congress is completely unhinged. They don't represent constituencies, they represent lobbyist dollars. And we see it again with CISPA.

Re:90%

[Anonymous Coward]

Except you're wrong about the US being "Majority Rule".

We are a Republic, and our representatives have a responsibility to ensure than legislation conforms to the Constitution (not that they actually DO do this, just saying what they're supposed to do). They, in fact, have a responsibility to NOT vote in conformance with the wishes of the public when the public is straight up =wrong=.

Granted, there is absolutely a lot of corruption, but you are very, very mistaken that they should vote according to the public majority polls.