Slashdot Mirror
CISA Surveillance Bill Hidden Inside Last Night's Budget Bill (engadget.com)
An anonymous reader writes that the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) was inserted into the omnibus budget deal passed by the House of Representatives late last night. Engadget reports: "Last night's budget bill wasn't all about avoiding a government shutdown. Packed inside the 2,000-page bill announced by Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) is the full text of the controversial Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) of 2015. If you'll recall, the measure passed the Senate back in October, leaving it up to the House to approve the bill that encourages businesses to share details of security breaches and cyber attacks. Despite being labeled as cybersecurity legislation, critics of CISA argue that it's a surveillance bill that would allow companies to share user info with the US government and other businesses. As TechDirt points out, this version of the bill stripped important protections that would've prevented directly sharing details with the NSA and required any personally identifying details to be removed before being shared. It also removes restrictions on how the government can use the data."
If it's anything like the patriot act it's technically impossible to fully read and large portions are amending parts of many other bills and documents. That's why shit like this is rammed through just before a break, after changes have been made ensuring there is not enough time to actually read the document. This is EXACTLY what happened with the patriot act. This is how it works.
The point of this article is that it already happened. They passed that bill last night. And since the Senate already approved it months ago it just needs a presidential signature I believe. And at this point, if the President hasn't already signed it, he'd be really sticking his neck out by not signing it.
You miss the same thing the parent does; they have staff that divide it up, read the parts, and can explain the parts. Spending the time to pass all the words briefly in front of your eyes wouldn't prepare you to vote on it, because there will be lots of details that have to be "worked out" by experts in the various areas of civics affected. What is important is that advisors who are experts in specific areas of law or policy have had detailed working discussions with the staff below them that have read those portions, and have examined the portions that are significant or could have multiple readings.
Pelosi was making an existential comment. You not only mangle what she actually said, you give a completely erroneous reading. What she actually said was that there are lots of proposed bills, and the proposal is being amended continuously. The idea that there is "a bill" before it is voted on is silly, because it is changing from one minute to the next. Reading it doesn't help, because what did you read? Something that changed while you were reading it. Once something comes up for a vote, that is when you can't add more stuff to it; if it passes, then you could read it. This works because both houses of Congress have to pass it, and then discuss and vote on any differences, and then it also has to go to the President. The type of complaint you make is just an "insult from ignorance" that disappears if you attempt to understand what was said.
41 states have that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
43 states allow their governors to veto specific items in bills.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
In 1996 the Republicans gave Clinton line-item veto. The Supreme Court ruled it was unconstitutional, because Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution says the president either signs or vetoes the bill, not -part- of the bill. It needs to be done as a constitutional amendment.
In this case he really should use the one power left to a lame duck President and use the line item veto. He could strike out the CISA stuff and leave the rest of the funding intact. The question would be if he would actually do it, but we all know the answer to that is most likely no.
Presidents do not have a line-item veto power. Presidents can only veto the entire bill, which is why Congress habitually tries to add contentious items to "must-pass" bills.