Cispa is back

[Clouder]

Quoted from SFGHQ

CISPA is back and has a very real chance of passing the house vote AGAIN tomorrow. With that each and everyone of you will lose your privacy. It'll all be funneled straight to the US government without just cause or even a warrant. Less than 24 hours to help stop a bill worse than SOPA. Most of the represenatives support CISPA because of how it will benefit businesses, not people, so let your voice be heard and tell them we value our privacy. Spread these links around to anybody you can, tell them to call their represenative and pass it on, we need to get the word out and get people stepping up.

You can find out your represenative's phone number here: http://cms.fightforthefuture.org/cispa/

Other links for if you want to know more about why this is a huge freaking deal.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...ternet-privacy
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...-passing.shtml
List of those who voted yesterday to take away your privacy:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll117.xml

Seriously guys, lets get the ball rolling. Not trying to preach or anything but the freedom of the internet is in serious trouble right now. It'll effect us all. so GOGOGOGOGOGO!

We better act now or else we're all done for.

[Solkia]

oh no

[Chaos Warp]

For fucks sake can't they give up already?! We've beaten then down countless times, they may as well give up!

Anyway, I would support this, but I'm in Canada, therefore I have no senator to call. 

Edited April 18, 2013 by Generations (Chaos Warp)

[Clouder]

For fucks sake can't they give up already?! We've beaten then down countless times, they may as well give up!

They're never gonna give you up! Never gonna let you down : D !

 

Seriously, they need to cut this (EDIT: Inflammatory T) out.

[JezMM]

I feel like I hear "CISPA is back" a lot lately.

[Tani Coyote]

There's a chance this will pass. In which case, I recommend the following:

 

Make a point to go to the elections in 2014. Circulate who voted for this bill, and make your case to throw out representatives who voted yea on it.

 

Before one thinks we can't change anything, look at the Tea Party. Not exactly the most ideologically admirable, but they DID change the makeup of Congress, for better or worse. Any cause with sufficient appeal can swamp the polls, and that is what we should try our darnedest to do as well.

[Clouder]

There's a chance this will pass. In which case, I recommend the following:

 

Make a point to go to the elections in 2014. Circulate who voted for this bill, and make your case to throw out representatives who voted yea on it.

 

Before one thinks we can't change anything, look at the Tea Party. Not exactly the most ideologically admirable, but they DID change the makeup of Congress, for better or worse. Any cause with sufficient appeal can swamp the polls, and that is what we should try our darnedest to do as well.

I approve this.

[Tani Coyote]

Let's face it. At the end of the day, the rich do NOT rule this country. They only have a vote of a few million if that. Where their power comes from is the media, which helps influence the vote by making sure certain topics get reported more than others.

 

Fortunately, we have the internet. We have the steady rise of the newer generation. We can get our information from places that AREN'T in the hands of a few media moguls, and that is why this generation's democracy has the potential to outdo all prior ones'.

 

Whether it will, is a matter of if we decide it's worth trying to. Every time some talking head spews CISPA as something meant to protect businesses, we can immediately counter with all the abuses that tend to stem from supposedly well-intentioned government measures. If Americans were iffy on wiretapping, there's no reason we shouldn't be heavily opposed to this bull.

 

So, we vote with our feet. By marching right to the polls in November and teaching these clowns where the power lies.

 

There are of course some practical issues (people can't get time off work to vote, a lot of people feel their vote doesn't matter, etc.) but the idea remains true.

[Dr. Homem]

Remember this, people: if passed, CISPA is going to kill all privacy on the net. It's far worse than the already-horrible SOPA, which was meant to stop piracy. It could allow any private company to share vast amounts of sensitive, private data about its customers with the government. It does not require that data shared with the government be stripped of unnecessary personally-identifiable information. It would allow the government to use collected private information for reasons other than cybersecurity.

 

Every goddamn year they try and pass some shit like this and every goddamn year we have to fire up the base and show them that 90% of America (as well as pretty much the whole rest of the world) doesn't want PIPA/COICA/CISPA etc. Do we really need any more proof that congress is in the hands of the rich and powerful? Not by votes, but by influence. There's a reason they're all millionaires or extremely wealthy, and more importantly, that their campaigns are funded by rich people who they later grant favors. America needs to change our legislative process from its core. Campaign finance reform should be the #1 issue for everyone - not abortion, not immigration, not guns, not the environment, not the national debt. It's the only way that filthy House can start to be cleaned.

[Tani Coyote]

Indeed. The rich only rule because they are allowed to. Wiping out any and all influence of money in politics would be a great way to clear up many of this country's problems. We can't get rid of the undue influence the wealthy have through the media, but we can eliminate their ability to control campaigns by making campaigns publicly-financed. Unfortunately, we're too busy arguing over gay marriage or gun control to press for reform of the government as a whole. The system is broken, regardless of what some (or many) say, and it needs to be fixed, if not scrapped and rebuilt entirely.

 

It also means bills like this would wither and die entirely, since they're the product of special interests, not the popular will.

 

Most Americans do not want their privacy trampled on, but businesses would love all that information. Most Americans do not want amnesty, but businesses would love to have such cheap labor. Etc. Etc. The only way to show the assclowns in D.C. their priorities is to throw them out on their butts when they screw up. Partisan politics interferes with this, but this ties into reforming the system: we need to work from the ground up to demolish the two-party system as much as the lobbying system. Once there's a very real chance politicians will suffer if they screw up, they're going to stop testing the waters every few months.

 

"Whether you think you can or can't, you're right." - Henry Ford

Edited April 18, 2013 by Ogilvie Maurice

[Dizcrybe]

Is there anything else I can do other than call my representative to prevent this?

[KrazyBean]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/apr/18/house-representatives-cispa-cybersecurity-democrats

 

It passed.

 

The House of Representatives on Thursday passed legislation meant to help companies and the government share information on cyber threats, even though concerns linger about the amount of protection the bill offers for private information.

 

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (known as Cispa) passed 288-127, receiving bipartisan support as 92 Democrats voted in favor. But the White House threatened this week to veto the legislation if further civil liberties and privacy protections are not added.

Edited April 18, 2013 by KrazyBean

[Tani Coyote]

Well at least Obama will veto it. 288-127 is more than two-thirds, though... how did it fare in the Senate?

 

This is illustrating the problems with the two-party system. The Democrats are backing this too. Who are we supposed to vote in for the midterms?

[KrazyBean]

Well at least Obama will veto it. 288-127 is more than two-thirds, though... how did it fare in the Senate?

 

This is illustrating the problems with the two-party system. The Democrats are backing this too. Who are we supposed to vote in for the midterms?

 

Can you tell me what 'veto' means? I'm not good at political terminology.

[Tani Coyote]

Can you tell me what 'veto' means? I'm not good at political terminology.

 

It's akin to Royal Assent, except the President actually uses it.

 

Every time a bill passes both houses of Congress, it goes to his desk. The President can sign it into law, or veto it. Veto being Latin for "I forbid," once he vetoes a bill it's basically dead. The exception is if both houses vote to override the veto, which requires a two-thirds majority in both houses. In case of an override, it becomes law anyway.

 

So assuming the Senate doesn't have 67 Senators in favor, he can veto this bill and it will be rendered a non-issue.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Ogilvie Maurice

[Johnny Boy]

Dear God, when will they just give up already?! I hope Obama vetos this.

[Tani Coyote]

Dear God, when will they just give up already?! I hope Obama vetos this.

 

He said he would, and as I recall that's one area where he hasn't been a massive disappointment for the Democratic base.

 

Now, we are screwed if the Senate is 67 Senators in favor. But the Senate generally is more deadlocked than the House as I recall, so we will be fine. This was the Founders' intent - the House readily changes hands and can pass all sorts of radical legislation, but the longer term, more experienced Senators will obstruct anything passing that isn't well thought out.

 

Looking up the history of CISPA, it was proposed last year and passed the House but did not pass the Senate before the Congressional session ended. We can only pray the Senators are just as ready to debate the merits of it this time around as well. In either case, if debate can actually stall a bill to death, it generally means there's not a two-thirds margin. Don't panic, anybody.

[Conando]

You know, this is likely to just end up the exact same way it did before. It was passed by the House last time too, then it died pathetically in the Senate. Same exact circumstances with Obama threatening with a Veto too.

[Tani Coyote]

You know, this is likely to just end up the exact same way it did before. It was passed by the House last time too, then it died pathetically in the Senate. Same exact circumstances with Obama threatening with a Veto too.

 

This tends to be the standard procedure with these bills that trample all over the public's will, actually. It's really ironic the House, which is supposed to be close to the People, is the one that's doing the trampling in this case.

[SkyLlama]

people can't get time off work to vote

 

Of all the things I could have posted about it was this, but as a Canadian I don't have any real influence of this bill and everything I feel has been said.

 

However, what do you mean if they can't get time off? I don't know how America's elections work, but I'm under the impression that up here employers legally have to give time off to vote. Is that not true of the US also? Because that seems like a big issue to me if it's not.

[Tani Coyote]

Of all the things I could have posted about it was this, but as a Canadian I don't have any real influence of this bill and everything I feel has been said.

 

However, what do you mean if they can't get time off? I don't know how America's elections work, but I'm under the impression that up here employers legally have to give time off to vote. Is that not true of the US also? Because that seems like a big issue to me if it's not.

 

There's a large movement to make Election Day a national holiday here, and I presume it's not just for giggles.

 

Given the US' labor rights not being as stringent as in other countries, I'm going to guess it's not as easy to find time off to vote.

 

Even so I still find that incredibly surprising since voting is a process that only takes a few minutes unless you're in a really old area.

 

Regardless, democracy's very lackluster in the states and we really need to improve it if we want to avoid Congresses like the last ones we've been getting.

[Prince Manic the Hedgehog]

I'm tweeting like crazy like I did with SOPA to bring it down I tweet about points why this bill is bad for us. More I speak up the more we will win! I'm not letting companies like Apple to give up my data to them so they can check upon me!

[Carbo]

This thing is most likely going to get striked down in senate much like last time.

[Prince Manic the Hedgehog]

This thing is most likely going to get striked down in senate much like last time.

Yep it's gonna suffer the same fate that SOPA did they brought this back from the dead all they did was Renamed SOPA to CISPA according to this tweet - https://twitter.com/RecklessKaiser/statuses/188411105633255424 from RecklessKaiser for who I follow on Twitter

[Tani Coyote]

This thing is most likely going to get striked down in senate much like last time.

 

And this, this, is why whenever someone says we should abolish the Senate, I start laughing and then calmly walk away. As much as we like to ridicule the insanity of the Constitution being interpreted so literally, we can't deny having two Houses with different constituencies was one of its more genius provisions. What would we do if there was no Senate to keep the latest flavor of the month from passing crazy legislation like this?

 

Let us consider as a group that leans left-wing the result of having only the House, which tends to get overtaken by conservatives much more frequently than the Senate, as our decision making body.

Edited April 19, 2013 by Ogilvie Maurice