Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 624

Cyber Intelligence Sharing: Keeping America Safe or the Biggest of Brothers?

Argument in favor

Improves cyber security in both the public and private sectors. Fosters better communication between public and private sectors and creates an effective means of dealing with cyber threats.

Jake's Opinion
···
02/18/2016
The safety of our country should be number one for everyone.
Like
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

Creates an Orwellian police state where nearly all modes of communication can be legally surveilled. Opens deep privacy concerns around data sharing between the public and private sectors.

deercr0ssing's Opinion
···
04/29/2016
Fun fact: pervy NSA workers do have copies of your nudes you've sent over the internet and there are documented cases of them sharing them around.
Like (1)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
      senate Committees
      Select Committee on Intelligence
  • The house Passed April 18th, 2013
    Roll Call Vote 288 Yea / 127 Nay
      house Committees
      Committee on Homeland Security
    IntroducedFebruary 13th, 2013

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!

Bill Activity

  • referral
    Referred to the House Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select).
  • action
    Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Intelligence. H. Rept. 113-39.
  • calendar
    Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 25.
  • action
    Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 164 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 624 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
  • action
    Rule H. Res. 164 passed House.
  • action
    Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 164.
  • action
    Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 624 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
  • action
    House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 164 and Rule XVIII.
  • action
    The Speaker designated the Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen to act as Chairwoman of the Committee.
  • action
    GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 624.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 164, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Rogers (MI) amendment No. 1.
  • action
    POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Rogers (MI) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Rogers (MI) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 164, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Connolly amendment No. 2.
  • action
    POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Connolly amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Rogers (MI) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 164, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Schneider amendment No. 3.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 164, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Langevin amendment No. 4.
  • action
    POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Langevin amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Rogers (MI) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
  • action
    Mr. Rogers (MI) moved that the Committee rise.
  • action
    On motion that the Committee rise Agreed to by voice vote.
  • action
    Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 624 as unfinished business.
  • action
    Considered as unfinished business.
  • action
    The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
  • action
    UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that the unfinished business was on adoption of amendments which had been debated and on which further proceedings had been postponed.
  • action
    Mr. Sessions moved that the Committee rise.
  • action
    On motion that the Committee rise Agreed to by voice vote.
  • action
    Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 624 as unfinished business.
  • action
    ORDER OF PROCEDURE - Mr. Sessions asked unanimous consent that, during further consideration of H.R. 624 in the Committee of the Whole and pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 164, amendment numbered 13 offered by Mr. McCaul of Texas be modified in the form that was placed at the desk. Agreed to without objection.
  • action
    Considered as unfinished business.
  • action
    The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 164, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Sinema amendment No. 7.
  • action
    POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Sinema amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Ms. Sinema demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 164, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Loretta Sanchez amendment No. 8.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 164, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the LaMalfa amendment No. 9.
  • action
    POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the LaMalfa amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Rogers (MI) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 164, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Paulsen amendment No. 10.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 164, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Barton amendment No. 11.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 164, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee amendment No. 12.
  • action
    DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 164, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the McCaul amendment No. 13.
  • action
    POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the McCaul amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. McCaul demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
  • action
    Mr. Rogers (MI) moved that the Committee rise.
  • action
    On motion that the Committee rise Agreed to by voice vote.
  • action
    Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 624 as unfinished business.
  • action
    Considered as unfinished business.
  • action
    The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
  • action
    UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that the unfinished business was on the adoption of amendments which had been debated earlier and on which further proceedings had been postponed.
  • action
    The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 624.
  • action
    The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
  • action
    The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
  • action
    Mr. Perlmutter moved to recommit with instructions to Intelligence (Permanent).
  • action
    DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Perlmutter motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment to prohibit employers, prospective employers, or the Federal Government from requiring the disclosure of social networking or personal account passwords by an employee or job applicant without a court order. The Motion would also prohibit the Federal Government from establishing a mechanism by which it could control citizen's access to the Internet with a national firewall similar to the "Great Internet Firewall of China." Lastly, the Motion would make changes to the McCaul amendment, adding a section that requires reporting of information on the number of Americans who have been forced to disclose passwords and had information released to the Federal government or obtained in connection
  • action
    The previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.
  • action
    On motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 189 - 224 (Roll no. 116).
  • vote
    On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 288 - 127 (Roll no. 117).
  • action
    Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
  • action
    The Clerk was authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, and cross references, and to make other necessary technical and conforming corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 624.
  • referral
    Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Select Committee on Intelligence.

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
      senate Committees
      Select Committee on Intelligence
  • The house Passed April 18th, 2013
    Roll Call Vote 288 Yea / 127 Nay
      house Committees
      Committee on Homeland Security
    IntroducedFebruary 13th, 2013

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!
    Fun fact: pervy NSA workers do have copies of your nudes you've sent over the internet and there are documented cases of them sharing them around.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Seeing me post about my cat and talk about what to eat for dinner isn't going to strengthen any security and I don't think any person should have to sit and listen/read through all the mindless chatter day-to-day Americans pursue. Tax payer money should go towards something more important.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Our "protectors" are taking advantage of the uninformed ignorance most of the public is bound to in regards to cyber security. It is not a simple subject and most do not understand the implications programs like this bill could bring.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    To a certain extent the government should have access to suspect cyber activity. However, this will no doubt open the doors to the possibility of an Orwellian society in which nothing is kept private.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    R.I.P. The ACLU if this bill passes
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    It is a complete violation of personal privacy and individual rights.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    The NSA has dismantled the many internet freedoms that citizens both public and private enjoy. Instead of exposing terrorists they ended up spying on more innocent Americans having casual conversations or shopping on Amazon than catching any real bad guys. Not only is this a wrongful invasion of my own privacy but it has proven to be ineffective in its efforts. I can see the benefits to a program like this but as a free citizen of these United States I do not want to live in what seems like an increasingly Orwellian country where my peers and I live in an overcast of fear for what may or may not be lurking in the dark.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    All of the gathering of cyber illegible from citizens hasn't made a very big impact at all, it's an abysmal failure. And it costs too much and limits liberty and freedom.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    The government should not have access to the information
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    Privacy should be a right on personal devices.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    Creates an Orwellian police state where nearly all modes of communication can be legally surveilled. Opens deep privacy concerns around data sharing between the public and private sectors.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    The language in this bill is too vague to protect privacy.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    I value my Freedom. Cut the crap already, America is the biggest terrorist organization on planet Earth. Stop telling us that we must trade our freedom for security! Id rather die a free person then live in North Korea! We are almost there and surely Russians have more freedom than the average American. You might also try Peace instead of War. maybe then the so called terrorists will not have the need to retaliate because we droned their village and killed their Grandma!
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    America needs to drop this terrifying intelligence oversight before it falls into the wrong hands and undermines everything it attempted to create for the security of the nation.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    CISPA does not take into account the way that the Internet actually works. The fallout of this law is likely toy only hurt users.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    Anytime the federal government sticks its nose into anything it becomes another big bureaucracy, Leave the internet alone, it has gotten along very well without government intervention
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    A bill will not improve communication between government and private sector. Why is a law required for the government to warn a corporation of a threat? The government's role is to protect us. Why should corporations be required by law to report a threat? Is a business criminal if it does not report something that the government decides later was a threat? It is in a business's interests to report threats.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    The Internet is the best way to share information freely, and over-regulating it would take away that freedom.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    This is one step in a self aware police state.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    We should be passing bills to protect our citizens, not government agency's that fail to do so and infringe upon their rights.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    MORE