CISPA: Who’s for it, who’s against it

With the House’s passage of the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, the bill’s proponents and opponents on both sides of the aisle are gearing up for a fight over the legislation as it heads to the Senate. Here’s a quick look at who’s for CISPA, who’s against it and why.

• Facebook, Microsoft, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce: Technology companies have lent their support to the bill because they say it provides a simple and effective way to share important cyber threat information with the government. The technology industry is fully behind the bill, with associations such as Tech America, the Software & Information Industry Association, the Business Software Alliance and the Telecommunications Industry Association all applauding the House’s passage. The common thread through all of the statements issued by industry groups point to the fact that the bill allows companies to share vital information with the government without giving additional power to any part of it.
• Bipartisan support, bipartisan dissent: The law was proposed by Reps. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) and Mike Rogers (R.-MI), and has had bipartisan support. While most of the bill’s most vocal supporters are Republicans, 28 Democrats joined with the majority to pass the bill. There is also, however, bipartisan dissent on the bill.
• Privacy advocates: The Center for Democracy and Technology said it was “disappointed that CISPA passed the House in such flawed form and under such a flawed process.” The Electronic Frontier Foundation will continue to fight the bill in the Senate. In a statement, Michelle Richardson, American Civil Liberties Union legislative counsel, said that “CISPA goes too far for little reason. Cybersecurity does not have to mean abdication of Americans’ online privacy. As we’ve seen repeatedly, once the government gets expansive national security authorities, there’s no going back. We encourage the Senate to let this horrible bill fade into obscurity.”
• The White House: The White House said that it would veto the bill because it would put American’s privacy at risk.