Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Chair, let me thank you for your courtesy. Let me thank the chairperson for his courtesy and the ranking member for his courtesy. I was very appreciative, with the overlapping committee work, for the courtesy of the floor. I thank you very much.

Let me hold up the Constitution and say that I believe in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, particularly, that protects us against unreasonable search and seizure. And I also recognize the bipartisan effort of this particular legislation and recognize that we may have disagreement.

My amendment ensures that comprehensive policies and procedures are implemented by the Department of Homeland Security to protect Federal systems from cybersecurity threats and minimize the impact on privacy. What it does not do is allow Homeland Security and the Justice Department to spy on Americans.

Let me be very clear. It does not allow the infrastructure of Homeland Security and the Justice Department to spy on Americans. I would not adhere to that.

It is a shame that oversight of our Nation's critical infrastructure, however, was not included in this bill. The hard work that has been done by the Committee on Homeland Security, Mr. Lungren and Ms. Clarke, joined with other Members, was worthy of consideration.

I understand the strictures that we're dealing with. My amendment is designed to put in place comprehensive privacy protections in order to prevent any gross infringement of an individual's civil liberties or privacy rights. It allows the Department of Homeland Security to protect Federal systems that enable air traffic controllers to operate.

Madam Chairperson, we know the climate that we live in. God has blessed us, if I might even say that, but more importantly, the hard work of men and women who happen to be Federal employees, that no action has occurred on our soil since 9/11.

This amendment would allow the Department of Homeland Security to protect Federal systems that enable air traffic controllers to operate, that enable Congress to operate, that enable all Federal agencies to operate.

My amendment is intentionally narrowly tailored to go after known or reasonable threats to our Federal systems. Let me be very clear. This is not a reflection on this legislation from the extent of hard work.

I am just saying that, coming from my perspective, I would hope that we would look at infrastructure.

I am not advocating for the bill. I am advocating for an open discussion on this issue that certain elements have to be resolved in dealing with the cyberthreats that we face. I've long been an advocate for protecting the right to privacy and the civil liberties of all Americans--that is very much a part of this amendment--but I am also mindful of the importance of the infrastructure.

As we assess cybersecurity measures and take steps to implement legislation, I believe we must be sure to strike the proper balance between effective and strong security for our digital networks and protecting the privacy of individuals as well as infrastructure that involves transportation. I am ever mindful that we must be careful not to go about strengthening cybersecurity at the expense of infringing on people's privacy rights and civil liberties, which is why my amendment is narrowly tailored and sets clear restrictions on the scope of communications addressed and why and how that information can be used.

Our Nation's critical infrastructures are composed of public and private institutions in the sectors of agriculture, food, water, public health, emergency services, government, defense industrial base, information and telecommunications, energy, transportation, banking and finance, chemicals and hazardous materials.

I ask my colleagues to support the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. What an exaggeration. I know that they have been propelled by all of the media that has given them great support.

They know that the underlying bill, in fact, is considered an invasion of privacy; but if you look at my amendment, it is only when the communication is associated with a known or a reasonably suspected cybersecurity threat. It is narrow, but more importantly, it has a privacy provision. I believe in privacy. Let me just say that I was not going to be denied the right to come to the floor to be able to frame what we should be doing--looking at infrastructure and the complement of making sure that privacy is protected.

This particular book, even with the amendments they have, will probably not draw this to the point of acceptance. So I would argue that this is a productive debate but that the amendment that Jackson Lee has submitted does not, in fact, at all violate privacy. I would say to them that I look forward to being able to address this question as we go forward.

I am going to ask, at this time, unanimous consent to withdraw this amendment for the misinterpretation that my friends on the other side of the aisle have predicted or thought that they were going to put on this particular amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source