McConnell Pushing for Senate Vote Next Week on Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act
Senate Republican leadership reversed course again Thursday on the prospects of the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (S-754) for a pre-August recess vote, with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., telling reporters he wants to make the bill the Senate’s next priority if Senate Democrats unite to oppose a bill to end federal funding of Planned Parenthood (S-1881). The Senate is to vote on S-1881 Monday, but if the measure as expected fails to get 60 votes for cloture, “then we’re going to turn to cybersecurity,” McConnell said. Senate opponents of S-754 continued to criticize the bill Thursday, saying the Senate should wait to consider it until after the August recess, while privacy and civil liberties advocates continued to campaign against the bill.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Senate Judiciary Committee ranking member Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., urged McConnell Thursday not to consider S-754 before the August recess. If McConnell “is serious about improving our nation’s cybersecurity, he will listen” to Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who is one of S-754’s main sponsors, “and others who have called for a meaningful amendment process,” Leahy said in a statement. “If he wants yet another political stunt, he will try to jam this bill through the Senate just days before the August recess. That is not the responsible way to legislate about our nation’s cybersecurity.” Leahy and Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., have been strong critics of S-754 and promised to file amendments to the bill that would further address concerns about privacy protections.
Wyden also was critical of the push to bring S-754 up for a vote, saying during a Thursday conference call with reporters that McConnell's announcement contradicted earlier statements from Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas, in which Cornyn's office indicated there wouldn't be time to address S-754 before the August recess (see 1507290036). That contradiction shows that Senate leaders “apparently can’t agree even among themselves” about whether to advance S-754 prior to the recess. Wyden, the only member of the Senate Intelligence Committee to vote against S-754 during an April committee markup, said he continues to believe the bill “doesn’t pass the smell test” because it prioritizes companies’ rights over “individual privacy.”
It’s feasible for McConnell to push for a Senate vote on S-754 next week, and “sometimes when it looks like everything’s busy, a little push can actually make something like this go,” said former FCC Public Safety Bureau Chief Jamie Barnett, a Venable cybersecurity and telecom lawyer. “All of the members are going to want to go back to their constituents and say, ‘I did something about cybersecurity,’ especially after” the Office of Personnel Management data breach. The White House itself may now be quietly supporting passage of S-754 because of behind-the-scenes work to improve the bill’s privacy and civil liberties protections, “though I doubt that they’d be very up front on that.” The White House hasn’t taken an official policy position on S-754, a spokesman said.
The timeline for a Senate vote on S-754 next week is “incredibly tight,” with the Senate likely needing to vote Monday on cloture for such a final passage vote to be feasible, said Norma Krayem, a Holland & Knight senior cybersecurity policy adviser. A successful cloture vote would “require both sides to come together to agree on an overall timeframe for debate and a set number of amendments per side,” Krayem said. “I think there would have to be very substantive negotiations between some of the privacy groups and other members of the chamber with members of Senate Intelligence to come up with a manager’s package that could address members’ concerns.” There have been some behind-the-scenes negotiations on those issues, but no final agreements, she said. One potential amendment could mirror federal data breach legislation, with potential options varying from comprehensive language to language that addresses only data breach notification requirements, Krayem said.
Fight for the Future, one of several privacy and civil liberties groups involved in the “Operation: Fax Big Brother” campaign to oppose S-754 via faxes to senators (see 1507270070), said Thursday that its supporters have generated more than 6.1 million faxes since the campaign began Monday. Those faxes will be “constantly flooding” into Senate offices in the coming days, Fight for the Future said. “The Internet is clearly pissed off,” said Fight for the Future Co-Director Tiffiniy Cheng in a tumblr post.