WASHINGTON – The Cybersecurity Act of 2012, which was blocked before the August Congressional recess, continues to draw strong support, particularly from independent observers.  Three major metropolitan newspapers – The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Boston Globe – have weighed in recently to urge Congress to pass legislation to secure the nation’s most critical networks. And many others have as well.

 Here is a sampling of opinion:

  • The New York Times: “…faced with strong opposition from Mr. McCain and the business community, the sponsors compromised. Under the revised bill, industry will develop the standards for addressing threats and compliance will be voluntary.

 “This has not satisfied Mr. McCain or the chamber, which insists the bill would still be too costly and cumbersome. Last year, a survey of more than 9,000 executives in more than 130 countries by the PricewaterhouseCoopers consulting firm found that only 13 percent of those polled had taken adequate defensive action against cyberthreats.”

  • The Washington Post: “…This was a moment when the business lobby put its head in the sand. The threat posed to the private sector in cyberspace cannot be wished away — it is large and growing. Most companies realize this from their own experience. They are being battered by cyber-exploitations and theft, losing customer records and intellectual property. Instead of torpedoing legislation, they ought to be leading the way, pressing Congress to act.”

  • The Boston Globe:  “By the end, proponents of the legislation were even willing to leave the matter of establishing security systems to the industry itself; businesses that participated in the voluntary effort would be immune from liability should an attack occur. Despite broad support in the national security community, business interests persisted in an ideological objection despite the real threats America faces.

 “Regulation aside, the greater impact of the legislation had to do with defining the roles of federal agencies in ensuring that vital networks are protected. Through the legislation, Congress and the Obama administration sought to establish clear lines of responsibility and budgetary authority across the government. That important part of the legislation was lost, too — though who knows if any of the bill’s detractors bothered to read it before sacrificing such important provisions for the sake of an ideological battle.”

    What others are saying:

 Los Angeles Times:,0,4850787.story

Chicago Sun Times:




Become a fan of the Committee on Facebook