Washington, DC – U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Ranking Member of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, made the following statement on the Senate floor during the cybersecurity debate. While managing floor debate in opposition, Sen. Hutchison voted to oppose cloture, expressing concerns with the process as well as with the underlying bill:
Click here for the video.
“Mr. President, I rise to express my disappointment that we are taking a vote that is very premature, not that we haven't been discussing this bill for over a year. And I have certainly been one of the first to say that we should vote on a cybersecurity bill.
“But, Mr. President, this is a complicated bill. It is a bill that didn't get marked up in committee, and in our discussions we are talking about amendments, and I want to say that the proponents of the bill before us have certainly been willing to talk and adjust and try to make changes in the bill. But it is not there yet, and even though we have been meeting pretty much constantly, there are three different groups that have a very strong interest.
“All of us are interested in getting a cybersecurity bill but none of us liking what is before us -- well, obviously the proponents of the bill like what's before us. But two other groups are very concerned about further needs in the bill.
“Let me just say that we have an alternative called "SECURE IT" it is cosponsored by eight of the ranking members of committees and subcommittees that have jurisdiction over cybersecurity. Senators McCain, myself, Chambliss, Grassley, Murkowski, Coats, Burr, and Johnson are now cosponsoring a bill that would pass the House and go to the
President.
“My concern with the bill on which we're voting on cloture is on the process, because we have not had are chance to amend this bill and the majority leader is attempting to vote cloture, fill the tree, so that we are not able to put any amendments on this bill at all. And it is a bill that will not get 41 votes, for sure, and there are many others who are very concerned about the substance of the bill. You can't have a bill with no amendments that is this important and this technical.
“Let me just state some of my concerns on the bill before us.
“First, it will actually undermine the current information sharing between the government and the private sector. The biggest priority we have is to get the private sector to the table and to make sure that they have the ability to not only give information to the government but get information from the government and, furthermore, be able to share among the other industries if they see a cyber threat on an expedited basis. “Number two, the Department of Homeland Security would be granted authority over standard-setting for private-sector systems. That's unacceptable in the private sector and most certainly is not going to produce what is a consensus for getting the information that we need. It assumes that government must take the adversarial role against private network owners in order to get cooperation when informing both the government and private sector share the same goal of increased cybersecurity.
“Let me read from a couple of letters we have received with concerns about this bill. The American Bankers Association, the Financial Services Roundtable, the Consumer Bankers Association and six other organizations say, ‘This legislation threatens to undermine important cybersecurity protections already in place for our customers and institutions. It misses an opportunity to substantially improve cyber threat information-sharing between the federal government and the private sector.’
“The National Association of Manufacturers say, ‘The creation of a new government-administered program in an agency yet to be named forces unnecessary regulatory uncertainty on the private sector.’ The defense industry groups are very concerned about not having direct access to the national security agency with whom they deal now, and this bill would take that away from their capabilities.”
###
