[ by Melanie Gretchen ] Leaders in the Republican and Democratic parties appear to be playing political football with the issue of Cybersecurity, and if they're not careful, it could turn into the next global warming.  Efforts to introduce legislation have stalled time and again - often for reasons that have little or nothing to do with the scope and substance of the topic. Politics of 'Obstructionism'. This year, Senator Joseph Lieberman (Ind-CT) and chairman of the homeland security committee, joined forces with Senator Susan Collins (Rep-ME) and the ranking Republican member, to introduce a bill.  The bill was blocked by a Republican filibuster, severely limiting its prospects for passage in 2012.  The bill's biggest naysayer was none other than the 2008 presidential candidate, Senator John McCain (Rep-AZ).  More often than not, the motives for blocking a bill have little or nothing to do with the subject at hand - it purely is a political ploy to not let anything go to the President for his signature. Politics vs. National Security: No Contest? President Obama felt so strongly about the "threat of cyberattack" that he wrote an Opinion piece in the 7/20/12 edition of the WSJournal.  There, President Obama cited cyberattacks committed by foreign governments, criminal syndicates, and individuals targeting financial, energy, and public safety systems.  To address the increasingly non-virtual problem, he urged the government to undertake "the kind of responsible, collaborative approach to an urgent national-security challenge that Americans expect but that Washington too rarely provides." All for naught.   [WSJ, 7/19/12] Here are just a few concerns:

• Hundreds of major companies, defense contractors and government agencies have been affected, costing businesses billions of dollars annually
• At least 200 cyberattacks last year were attempted or successful on power plants, electric grids, refineries, transportation networks and water treatment systems.
• A survey last year of more than 9,000 executives in more than 130 countries by PricewaterhouseCoopers consultants found that only 13% of those polled had taken adequate defensive action against cyberthreats.
• General Keith Alexander, the chief of the U.S Cyber Command and the director of the National Security Agency, rated preparedness for a large-scale cyberattack to be "around a 3," out of 10.  [NY Times, 7/31/12]

The President's wish has not been fulfilled.  Rather, anything but. Politics seem to have taken priority over our security.  Last month, the U.S. Senate voted on a bill that would have provided cybersecurity to combat assaults on America’s computer networks by China and other foreign governments, hackers, and criminals. If passed, the bill would have provided cybersecurity to combat assaults on America’s computer networks by China and other foreign governments, hackers, and criminals.  To this end, it proposed mandatory minimum standards that would require companies to share information and harden computer protections. Outfitting the Bill. Original versions of the bill, which was first drafted in 2009, called for giving the Department of Homeland Security the power to enforce minimum cybersecurity stands on systems that, if damaged, would lead to mass casualties or economic loss.  Following objections from U.S. Chamber of Commerce to the costs that would burden government and the private economy, Senator Lieberman offered these concessions:

• minimum standards were made optional;  the revision never made it through.
• dropped a mandate for private facilities to upgrade their cyber-security as prescribed by government.
• removed a "kill switch," which would have allowed the President to shut down the Internet in an emergency.   [NY Times, 7/27/12] [WSJ, 8/1/12]

End Result. End Game? Nevertheless, the bill failed; the Senate voted 52 to 46, falling short of the 60 needed to force a final vote on the measure.  [NY Times, 8/2/12] [NY Times, 8/5/12] Senator Collins, who sponsored the bill, expressed her disappointment about lacking "a sense of urgency" about a looming cyberattack:

"I cannot think of another area where the threat is greater and we are less prepared."

The State of National Security. Is this a sign of things to come?  Bickering between camps has been flaring up.  Congressional aides said Senator Lieberman in a closed-door meeting in July openly questioned Mr. McCain about why he was putting the interests of the Chamber of Commerce over national security and asked Senator McCain what he would say if he blocked the bill and the nation suffered a catastrophic cyberattack.  (In his defense, Senator Lieberman contended his reputation on national security issues was unquestionable.) Senator McCain did block the bill, postponing any action until after the August recess, and we will be more likely less safe than safer than we were before.  [NY Times, 8/2/12]

[C-I Note: unlike the House, which successfully passed its own cybersecurity bill in April, which called for more information sharing between national security and intelligence agencies and businesses.  It didn't have the President's support, but maybe every bit counts in this political climate?]