No one\u00a0appears to be\u00a0happy with the revised\u00a0Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protect Act (CISPA)\u00a0that is about to be voted on in the U.S. Senate.\u00a0And yet,\u00a0this\u00a0version\u00a0will probably get\u00a0passed. Count me among the not happy.\u00a0The new version includes just as much stupidity as earlier ones.\n\tFirst, we would get a giant, brand-spanking-new pile of steaming bureaucracy called the National Cybersecurity Council (NCC). The NCC\u2019s mission would be to\u00a0assess vulnerabilities in computer systems of critical infrastructure. (In my house that includes the TV remote.) The council would have representatives from every major related agency, except perhaps\u00a0the National Park Service. It will be chaired by the Homeland Security Secretary (oh joy) and, as The Hill reports, it will \u201cinclude members from the Pentagon, Department of Commerce, Justice Department, intelligence community and federal regulatory agencies that oversee critical infrastructure for specific sectors.\u201d\n\tWhether this is a good or bad thing depends largely on how you feel about inefficient and wasteful government spending. I bet it would take this group six months to order a pizza--and it would cost an\u00a0additional half-billion dollars to add pepperoni.\n\tSome poor soul at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) read all 211 pages of the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 so you didn\u2019t have to and put out a nice summation. (I can tell you right now the person who wrote this\u00a0is not getting paid enough.) Among the items the EFF\u00a0likes about it:\n\t\n\t\tCivilians, not the NSA, will get to be in charge of illegal\u00a0wiretapping.\n\t\n\t\tThe government no longer gets access to any data it wants unless it says it is linked to \u201ca cybersecurity crime investigation.\u201d\n\n\tBroad enough for ya?\n\tTo be fair, the EFF\u00a0also mentions a bunch of ways\u00a0the new bill addresses some privacy concerns. However, the group spotted at least one major problem:\n\t\n\t\t"Currently, the bill specifically authorizes companies to use cybsersecurity as an excuse for engaging in nearly unlimited monitoring of user data or countermeasures (like blocking or dropping packets)."\n\n\tThat\u2019s not too broad, is it?\n\tThe EFF is concerned the bill's supporters may try to stir up fear\u00a0over potentially-catastrophic cybersecurity scenarios to strip the bill of its privacy protections.\n\tIt sure as hell didn\u2019t take them long to be proven right. On Wednesday NextGov posted a story with the following headline: SENATORS USING CRIME STORIES TO PUSH CYBERSECURITY BILL:\n\t\n\t\t"It\u2019s not a matter of whether a catastrophic cyberattack will happen, but when. That\u2019s the message Senate backers of broad cybersecurity legislation repeated over and over on Tuesday as they sought to highlight what they see as the danger of inaction."\n\n\tA report in the The Hill,\u00a0SENATORS: BILL NEEDED TO PREVENT A 'CYBER 9\/11', suggests this is understating the tone of the argument.\n\t\n\t\t\u201c\u2026 pass the measure before the August recess, arguing it would ensure the United States averts a devastating \u2018cyber 9\/11\u2019 attack.\u201d\n\n\tCry insanity and let loose the imaginary hobgoblins!\n\tThe bill is sponsored by Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-DeputyDawg), Susan Collins (R-Moderate) and three others I couldn\u2019t pick out of a police lineup. Here\u2019s what they said when they introduced it:\n\t\n\t\t"The destruction or exploitation of critical infrastructure through a cyber attack, whether a nuclear power plant, a region's water supply, or a major financial market, could cripple our economy, our national security, and the American way of life. We must act now."\n\n\tSo if this bill gets passed we will only have to worry about the same old-fashioned methods currently being used to of screw up the financial markets, the ecomony, national security and the American way of life.