February 7, 2018 - Issue: Vol. 164, No. 24 — Daily Edition115th Congress (2017 - 2018) - 2nd Session
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS; Congressional Record Vol. 164, No. 24
(Senate - February 07, 2018)
Text available as:
Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Pages S705-S706] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS By Mr. DAINES: S. 2392. A bill to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to designate cybersecurity technologies that qualify for protection under systems of risk and litigation management; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, in recent years we have seen the inability of the Federal government to quickly adapt to changing technology and evolving cyber security threats. In June of 2015 the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) announced it had fallen victim to a major cyber breach, compromising the personally identifiable information of more than 22 million current and former Federal employees, including myself. Seven months later, nearly half a million more Americans had their social security numbers stolen when the Internal Revenue Service was hacked. We found out last year that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission had been hacked in 2016. I spent 28 years in the private sector, 12 years with a global cloud computing company. We faced new cyber threats daily and our customers expected security. We delivered, not once was our data compromised. I know firsthand that industry has the talent and the incentive to revolutionize cyber security and keep their information systems secure. The Federal government should unbridle the private sector whenever possible, utilizing their expertise, learning from their best practices, and facilitating their innovation. That is why I am introducing the Cyber Support for Anti-Terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies Act or the Cyber SAFETY Act. Since 2002, the Department of Homeland Security's existing SAFETY Act program has successfully incentivized the private sector's development and deployment of anti-terrorism and security technologies through limited liability protections. It has ensured the threat of litigation does not deter entrepreneurs from developing and commercializing products and services that protect lives and infrastructure. This legislation will simply expand the applicability of the program to ensure that cyber security firms can qualify for these same protections. It will enable cyber security firms to innovate and commercialize new technologies without a technology mandate. I ask my Senate colleagues to join me in support of this important legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record. There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows: S. 2392 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``Cyber Support for Anti- Terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies Act of 2018'' or the ``Cyber SAFETY Act of 2018''. SEC. 2. INCLUSION OF QUALIFYING CYBER INCIDENTS. Subtitle G of title VIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 441 et seq.) is amended-- (1) in section 862(b) (6 U.S.C. 441(b))-- (A) in the heading, by striking ``Designation of Qualified Anti-terrorism Technologies'' and inserting ``Designation of Anti-terrorism and Cybersecurity Technologies''; (B) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting ``or cybersecurity'' after ``anti-terrorism''; (C) in paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), by inserting ``or cybersecurity'' after ``anti-terrorism'' each place that term appears; and (D) in paragraph (7)-- (i) by inserting ``or cybersecurity'' after ``Anti- terrorism''; and (ii) by inserting ``or qualifying cyber incidents'' after ``acts of terrorism''; (2) in section 863 (6 U.S.C. 442)-- (A) by inserting ``or cybersecurity'' after ``anti- terrorism'' each place that term appears; (B) by inserting ``or qualifying cyber incident'' after ``act of terrorism'' each place that term appears; (C) by inserting ``or qualifying cyber incidents'' after ``acts of terrorism'' each place that term appears; and (D) in subsection (d)(3)-- (i) by striking ``(3) Certificate.--'' and inserting the following: ``(3) Certificates.-- ``(A) Certificates for anti-terrorism technologies.--''; and (ii) by adding at the end the following: ``(B) Certificates for cybersecurity technologies.-- ``(i) In general.--For cybersecurity technology reviewed and approved by the Secretary, the Secretary will issue a certificate of conformance to the Seller and place the cybersecurity technology on an Approved Product List for Homeland Security. ``(ii) Subsequent review.--Not less frequently than once every 2 years, the Secretary shall conduct a new review of any cybersecurity technology for which the Secretary issued a certification under clause (i).''; (3) in section 864 (6 U.S.C. 443)-- (A) by inserting ``or cybersecurity'' after ``anti- terrorism'' each place that term appears; and (B) by inserting ``or qualifying cyber incident'' after ``act of terrorism'' each place that term appears; and (4) in section 865 (6 U.S.C. 444)-- (A) in paragraph (1)-- (i) in the heading, by inserting ``or cybersecurity'' after ``anti-terrorism''; (ii) by inserting ``or cybersecurity'' after ``anti- terrorism''; (iii) by inserting ``or qualifying cyber incidents'' after ``acts of terrorism''; and (iv) by inserting ``or incidents'' after ``such acts''; and (B) by adding at the end the following: ``(7) Qualifying cyber incident.--The term `qualifying cyber incident' has the meaning given the term `incident' in section 3552(b) of title 44, United States Code. [[Page S706]] ``(8) Final agency action.--The determination by the Secretary that an act of terrorism or qualifying cyber incident has occurred shall constitute a final agency action subject to review under chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code.''. ______ By Mr. GRASSLEY: S. 2401. A bill to amend the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 to reform the procedures provided under such Act for the initiation, investigation, and resolution of claims alleging that employing offices of the legislative branch have violated the rights and protections provided to their employees under such Act, including protections against sexual harassment, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, two decades ago, I championed passage of the Congressional Accountability Act. It was the first piece of legislation passed by the 104th Congress and the first time in history that Congressional employees enjoyed any legal protections relating to harassment and discrimination. Today, I am introducing a measure to update and improve this landmark legislation. I call on my colleagues to support these proposed reforms, which already have passed the House of Representatives. Doing so will promote greater transparency, accountability, and an improved work climate in the halls of Congress. For decades before the enactment of the original Congressional Accountability Act, our branch of government adopted legislation setting workplace safety, civil rights, labor and health policies that directly impacted workers and employers in our hometown communities. Until 1995, Congress was exempt from these Federal laws, which meant that Congressional staff enjoyed none of the employment protections that applied to private sector and executive branch employees. Because Members of Congress are elected to represent the people, it seemed to me rather disingenuous that the people's branch had authored laws that applied to the men and women on Main Street but didn't apply to the members of Congress who wrote them. Why shouldn't Congress be held to the same set of standards as everyone else? That's what prompted me to champion the development of the original, bipartisan Congressional Accountability Act. My initial good government effort wasn't met with open arms on Capitol Hill. It took tremendous effort and half a dozen years to secure enough support to pass these reforms. The Congressional Accountability Act finally passed when Republicans gained majority control of both houses of Congress for the first time in four decades. President Bill Clinton signed this legislation on January 23, 1995. The Federal legislative branch employs tens of thousands of workers on Capitol Hill, in state offices around the country, and in associated offices, such as the Capitol Police. Thanks to the Congressional Accountability Act, these legislative employees are covered by over a dozen Federal workplace laws, including provisions that mandate minimum wage and regulate overtime; make accommodations for workers with disabilities; spell out anti-discriminatory policies for workers based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or military service; guarantee family and medical leave; require hazard- free workplaces; clarify collective bargaining rights for union members; and explain rules about lie detector tests for employees. The legislation I'm introducing today makes significant reforms, in three areas, to the Congressional Accountability Act (CAA). The purpose of these reforms is to enhance transparency, ensure accountability, and promote a more respectful work climate in both chambers of Congress. First, this legislation would streamline and enhance the dispute resolution process for Congressional staff and interns. For example, it would enable Congressional employees to have access to an advocate who can offer assistance in proceedings before the Congressional Office of Compliance. It would require that every Congressional office adopt an anti-harassment policy. It would make it optional, not mandatory, for staffers complaining of harassment to engage in mediation. And it would institute a periodic survey of employees to assess attitudes about harassment in Congress. Second, this legislation would make Congressional lawmakers personally liable for their harassment of employees and interns. It imposes a 90-day deadline by which Congressional lawmakers must reimburse the Treasury for awards or settlements of harassment claims. It bars the use of official House or Senate funds to cover a settlement of a harassment claim. It also ensures the automatic referral of harassment claims against a lawmaker to the Ethics Committee. Third, and finally, this measure would increase public transparency of Congressional settlement awards. It does so by ensuring that detailed information on awards and settlements will be reported twice a year and posted online. These reforms are overdue, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the immediate passage of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 Reform Act. I also want to take this opportunity to thank Congressman Gregg Harper for introducing and championing the passage of very similar legislation in the House of Representatives earlier this week. ____________________