Bill Overview
Title: Intragovernmental Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act
Description: This bill requires the President, the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate, and the Chief Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives to enter into information-sharing agreements to facilitate collaboration on cybersecurity measures to protect legislative branch information technology. The President must also periodically brief Congress on the implementation of the agreements.
Sponsors: Sen. Portman, Rob [R-OH]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in the US legislative branch's IT operations
Estimated Size: 50000
- The bill impacts the cybersecurity operations within the legislative branch of the United States government.
- Enhanced cybersecurity measures will protect sensitive data and operations of the Senate and House of Representatives.
- All employees and operations of the legislative branch that rely on information technology will be affected.
- An increase in cybersecurity is intended to protect the legislative branch from cyber threats and data breaches.
Reasoning
- The Intragovernmental Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act specifically targets cybersecurity within the legislative branch. Hence, direct impacts are primarily on people involved in IT operations or those who rely heavily on IT within Congress.
- The estimated target population is around 50,000, primarily consisting of legislative IT workers, staffers, and elected officials.
- Given the budget constraints of $10 million in year 1 and $110 million over 10 years, the financial resources are directed towards improving cybersecurity infrastructure and incident response capabilities.
- It is essential to include perspectives from legislative IT staff, general staffers, officials, and regular citizens who are not directly impacted but may be indirectly affected by improved legislative cybersecurity.
Simulated Interviews
IT Specialist (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic about the policy because it means more resources dedicated to our operations.
- Better information sharing across governmental branches will make our jobs more effective and secure.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Legislative Assistant (New York, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy should enhance the safety of our communications, which is vital.
- Secure systems mean we can focus more on policy work without worrying about data integrity.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Cybersecurity Analyst (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More structured information sharing is exactly what's needed to tackle cyber threats.
- This could mean more jobs and stability in IT roles.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Congressional Staff (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Coordinating cybersecurity strategies is crucial.
- I'm concerned about execution without exceeding budgets.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Legislative Consultant (Boston, MA)
Age: 38 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could set a precedent for IT standards in other branches.
- The proactive approach is beneficial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Senator (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This collaboration is overdue, we need secure communication channels.
- Cybersecurity is a top priority for national security.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
IT Support Specialist (Austin, TX)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improved cybersecurity measures mean fewer threats to manage daily.
- I'm worried it might complicate my work without proper training.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Public Policy Expert (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 53 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This initiative could greatly influence future policy models.
- Successful implementation could significantly enhance national cybersecurity.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Software Developer (Charlotte, NC)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's great the government is stepping up its cybersecurity game.
- No direct impact on my daily life, but overall safety is reassuring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Journalist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improved cybersecurity means we get more accurate information.
- I hope this won't lead to less transparency in government operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 2: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 3: $10500000 (Low: $8500000, High: $12500000)
Year 5: $11000000 (Low: $9000000, High: $13000000)
Year 10: $12000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $14000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Key Considerations
- It is critical to consider the rapid pace of technological advancement, which may necessitate updating cybersecurity measures frequently.
- The effectiveness of information-sharing agreements will depend on successful inter-agency cooperation and clear guidelines.
- Evaluating the policy's success in preventing cyber threats and breaches will be challenging but necessary to justify ongoing expenditures.