BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleagues--the ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee, Senator Peters; along with Senators King, Gallego, and Slotkin--in support of the immediate passage of a clean and bipartisan reauthorization of the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015, which has been introduced by Ranking Member Peters, along with Senator Rounds, this session.
This law is critical for public-private information sharing and cyber threat mitigation. But due to the objections of a couple of Republican Senators, this essential tool has now expired, leaving our private sector partners in a lurch.
I want to come to this debate with a very, very specific focus. I also serve as ranking member of the Senate Rules Committee, with oversight of Federal elections administration issues. I am also California's former secretary of state. So I have seen firsthand how this cyber security law and the resulting public-private partnership provide State and local elections officials with the crucial support they need to mitigate threats to election administration, including the combating of misinformation and disinformation.
It is timely because voting is already under way in this country in several important State elections, as we speak, including in my home State of California; and voting will soon begin in several other key elections in 10 days.
Private sector partners will be more hesitant to report cyber security threats to our elections if they are left exposed or feel like they are left exposed during this lapse in the authority provided by the law.
It is especially dangerous that this law has expired, as President Trump and many members of his administration, for that matter, continue to try to sow doubt about the integrity of our elections, including undermining the cyber security of our election systems.
Now, following the original passage of this law in 2015, Congress actually went a step further to provide better Federal coordination by establishing the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, better known as CISA. This was coupled with the Department of Homeland Security's designation at the time of election infrastructure as critical infrastructure, which has helped ensure that elections offices received security assistance. And I should specifically point out that these elections offices are not just State offices; they are local elections offices throughout the country.
Now, CISA has been the leading Agency to fight against cyber threats that can impact key industries and infrastructure, and I know that State and local election officials appreciate and use the resources and support that CISA provides in fending off bad actors. But instead of prioritizing the reauthorization of the law and supporting CISA's important election security work, the administration has actually been undermining it.
Secretary Noem, DOGE, and Elon Musk have permanently cut over 1,300 staff at CISA--not added capacity; they have cut staff at CISA--while halting all election security activity and terminating funding for the election infrastructure center at CISA.
Colleagues, that is not government efficiency; that is government negligence.
For those who are still, by the way, on CISA's payroll--still employed, still staff at CISA--who joined the Federal Government with the aim of helping to protect the homeland from cyber threats, many of them are now being reassigned to support the President's mass deportation efforts. And those who don't agree to that assignment--what happens to them? They are being terminated from their jobs as we speak during President Trump's government shutdown.
Now, I know that since day one, this administration has not even tried to hide their contempt for CISA, and it is using any opportunity it can to gut the pivotal Agency and, in doing so, leaving our cyber defenses exposed.
As with many other areas where the Trump administration is pursuing dangerous and unpopular policies, they are ignoring our legitimate oversight requests. Since we first heard about the first round of job cuts back in March, several of us have requested a briefing on CISA's election-related activity, without any real answers or substantive response from CISA. Meanwhile, the Director of National Intelligence, Director Tulsi Gabbard, has spread baseless claims of election systems vulnerability and vote manipulation, including at a White House Cabinet meeting.
The vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Mark Warner, and I have requested that Director Gabbard provide Senators with an intelligence briefing to clarify her remarks on voting systems security--so far, to no avail.
This reckless spread of election conspiracy theories--from the head of the intelligence community, no less--demonstrates that this administration is not serious about election security and instead embraces and spreads misinformation to undermine public confidence in elections and in election results.
So why has this law been allowed to lapse? Because a few Senate Republicans agree with Trump and want to ban CISA from doing its important election security work on disinformation and misinformation. It is a position I personally find very, very hard to believe, and I hope they will reconsider and move off of that dangerous position.
No, colleagues, we should not codify the Trump administration's approach to election security, and we certainly should not codify it permanently. We have a responsibility, an obligation, to support election officials and provide all the resources we can to keep U.S. elections secure and allow Americans to vote both freely and securely, including the disbursement of election security grants, as Congress has approved on a bipartisan basis, and including the clean reauthorization of this critical cyber security law.
182, S. 2983; that the Peters substitute amendment, which is at the desk, be considered and agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, disappointing but not surprising. And I hope, as the days go on, and not just next year's midterm elections and not just next year's midterm primary elections but elections in numerous States this November--literally, just a few weeks away--will be a reminder of the urgency to revisit this topic, address it, reauthorize the law, and provide CISA with the funding and proper guidance, as we have over the last decade. The work is simply too important.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT