[wolverine876]

I completely agree that the infrastructure needs to be secured, and that it requires a lot of funding. I'm saying the military is the wrong organization for domestic operations.

What happens when the military believes an attack is coming from a private citizen? Can they spy on or take action against that person? Can that alleged attacker's computer be seized? On what evidence? What if the military determines that effective security means surveilling a wide area before an attack, or collecting all citizen data to have a source to search for clues in case of an attack? What if they determine, which some already agree, that the best defense is a good offense?

I'm of a mind that the security should be a regulation, and the infrastructure operators have to meet it. The NIST can develop standards and techniques, but the safety of infrastructure is part of the cost of doing business. Your plant can't be a menace to the community due to risk of explosion, pollution, etc. - it seems no different. The operators have gotten away with buying cheap, crappy IT for years. It's time to invest seriously in rigorous, quality engineering.

[dillondoyle]

There are also a ton of scary 'laws' like extra judicial 'border' areas which go wayyy into our country from agencies that are being militarized. Justice doesn't need swat teams...

I would be into a non-military branch. it baffles me we haven't funded this. Regulations are also a good first step, but don't seem enough alone. though HIPA and SOC seem fairly ok at least with low level stuff.

If we're going to spend $2T on infra throw at least $100 billion on this, some more to pay to onshore more critical chip & manufacturing. But Republicans are stuck on cars.