House GOP 'weaponization' Committee Targets Big Tech
Big Tech will soon have its turn in the Republican-controlled House.
Though House Republicans have a slim 222-213 lead over House Democrats, GOP-led committees can examine long-term concerns. This includes examining how the government is influencing conservative online content management on online social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook.
The Supreme Court is reviewing social media laws in Florida and Texas
The first step on the party's technology agenda is Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), who chairs the federal government's newly elected subcommittee on firearms. The committee will have the power to issue court orders and review private communications from various government agencies, White House staffers and members of Congress on the microblogging site, many of which were published in the tweets. These controversial posts include skepticism about the COVID-19 vaccine, theories about the origin of the virus, news that could have political implications, and more.
"Americans are fed up," Jordan recently told the House of Representatives, arguing that government officials should resist such demands on social media companies.
"We want this to stop," said Jordan, the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, adding, "That's what this committee is talking about." That's what we're going to focus on. That's what we do. ."
While the subcommittee hearings and findings may satisfy many Republican voters, it is unclear whether the government's approved motions violate the First Amendment or are inappropriate.
“To climb the wall, the state has to put a lot of pressure on the private legal entity to operate in a certain way, which is the organization's choice, actually the state's choice. This is the highest level I have ever seen. Corbin Barthold, Internet policy advisor at Tech Freedom, based in Washington, DC, told the Washington Examiner .
"That doesn't mean I condone the behavior of the federal government," Barthold continued, noting the difference between what is required and what is illegal.
The Jordanian subcommittee could pass legislation in the future that would disrupt some of the government's content moderation efforts on private social media platforms.
Congress may want to regulate when government officials can "talk" about content on forums. For example, it explains that government agencies can still report accounts managed by outside agents but must stop reporting accounts that make controversial medical claims, Barhold said. Congress can require the government to record and disclose communications with private individuals. forums
Jordan is working on the bill with Rep. James Comer (R-KY), the new chair of the House Oversight Committee, and Rep. Cathy McMorris Rogers (R-WA) as energy and council chair. The House Commerce Committee Oversight Committee website says the rule of three aims to curb excessive scrutiny of social media by members of President Joe Biden's administration. Her proposal would "ban officials in the Biden administration and federal bureaucrats from using their power or influence to advance censorship of speech or pressure social media companies to censor speech."
But passing content moderation legislation is an uphill battle for Republicans. Alongside a Democratic-controlled Senate and the threat of a veto by the Democratic president, the two parties are fundamentally at odds over what changes they want to see in the tech laws.
Democrats fear what they call "dangerous misinformation" is spreading online. Republicans fear too much online content, especially about conservatism, is being suppressed. Although both parties are not happy with the situation, the criticism is completely contradictory and makes a legal solution impossible. A change in either direction would eliminate or reduce federal liability protection known as Section 230. To this end, several laws were proposed at the last session, but none were passed.
House Republicans may not do better on other technical issues they have expressed an interest in solving. Although many states are taking responsibility for regulating online privacy, Congress has failed to enact a federal privacy law. Republicans want trade provisions that support the state law, while Democrats don't want plaintiffs to overturn the law.
Proposals to protect children on the Internet are similarly controversial along party lines. All antitrust laws failed in the last session. Despite the high profile of Biden and former Trump administration attorney general William Barr, these competing proposals are unlikely to air in the current session.
Click here to learn more about Washington's study
As fundamental political differences affect technology legislation on Capitol Hill, the FTC asserts its authority to make rules to regulate the industry without direction or approval from Congress. The Justice Department has announced it will file a new antitrust lawsuit against Google's online advertising business and a lawsuit against Apple.
While action against big tech over the next two years is likely to come from federal agencies rather than Capitol Hill, that hasn't stopped Jordan from trying to mobilize House Democrats. He told the House of Representatives, “This is about the First Amendment. You've been thinking about this for a while.
