Communications & Technology

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) issued the following statement after the United States Supreme Court struck down the “Chevron Deference” in Loper Bright Enterprises, et al. v. Raimondo : “Article I of the Constitution established Congress’s role to write the laws of the land—not the Executive Branch. The Supreme Court’s ruling today will help restore the proper balance of power as the Founders envisioned it. Moving forward, major decision-making authority will no longer automatically be deferred to unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats. Power has been placed back in the hands of the American people and their elected representatives, as the Constitution prescribes.” 

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chair Bob Latta (R-OH) delivered the following opening remarks at today’s subcommittee hearing titled “Legislative Proposal to Sunset Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.” RECOGNIZING CHANGES IN THE INTERNET   “Since 1996, Section 230 protections have allowed the U.S. tech industry to flourish. “This legal framework emboldened Americans to pioneer, creating Internet and social media platforms that promote innovation, user content, and social media interaction. “Its intent was to provide online platforms immunity from liability for content posted by third-party users. “But as the Internet exploded in growth, it also increased challenges that were not contemplated when the law passed in 1996. “Section 230 must be reformed. “As we heard in our last hearing on this topic, the current online eco-system is flawed. “Many of these platforms are rife with content such as online sex trafficking, illegal arms sales, child pornography, and other illicit crimes. “In response, Big Tech platforms hide behind Section 230’s broad immunity. “In that process, courts have rewarded their destructive behavior. “We need to reform Section 230 to hold platforms accountable for the role they play in facilitating and enabling harmful behavior. “But in doing so, Congress must be thoughtful and deliberative. There is no silver bullet to fix this issue.”  REFORMING SECTION 230 “Some argue that amending or repealing Section 230 violates the First Amendment rights of these platforms to host the content they so choose. “Yet, no other industry has complete protection from all liability for harm it causes. Newspapers, broadcasters—fundamental mediums that exemplify our First Amendment rights—are subject to publisher liability or can be sued for defamation. Not Big Tech. “Over the past several Congresses, there have been numerous proposals to hold Big Tech accountable for when it acts as a publisher in moderating content on its platforms, but to no avail. “Which is why, today, we are reviewing a discussion draft that will sunset Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 effective December 31, 2025.” HOLDING BIG TECH ACCOUNTABLE “I hope this legislation will bring people together—including those who support, oppose, or are interested—to carefully discuss Section 230 reforms. “One thing is certain: Big Tech’s behavior has brought Republicans and Democrats together on a commitment to find a long-term solution to reform Section 230. “Congress has a monumental task ahead—but we must reform the law in a way that will protect innovation and promote free speech, allow Big Tech to moderate indecent and illegal content on its platforms, and be accountable to the American people.  “I look forward to our discussion today and to working with my colleagues on a broader discussion about purposeful reforms to Section 230. It is up to Congress, not the courts, to reform Section 230, and changes to this law are overdue.” 

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) delivered the following opening remarks at today’s Communications and Technology Subcommittee hearing titled “Legislative Proposal to Sunset Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.”  “Ranking Member Pallone and I recently unveiled bipartisan draft legislation to sunset Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. “As written, Section 230 was originally intended to protect Internet Service Providers from being held liable for content posted by a third-party user or for removing truly horrific or illegal content. “The intent was to make the Internet a safe space and allow companies to remove harmful content in good faith without being held liable for doing so.  “However, the Internet has changed dramatically since then.  “Over five billion people around the world use social media, with the average person spending more than two hours a day on social media.  “The Internet has become vital for people to connect, work, find information, and make a living. “Big Tech is exploiting this to profit off us and use the information we share to develop addictive algorithms that push content on to our feeds.  “At the same time, they refuse to strengthen their platforms’ protections against predators, drug dealers, sex traffickers, extortioners, and cyberbullies.  “Our children are the ones paying the greatest price.  “They are developing addictive and dangerous habits, often at the expense of their mental health. “Big Tech has failed to uphold American values and be good stewards of the content they host. “It has been nearly three decades since Section 230 was enacted. “The reality is that many of these companies didn’t even exist when the law was written, and we could not comprehend the full effect of the internet’s capabilities. “It is past time for Congress to reevaluate Section 230.” IMMUNITY “In recent years, U.S. courts have expanded the meaning of what Congress originally intended for this law, interpreting Section 230 in a way that gives Big Tech companies nearly unlimited immunity from legal consequences. “These blanket protections have resulted in tech firms operating without transparency or accountability for how they manage their platforms and harm users. “This means that a social media company, for example, can’t easily be held responsible if it promotes, amplifies, or makes money from posts selling drugs, illegal weapons, or other illicit content. “As more and more companies integrate generative artificial intelligence technologies into their platforms, these harms will only get worse, and AI will redefine what it means to be a publisher, potentially creating new legal challenges for companies.  “As long as the status quo prevails, Big Tech has no incentive to change the way they operate, and they will continue putting profits ahead of the mental health of our society and youth.”  SOLUTION “Reforming Section 230 and holding Big Tech accountable has long been a priority of mine and Ranking Member Pallone. “Last Congress, we both introduced our own legislation to reform the decades old law. “Unfortunately, tech companies did not engage with us in a meaningful way and no solutions or reforms were made. “Big Tech is satisfied with the status quo. “So much so that they have become masters at deception, distraction, and hiding behind others in order to keep Section 230 unchanged. “That’s why we’re taking bipartisan action now. “Our discussion draft will bring Congress and stakeholders to the table to work in good faith to create a solution that ensures accountability, protects innovation and free speech, and requires companies to be good stewards of their platforms. “Let me be clear. “Our goal is not for Section 230 to disappear. “But the reality is that nearly 25 bills to amend Section 230 have been introduced over the last two Congresses. “Many of these were good faith attempts to reform the law and Big Tech lobbied to kill them every time. “These companies have left us with no other option. “By enacting this legislation, we will force Congress to act. “It is long past time to hold these companies accountable. “The shield of Section 230 should be there to protect the American people, not Big Tech. “I am hopeful that this legislation is the start of an opportunity to work in a bipartisan way to achieve that goal. “It’s vital that we develop solutions to restore people’s free speech, identity, and safety online, while also continuing to encourage innovation.” 

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chair Bob Latta (R-OH), and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA) wrote to NPR CEO Katherine Maher regarding reports of political and ideological bias at the taxpayer-funded public radio organization. In addition to requesting answers to questions, the letter requests Ms. Maher appear before the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee for a hearing on May 8, 2024. "The Committee has concerns about the direction in which NPR may be headed under past and present leadership. As a taxpayer funded, public radio organization, NPR should focus on fair and objective news reporting that both considers and reflects the views of the larger U.S. population and not just a niche audience," the Chairs wrote.   They continued , "We also find it disconcerting that NPR’s coverage of major news in recent years has been so polarized as to preclude any need to uncover the truth. These have included news stories on matters of national security and importance, such as the Mueller report, the Hunter Biden laptop, and the COVID-19 origins investigation. On each of these issues, NPR has been accused of approaching its news reporting with an extreme left-leaning lens." “In light of the recent, disturbing revelations about National Public Radio (NPR) and its leadership, I’ve directed Chair McMorris Rodgers and the Energy and Commerce Committee to conduct an investigation of NPR and determine what actions should be taken to hold the organization accountable for its ideological bias and contempt for facts. The American people support the free press but will not be made to fund a left-leaning political agenda with taxpayer funds.” said Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) regarding the effort. CLICK HERE to read the letter.

Letter argues agency lacks legal authority to reinstate burdensome rules that will hurt consumers Washington, D.C. – U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Senate Commerce Committee Ranking Member Ted Cruz (R-TX) led a bicameral coalition of their committee colleagues in calling on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to reverse course and abandon its so-called “net neutrality” draft order—an illegal power grab that would expose the broadband industry to an oppressive regulatory regime under Title II of the Communications Act. The FCC is set to vote on the draft order on Thursday. The members argue that the FCC’s draft order ignores the text of the Communications Act of 1934, which explicitly precludes the FCC from treating broadband as a public utility. Moreover, the Supreme Court’s recent jurisprudence on the major questions doctrine confirms that the only body that can authorize public utility regulation of broadband is Congress. Resurrecting this failed Obama-era policy, which will inevitably be struck down by the courts, is a waste of time and re sources and will punish American consumers by choking off investment, innovation, and competition. In a letter to Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, the members write: “Congress’s decision to treat broadband Internet access as an information service, rather than a telecommunications service, was a deliberate policy choice. Congress recognized that ‘[t]he Internet and other interactive computer services have flourished, to the benefit of all Americans, with a minimum of government regulation,’ and accordingly decreed that it ‘is the policy of the United States... to promote the continued development of the internet and other interactive computer services... [and] to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation.’   “Your proposal to reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service does the exact opposite. It would give the Commission largely unfettered power to impose (and allow states to impose) rate regulation, tariffing requirements, unbundling obligations, entry and exit regulation, and taxation of broadband—the antithesis of leaving broadband ‘unfettered’ by regulation as the law requires. Congress has had many opportunities to give the FCC such power, yet it has never done so in any of its ample legislative enactments regarding broadband over the past two decades. Rather, legislators have repeatedly considered but ultimately rejected efforts to replace the longstanding light-touch framework with common carrier regulation. And for good reason: Title II will inflict significant damage on consumers by chilling investment and innovation.   “Finally, recent jurisprudence from the Supreme Court confirms that the Commission has no power to impose Title II on the broadband industry. As the Commission’s record demonstrates, the question of whether broadband should be subject to public utility regulation is an issue of ‘vast economic and political significance,’ such that the Commission must identify ‘clear authorization from Congress’ to justify such a decision. Our review of the relevant statutory provisions leaves no doubt that, far from possessing the type of ‘clear’ statutory authority required under Supreme Court precedent, the Commission lacks any authority to subject broadband services to common-carrier regulation.” The full list of Senators joining Chair Rodgers and Ranking Member Cruz in sending the letter include: Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Deb Fischer (Re-Neb.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Todd Young (R-Ind.), Ted Budd (R-N.C.), Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), and Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.). Also signing the letter were Reps. Bob Latta (OH-5), Michael Burgess (TX-26), Brett Guthrie (KY-2), Morgan Griffith (VA-9), Gus Bilirakis (FL-12), Larry Bucshon (IN-8), Richard Hudson (NC-9), Tim Walberg (MI-5), Buddy Carter (GA-1), Jeff Duncan (SC-3), Gary Palmer (AL-6), Neal Dunn (FL-2), John Curtis (UT-3), Debbie Lesko (AZ-8), Greg Pence (IN-6), Dan Crenshaw (TX-2), John Joyce (PA-13), Kelly Armstrong (ND-At-large), Randy Weber (TX-14), Rick Allen (GA-12), Troy Balderson (OH-12), Russ Fulcher (ID-1), August Pfluger (TX-11), Diana Harshbarger (TN-1), Mariannette Miller-Meeks (IA-1), Kat Cammack (FL-3), Jay Obernolte (CA-23), and John James (MI-10). The full text of the letter is available HERE .

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee (E&C) Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), E&C Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chair Bob Latta (R-OH), E&C Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), E&C Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), and House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, launched an investigation into grants made to an AI scientist at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) with ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).  The Chairs made requests for documents to UCLA, the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD).  BACKGROUND :  On November 1, 2023, a Newsweek investigation found that the federal government awarded at least $30 million in federal research grants led by Mr. Song-Chun Zhu, who is now “at the forefront of China's race to develop the most advanced artificial intelligence.”  The investigation further revealed the NSF and DOD continued funding Mr. Zhu even as he “set up a parallel institute near Wuhan, took a position at a Beijing university whose primary goal is to support Chinese military research, and joined a CCP ‘talent plan’ whose members are tasked with transferring knowledge and technology to China.”  In particular, Newsweek found that the project once led by Mr. Zhu received $1.2 million in two grants from the Office of Naval Research in 2021, the year following his departure to China.  KEY LETTER EXCERPT:   “Mr. Zhu has openly discussed how if China takes the lead in developing a ‘truly universal intelligence,’ then it will ‘become the winner of the international technology competition.’ He has also referred to the AI race as being equivalent in military importance to the race for the atomic bomb. In a period of intensifying geopolitical competition with the CCP, ceasing federal government support for Chinese AI development is a critical national security imperative.”  CLICK HERE to read the letter to UCLA Chancellor Gener Block.  CLICK HERE to read the letter to NSF Director Sethuraman Panchanathan.  CLICK HERE to read the letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.