The House of Representatives has been busy today. First, they passed the massive funding package for Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan. You might hear some people talk about the “bipartisan” effort in passing the bill. What they mean is that the Republican “majority” was so divided that the bill wouldn’t have passed without Democrats supporting it. The final vote was 311 to 112. House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said, “Traditional House Republicans led by Speaker Mike Johnson have risen to the occasion. We have a responsibility to push back against authoritarianism.”
That authoritarianism would be ultra-conservatives who wanted to attach US border legislation that would have rendered the bill DOA when it arrives in the Senate next week. Three of those ultraconservatives, Greene of GA, Massie of KY, and Gosar of AZ, are ready to attempt to oust the Speaker for working with Democrats to pass the bill without the addendum.
Those ultra-conservatives may see such a move backfire. Democrats could vote to keep the Speaker in power, OR they could make Jeffries a contender who would only need four Republican votes to become Speaker himself. Either one would be seen as a strong rebuttal and shaming of Greene and other pro-Putin traitors.
The Key Garden [2011 original with AI background]
In the same session, the House passed a bill by a vote of 360-58 that could lead to a ban on TikTok in the US. The bill is primarily a sanctions bill against Russia and Iran. The sanctions aren’t likely to stop wars that either country is running, but it looks good on the campaign trail. Tucked deep inside the small print, however, is a part that requires TikTok’s Chinese parent, ByteDance, to sell its stake in the video platform to a US-based entity within nine months or face a ban.
Don’t go crying about the loss of the app just yet, though. IF the bill passes the Senate without the ban being yanked out, there’s an inevitable First Amendment battle ripe for arguing for years and could possibly win in a Supreme Court that’s likely to change a couple of members before the issue would get to them. It’s also possible that the Senate could modify the bill to allow any NATO member country to purchase ByteDance’s shares, and that could also be challenged in multiple international courts which could delay any result even longer. This issue is far from over. In the meantime, feel free to go ahead and learn that dance in the confidence that we are all going to laugh at you when you post it.
Now, here’s the question: Which is more important, free speech or national security? The whole reason this issue was squeezed into a totally unrelated bill is the fear that the Chinese-owned company could use the app to spy on Americans. ByteDance says there are precautions in the software against that, that the Chinese government has never requested such data, and that the company has strong rules against data sharing with any government entity. Forcing the removal of the app would have a huge First Amendment effect on the millions of US-based users and US-based advertisers who rely on TikTok influencers to help spread the word about their products.
Without strong evidence of China being up to something, supporters of the measure could find themselves not only barking up the wrong tree, but alienating younger voters who frequently use the app.
Personally, I’m too old to be on TikTok so I’m not directly impacted either way. It seems like a real stretch to try and make it a Homeland Security issue.
How Much Do You Value Free Speech?
The House of Representatives has been busy today. First, they passed the massive funding package for Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan. You might hear some people talk about the “bipartisan” effort in passing the bill. What they mean is that the Republican “majority” was so divided that the bill wouldn’t have passed without Democrats supporting it. The final vote was 311 to 112. House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said, “Traditional House Republicans led by Speaker Mike Johnson have risen to the occasion. We have a responsibility to push back against authoritarianism.”
That authoritarianism would be ultra-conservatives who wanted to attach US border legislation that would have rendered the bill DOA when it arrives in the Senate next week. Three of those ultraconservatives, Greene of GA, Massie of KY, and Gosar of AZ, are ready to attempt to oust the Speaker for working with Democrats to pass the bill without the addendum.
Those ultra-conservatives may see such a move backfire. Democrats could vote to keep the Speaker in power, OR they could make Jeffries a contender who would only need four Republican votes to become Speaker himself. Either one would be seen as a strong rebuttal and shaming of Greene and other pro-Putin traitors.
In the same session, the House passed a bill by a vote of 360-58 that could lead to a ban on TikTok in the US. The bill is primarily a sanctions bill against Russia and Iran. The sanctions aren’t likely to stop wars that either country is running, but it looks good on the campaign trail. Tucked deep inside the small print, however, is a part that requires TikTok’s Chinese parent, ByteDance, to sell its stake in the video platform to a US-based entity within nine months or face a ban.
Don’t go crying about the loss of the app just yet, though. IF the bill passes the Senate without the ban being yanked out, there’s an inevitable First Amendment battle ripe for arguing for years and could possibly win in a Supreme Court that’s likely to change a couple of members before the issue would get to them. It’s also possible that the Senate could modify the bill to allow any NATO member country to purchase ByteDance’s shares, and that could also be challenged in multiple international courts which could delay any result even longer. This issue is far from over. In the meantime, feel free to go ahead and learn that dance in the confidence that we are all going to laugh at you when you post it.
Now, here’s the question: Which is more important, free speech or national security? The whole reason this issue was squeezed into a totally unrelated bill is the fear that the Chinese-owned company could use the app to spy on Americans. ByteDance says there are precautions in the software against that, that the Chinese government has never requested such data, and that the company has strong rules against data sharing with any government entity. Forcing the removal of the app would have a huge First Amendment effect on the millions of US-based users and US-based advertisers who rely on TikTok influencers to help spread the word about their products.
Without strong evidence of China being up to something, supporters of the measure could find themselves not only barking up the wrong tree, but alienating younger voters who frequently use the app.
Personally, I’m too old to be on TikTok so I’m not directly impacted either way. It seems like a real stretch to try and make it a Homeland Security issue.
Share this:
Like this: