Key GOP lawmaker lays out 'non-starters' for Big Tech antitrust reform


Rep. Ken Buck

Source: CNBC

A key GOP lawmaker who has been an ally to Democrats on the House Judiciary antitrust subcommittee plans to release his own report laying out “common ground” and “non-starters” for antitrust reform, according to a draft copy of the report obtained by CNBC.

The report by Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colo., first obtained and published by Politico, is written in response to the report led by the Democratic majority culminating a more than year-long investigation into Apple, Amazon, Facebook and Google. The main report has not yet been released after two delays involving new information about Facebook and further discussions between Democrats and Republicans, a source told CNBC on Monday. Representatives for the committee majority did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Buck’s report.

The investigation was launched in June 2019 as a bipartisan endeavor. Buck has repeatedly said in interviews it has remained a coordinated effort. But his report shows that even a Republican that has seemed most open to reform is reticent to endorse some of the bolder proposals Democrats are considering. The divergence leaves an opening for the powerful tech companies to oppose legislation that could place greater regulatory burdens on their businesses or even force them to break up.

“While we agree in principle with the findings identified in the report, we cannot endorse all of the legislative recommendations offered by the majority,” the draft report says. “We will work with the Chairman in a bipartisan fashion to help enact the legislative solutions where we can agree. However, we are concerned that sweeping changes could lead to overregulation and carry unintended consequences for the entire economy. We prefer a targeted approach, the scalpel of antitrust, rather than the chainsaw of regulation.”

A representative for Buck did not immediately provide comment to CNBC on the report. Buck told Politico in a statement Monday, “With a problem this significant, one shouldn’t be surprised that there is a variety of legislative solutions being offered.”

In the draft report, Buck lays out the following as areas of common ground he’s found with the Democratic report:

  • Additional resources for antitrust enforcers.
  • Creating rules that ensure users can transfer their data between platforms.
  • Shifting the burden of proof in merger cases to make it more possible for antitrust agencies to bring successful merger challenges.

Also under the “Common Ground” section, Buck lays out areas where he’d like to see more expert feedback, according to the draft report, before installing potentially onerous regulations. These areas for further exploration include:

  • Leveraging monopoly power from one market to threaten a separate market.
  • Predatory pricing.
  • Revitalizing the “Essential Facilities Doctrine” whereby a company with monopoly power must allow competitors “reasonable use”  of a facility it owns if those competitors rely on it to succeed in the marketplace.
  • How platform monopolies should be allowed to make design changes to their services.

Buck also lists several “non-starters” in the discussions:

  • A “Glass-Steagall for the Internet,” or a type of structural separation that would force large data firms to distinguish different lines of business. Buck calls this “a thinly veiled call to break up Big Tech firms,” according to the draft report and writes, “We do not agree with the majority’s approach to pass a Big Tech Glass-Steagall Act,” referring to the 1933 law that separated commercial and investment banking.
  • Eliminating arbitration clauses and removing limits on class action lawsuits. The draft report says the idea is “rife with unintended consequences,” saying arbitration provides important protections for small businesses, though “there is room for Congress to reevaluate some portions of arbitration clause policy.”
  • Creating a “regulatory regime” to create rules governing “equal terms for equal service” to prevent platforms from self-preferencing. The draft report claims this would reduce innovation and harm small businesses.
  • Removing “barriers” to private antitrust enforcement by excluding antitrust arbitration clauses from contracts. The draft report says Congress should focus on removing barriers for antitrust agencies to move forward with enforcement, rather than do so for private enforcement.

In addition to the non-starters, Buck’s report criticizes the majority report for not tackling the issue of potential censorship and political bias online. Conservative lawmakers say tech platforms like Facebook and Google-owned YouTube stifle conservative speech, an allegation the tech companies have repeatedly denied.

Buck’s report shows that regardless of the areas of agreement, there will be a long road ahead for lawmakers to reform antitrust laws, even as the companies they have investigated face potentially imminent competition lawsuits.

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

WATCH: How US antitrust law works, and what it means for Big Tech

A Global Asset Management Seoul Korea Magazine

This post was originally published on this site