Tweet Share Share Comment

The Senate supporters of House-passed legislation targeting TikTok have a message for anyone who would call it a “ban”: Get that filthy word out of your mouth.

“We are talking about a transition in ownership, not a ban, not elimination of TikTok—a transition of ownership that puts it in different hands but permits it to continue to exist,” Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal said Wednesday. “We’re not talking about messing with it; we’re not talking about screwing around with an asset; we’re not talking about disabling it. We’re talking about disarming it.”

Blumenthal was among the senators who attended a classified briefing Wednesday morning on national security threats posed by TikTok, the social video app that’s a subsidiary of China-based ByteDance. The House last week passed a bill that would give ByteDance 180 days to divest from TikTok or see the app, well, “prohibited” in the United States. The House vote was an overwhelming 352 to 65 in favor, a margin wide enough that supporters hoped that it would put pressure on the Senate to act.

But if the Senate is feeling pressured to act, it’s doing a good job hiding it. All Majority Leader Chuck Schumer would say after the House passed the bill was that “the Senate will review the legislation when it comes over from the House.” There’s no vote scheduled. There’s no timetable. There’s no certainty that the Senate will take up the House bill, produce a competing Senate alternative, or do anything on the subject in the near future.

Advertisement

There’s a whiff of intra-Congress rivalry in the way senators talk about the bill. Senators believe that they jam the House with legislation, not the other way around. Bills that arrive from the House, in their view, tend to be hotheaded and in need of deliberate adult revision, if they are lucky enough to be considered at all. Committees of jurisdiction will want their opportunity to shape any legislation, and individual members will want amendment votes, in order to leave their imprint on the final product. This exercise in ego management is the business of the Senate, and TikTok is relying on this cumbersome process to buy itself the time and space to execute a lobbying blitz.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

While the app waits, though, the bill’s Senate supporters are spending a great deal of time emphasizing that this is not a “TikTok ban,” a shorthand that many are using for the bill—and the way TikTok is characterizing the legislation in existential warnings to its users. The app is, after all, used by more than 100 million Americans, and disproportionately younger Americans at that. The last thing those senators who support wresting control of the app from Chinese state influence want is for young Americans to think that the lawmakers are taking away their favorite digital hobby in a fit of pique. Senators are already fielding unusual phone calls, from people who sound suspiciously like teenagers giggling with their friends, threatening violence.

Advertisement

Two of the strongest Senate advocates for the House bill are the top two senators on the Intelligence Committee, Democrat Mark Warner and Republican Marco Rubio. They had put together the Wednesday briefing on the topic, with Warner noting that the relevant House committee passed its TikTok legislation unanimously after a similar briefing.

“This legislation is not about banning TikTok,” Warner told reporters, very early in his remarks, following the briefing. “It’s making a transition from the current control by the Communist Party of China to some other owner. And, frankly, there are a lot of American investors in TikTok/ByteDance, and they could roll into the new ownership structure.”

Advertisement

Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman, similarly, stressed that the bill would be about “divorcing” TikTok’s relationship with “the Chinese Communist government.”

Advertisement

“I could have banned TikTok in my own house; my children use it, and I didn’t do it,” he said. “So if I’m not going to ban it in my own home, I’m certainly not trying to—I’m not going to support banning it nationally.” While he “wished” that his children wouldn’t use the app, he said, what can you do?

Advertisement

“I remember Mötley Crüe was dangerous with my parents,” he said, “and they never took away my Mötley Crüe.”

Those who support the TikTok not-ban point to two concerns that make its Chinese ownership, in the words of Blumenthal, a “gun aimed at Americans’ heads”: The Chinese government having access to Americans’ personal data and Chinese manipulation of TikTok algorithms to push propaganda on American users.

Advertisement

“A hashtag about the Hong Kong protests trended 175 times more on Instagram than it did on TikTok. There is no benign explanation for that,” Texas Sen. Ted Cruz told reporters after the briefing. Cruz, as the ranking member of the Commerce Committee, will have a managerial role in this fight; he’s called for Commerce to take up the House bill and allow for a robust amendment process. When I asked whether he would need to see any changes to the House bill in order to support it, he said, “Possibly, but I haven’t resolved that question yet.”

Advertisement

Advertisement

It’s the Democratic Caucus, though, that seems most ambivalent on the subject. That might explain the relative lack of vigor with which the bill has been received in the chamber.

The concerns I heard Wednesday were all over the place.

Advertisement

Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden, who has a long history of leading data privacy debates in Congress, said he would “look at the TikTok issue” but was troubled by the proposition that Chinese control of the app could be replaced by that of another “overseer,” such as Saudi Arabia. (The “foreign adversaries” in the House’s Protecting Americans From Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, as it’s called, are Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran.)

Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey argued that congressional oversight of social media’s deleterious effect on young people should be broader, and that the focus on TikTok “is missing the forest for the trees.” He wouldn’t say whether he would vote for the bill.

Advertisement

Popular in News & Politics

  1. The Real Reason No One Is Giving Biden Credit for How Good the Economy Is Right Now
  2. The Fight Against Birth Control Is Already Here
  3. What to Really Take From Trump’s Latest Comments About Jews
  4. There’s a Hint of Bad News for Trump in the Ohio Primary Results

One senator whose opinion matters a great deal is Maria Cantwell, of Washington state, who chairs the Commerce Committee. Cantwell embodies the Senate spirit of patting the House’s head while pursuing its own legislation, at its own pace.

Advertisement

“It’s important to get it right,” Cantwell told reporters after the briefing. She’s cool to the House’s approach of tailoring this so specifically to TikTok. “There’s ways to talk about this in a broad public policy way without being specific to anybody, or even any company, really,” she said. She did suggest that, as a next step, there could be joint hearings between the Commerce and Intelligence committees.

The bill’s supporters, though, want to keep the issue hot while there’s momentum from the House, and to act on the bill before time, lobbying, and outside influence blend into inertia. For some, like Sen. Tom Cotton, that means directly prodding Schumer. After the briefing Wednesday, he showed reporters a tweet of Schumer’s from 2020 supporting a TikTok sale. He had to read it aloud, though, since no one could see the tweet through his phone’s privacy screen.

Advertisement

Related From Slate

David Zipper

A Decade Ago, I Saw “Uber’s Zombie Horde” Take on D.C. Now, TikTok Is Using the Same Tactic.

Read More

“I’m talking to the members of my caucus to decide the best path forward,” Schumer said at his Wednesday press conference.

Warner, the more eager of the two chairpersons of jurisdiction who described this as a “top priority,” said he would be open to another Senate hearing if that’s what it takes.

“I think anything we can do to make clear to the public, and particularly those 170 million users who like TikTok, that this is not about trying to get rid of the creativity—this is not about trying to eliminate your ability to make money if you’re a social influencer,” Warner said. “It’s about the ability to make sure that this creativity that happens on this platform can’t be manipulated by the Communist Party of China.

“And I’ve yet to hear,” he added, “the most fervent TikTok advocates say, ‘Oh, gosh, I’ve got to make sure the company stays controlled by China.’ ”

Tweet Share Share Comment

QOSHE - Look, Senators Insist, We’re Not “Banning” TikTok, OK? - Jim Newell
menu_open
Columnists Actual . Favourites . Archive
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close
Aa Aa Aa
- A +

Look, Senators Insist, We’re Not “Banning” TikTok, OK?

9 0
21.03.2024
Tweet Share Share Comment

The Senate supporters of House-passed legislation targeting TikTok have a message for anyone who would call it a “ban”: Get that filthy word out of your mouth.

“We are talking about a transition in ownership, not a ban, not elimination of TikTok—a transition of ownership that puts it in different hands but permits it to continue to exist,” Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal said Wednesday. “We’re not talking about messing with it; we’re not talking about screwing around with an asset; we’re not talking about disabling it. We’re talking about disarming it.”

Blumenthal was among the senators who attended a classified briefing Wednesday morning on national security threats posed by TikTok, the social video app that’s a subsidiary of China-based ByteDance. The House last week passed a bill that would give ByteDance 180 days to divest from TikTok or see the app, well, “prohibited” in the United States. The House vote was an overwhelming 352 to 65 in favor, a margin wide enough that supporters hoped that it would put pressure on the Senate to act.

But if the Senate is feeling pressured to act, it’s doing a good job hiding it. All Majority Leader Chuck Schumer would say after the House passed the bill was that “the Senate will review the legislation when it comes over from the House.” There’s no vote scheduled. There’s no timetable. There’s no certainty that the Senate will take up the House bill, produce a competing Senate alternative, or do anything on the subject in the near future.

Advertisement

There’s a whiff of intra-Congress rivalry in the way senators talk about the bill. Senators believe that they jam the House with legislation, not the other way around. Bills that arrive from the House, in their view, tend to be hotheaded and in need of deliberate adult revision, if they are lucky enough to be considered at all. Committees of jurisdiction will want their opportunity to shape any legislation, and individual members will want amendment votes, in order to leave their imprint on the final product. This exercise in ego management is the business of the Senate, and TikTok is relying on this cumbersome process to buy itself the time and space to execute a lobbying blitz.

Advertisement

Advertisement

........

© Slate


Get it on Google Play