TechBytes

A variety of legislative proposals across the country attempt to limit “children’s” or minors’ ability to be online, but the implications reach right to our basic liberties.

Critics of Big Tech are misrepresenting Section 230 and purposely convoluting its meaning. It’s really not all that complicated.

While Congressman Ken Buck (R-CO) says “Big Tech” is “crushing” free speech, we are crushed to see Rep. Buck and fawning organizations abandoning their free market, limited government principles.

Broadband access enables access to information, education, healthcare and community, but many American households simply do not take advantage of access to broadband. Efforts to increase broadband adoption through digital literacy education are an investment that can pay off in economic growth for local communities.

Government regulators prize protecting their political constituencies above realizing all the benefits and gains to consumers that result from encouraging and implementing technology and innovation. 

Like the Texians before them, today’s Texans overwhelmingly believe in free markets, private property, individual liberty and lesser government. HB 20 violates not only these principles but also the free speech protections of both the U.S. and Texas Constitutions.

For the sake of our economy, for the promise of a better quality of life, and greater discovery, we should allow permissionless innovation unless harm can be demonstrated. And even then, such regulation should be minimal and flexible. 

The United States has figured out the innovation equation, while the rest of the world has not: The heavy hand of government does not lead to greater innovation. That’s why tech populism, calling for more aggressive regulation and antitrust activism, is very troubling.

Seeing the Heritage Foundation institutionalize grievance politics and populist anger and demonize an entire industry is a mistake with potentially enormous consequences.

In an attempt to settle political scores with “Big Tech,” some conservatives are suggesting policy changes that would be an unwise tradeoff of past successful conservative policy victories.