<mediadc-video-embed data-state="{"cms.site.owner":{"_ref":"00000161-3486-d333-a9e9-76c6fbf30000","_type":"00000161-3461-dd66-ab67-fd6b93390000"},"cms.content.publishDate":1664479890059,"cms.content.publishUser":{"_ref":"0000016c-7763-d473-a96f-77eb53420000","_type":"00000161-3461-dd66-ab67-fd6b933a0007"},"cms.content.updateDate":1664479890059,"cms.content.updateUser":{"_ref":"0000016c-7763-d473-a96f-77eb53420000","_type":"00000161-3461-dd66-ab67-fd6b933a0007"},"rawHtml":"
var _bp = _bp||[]; _bp.push({ "div": "Brid_64398307", "obj": {"id":"27789","width":"16","height":"9","video":"1107526"} }); rn","_id":"00000183-8a2e-de4a-a5b3-ea3fd76d0000","_type":"2f5a8339-a89a-3738-9cd2-3ddf0c8da574"}”>Video EmbedThe House passed a package of antitrust legislation that would provide regulators with more power to rein in tech giants by increasing merger fees in a 242-184 vote on Thursday after conservatives openly sparred over its provisions.
The measure combines three bills — the State Antitrust Enforcement Venue Act, the Merger Filing Fee Modernization Act, and the Foreign Merger Subsidy Disclosure Act, which were spearheaded by Reps. Ken Buck (R-CO) and Joe Neguse (D-CO) — that would allow state attorneys general to select which courts they want to hear antitrust cases while preventing defendants from requesting a change of venue; increase fees for larger, more complex mergers while lowering them for smaller deals, with a review process conducted by the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division; and require merging companies to disclose any funding or subsidies received from foreign governments.
MIDTERM MEMO: THE DEBATE OVER WHICH PARTY HAS THE MIDTERM UPPER HAND
In the days leading up to the vote, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, took to Twitter to slam the bill for providing funding to the DOJ and FTC. Buck, a fellow member of the House Freedom Caucus, clapped back, noting that the measure is backed by such conservatives as Sens. Tom Cotton (AR), Chuck Grassley (IA), and Mike Lee (UT), as well as outside groups such as the Heritage Foundation.
“We’ve got to rein in Big Tech, and the only way to do it is with competition. We’re not going to do it with 230 alone; we’re not going to do it with privacy alone,” Buck told the Washington Examiner.
“We’re going to do it with making sure that Google has competitors in the marketplace, and just as we do with newspapers, just like we do with cable news, we’ve got to have a competition to give people a choice,” he added.
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) also lobbied his colleagues to support the measure during a closed-door GOP conference meeting on Thursday morning, telling lawmakers, “I bet the last thing you thought you’d see when you came in conferences is me advocating for more money to DOJ,” according to one source in the room.
Jordan argued ahead of the vote that despite some of his conservative colleagues’ calls, he is not confident the money allocated to the agencies would be used for the intended purposes.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“I strongly urge my colleagues to vote no. While parts of this bill have some support, the package before us today does nothing but empower the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission. Why would we support more funding for unaccountable officials in the Biden administration, particularly these two agencies?” he said on the floor. “Now, some are asserting that, ‘Oh, no, this wouldn’t give more money to the bureaucracy,’ but this is the kind of Washington budget gimmick that the swamp uses to grow government all the time.”
A number of California-based Democrats also pushed back against the bill over the language on attorneys general being able to select the venue for cases to be taken up.
“This has been advanced as if it’s noncontroversial — that is not the case; it’s complicated. Let me try and be very simple. In 1968, Congress enacted a provision where if there was a multiplicity of antitrust lawsuits filed by state AGs who have concurrent jurisdiction, a senior panel could consolidate the cases so you wouldn’t have inconsistent discovery, inconsistent decisions outside of the various regions,” Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) said during debate.
“Now, you don’t need that with the Department of Justice because they do the consolidation when they bring the case, but that’s why it worked for the AGs, and it’s worked very well for a long time,” she added.
The upper chamber previously passed a bill to allow state attorneys general to pick the venue in which cases are heard. It is unclear whether the Senate will take up the House-passed legislation.
