Click:查微信注册手机号

California Democrats are clashing with members of their party over a package of antitrust bills targeting the top tech companies in the country.

Democratic lawmakers from California on the House Judiciary Committee, particularly those representing tech-heavy Bay Area districts, voted against the majority of their colleagues over the past two days on five antitrust bills that seek to rein in the market power of Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google.

The stiff opposition from the California delegation may cause further hurdles as the legislation heads to the House floor, with moderate and progressive Democrats, as well as prominent Republicans, voicing concern over the bills.

ADVERTISEMENT

Democratic Reps. Zoe LofgrenZoe Ellen LofgrenHillicon Valley: House advances six bills targeting Big Tech after overnight slugfest | Google to delay cookie phase out until 2023 | Appeals court rules against Baltimore Police Department aerial surveillance program California Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight House advances five bills targeting Big Tech after overnight slugfest MORE, Eric SwalwellEric Michael SwalwellHillicon Valley: House advances six bills targeting Big Tech after overnight slugfest | Google to delay cookie phase out until 2023 | Appeals court rules against Baltimore Police Department aerial surveillance program California Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight House advances five bills targeting Big Tech after overnight slugfest MORE and Lou CorreaJose (Lou) Luis CorreaHillicon Valley: House advances six bills targeting Big Tech after overnight slugfest | Google to delay cookie phase out until 2023 | Appeals court rules against Baltimore Police Department aerial surveillance program California Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight Lawmakers roll out legislation to defend pipelines against cyber threats MORE — all from California — voted against advancing nearly every bill the committee marked up Wednesday and Thursday.

After the marathon two-day markup, they issued a joint statement with California Republican Reps. Tom McClintockThomas (Tom) Milller McClintockHillicon Valley: House advances six bills targeting Big Tech after overnight slugfest | Google to delay cookie phase out until 2023 | Appeals court rules against Baltimore Police Department aerial surveillance program California Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight Tech antitrust bills create strange bedfellows in House markup MORE and Darrell IssaDarrell Edward IssaHillicon Valley: House advances six bills targeting Big Tech after overnight slugfest | Google to delay cookie phase out until 2023 | Appeals court rules against Baltimore Police Department aerial surveillance program California Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight Tech antitrust bills create strange bedfellows in House markup MORE criticizing the legislation that stemmed from a lengthy investigation by a House Judiciary subcommittee.

“The 16-month-long investigation conducted by the Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law Subcommittee rightfully scrutinized digital markets in an effort to remove barriers to competition. Unfortunately, the resulting legislative proposals – which the full Committee did not hold a hearing on or have reasonable time to fully consider – fell short of adequately addressing identified problems in an effective way that serves Americans’ interests,” the lawmakers said.

The only bill the three Democrats supported was legislation that would increase filing fees for mergers. A companion measure was recently included in the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act passed by the Senate earlier this month.

Issa and McClintock opposed the merger fee bill, as did most Republicans on the House committee.

Click Here: new zealand warriors shirt

Meanwhile, California Reps. Ted LieuTed W. LieuCalifornia Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight Tech antitrust bills create strange bedfellows in House markup Communion vote puts spotlight on Hispanic Catholics MORE and Karen BassKaren Ruth BassLawmakers come to bipartisan framework agreement on police reform California Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight Thousands sent to emergency rooms every year due to violent police encounters: investigation MORE, who have districts in less tech-dominant areas, voted with the majority of their Democratic colleagues on advancing the antitrust measures.

ADVERTISEMENT

For most of the bills, which were introduced on June 11, Lofgren, Swalwell and Correa were the main Democratic detractors, though they were joined by Rep. Greg StantonGregory (Greg) John StantonCalifornia Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight The Hill’s Morning Report – Biden: Back to the future on immigration, Afghanistan, Iran Ambitious House lawmakers look for promotions MORE (D-Ariz.) in opposing a bill that would prohibit dominant platforms from self-preferencing their own services, as well as one that could lead to the break up of tech companies, a measure Lofgren called an “extreme remedy.”

“I think this bill is overbroad and will have serious adverse consequences for Americans,” Lofgren said of the legislation introduced by Rep. Pramila JayapalPramila JayapalDemocrats seek to calm nervous left California Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight House advances five bills targeting Big Tech after overnight slugfest MORE (D-Wash.), whose district includes many Microsoft employees. 

The measure ultimately advanced on a 21-20 vote. Republican Reps. Ken BuckKenneth (Ken) Robert BuckCalifornia Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight Tech antitrust bills create strange bedfellows in House markup Tech industry pushes for delay in antitrust legislation MORE (Colo.), the ranking member of the antitrust subcommittee, and Matt GaetzMatthew (Matt) GaetzCalifornia Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight Britney Spears case casts harsh light on conservatorships House advances five bills targeting Big Tech after overnight slugfest MORE (Fla.) joined most Democrats in voting for the bill.

Even the least contentious bill — one that would ensure state attorneys general are able to remain in the court they select rather than having cases moved to venues preferred by defendants — drew opposition from some California lawmakers.

Of the seven “no” votes on the bill, five were California representatives: Lofgren, Swalwell, Correa, Issa and McClintock. They were joined by Republican Reps. Thomas MassieThomas Harold MassieCalifornia Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight Tech antitrust bills create strange bedfellows in House markup GOP increasingly balks at calling Jan. 6 an insurrection MORE (Ky.) and Michelle Fisbhack (Minn.).

Progressive Rep. Ro KhannaRohit (Ro) KhannaCalifornia Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight Tech antitrust bills create strange bedfellows in House markup Democrats fear they are running out of time on Biden agenda MORE (Calif.), whose district covers much of Silicon Valley, has also criticized the bills, saying the legislation needs to be written in a “much more thoughtful, accurate way.”

“I think some of the people who wrote it don’t understand all the details of how these platforms work. I say this as someone who wants stronger antitrust enforcement,” Khanna said during a Fox Business interview Wednesday.

Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiEquilibrium/Sustainability — Presented by NextEra Energy — Set millions of tires on fire, pay less than ,000 On The Money: Biden announces bipartisan deal on infrastructure, but Democratic leaders hold out for more Democrats seek to calm nervous left MORE (D-Calif.) broke from her Bay Area colleagues in voicing support for the antitrust legislation at a Thursday press conference.

“There has been concern on both sides of the aisle about the consolidation of power of the tech companies and this legislation is an attempt to address that in the interest of fairness, in the interest of competition, in the interest of meeting needs of people who are whose privacy whose data and all the rest is at the mercy of these tech companies,” Pelosi said.

She also dismissed concerns raised by the tech companies lobbying against the legislation. The New York Times reported earlier this week that Apple CEO Tim Cook called Pelosi and other members warning that the bills were being rushed and could end up hurting consumers. Pelosi said Thursday that she told Cook to put forth any “substantive concern” as Congress moves ahead with the proposals.

“They can put forth what they want to put forth, but we’re not going to ignore the consolidation that has happened and the concern that exists on both sides of the aisle,” Pelosi said.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle in support of the bills, including the unlikely allies of Jayapal, Gaetz and Antitrust Subcommittee Chairman David CicillineDavid CicillineCalifornia Democrats clash over tech antitrust fight House advances five bills targeting Big Tech after overnight slugfest Tech antitrust bills create strange bedfellows in House markup MORE (D-R.I.), have dismissed arguments that the legislation was rushed in any way, pointing to the 16-month bipartisan investigation into the market power of the four tech giants.

“I urge my colleagues to read the report,” Cicilline said.

He also called for members to read the “pleas from small businesses” that are “begging them to do something.”

It’s unclear when the bills will head to the House floor for a vote, but centrist Democrats are already putting pressure on Pelosi to pump the brakes and have the committee hold hearings before proceeding to a House vote. Opposition from moderate Democrats along with members of the California delegation could prove problematic and risk dividing the party publicly in a floor vote.

Jayapal, who leads the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said she’d like to see a vote as soon as possible, though she acknowledged it likely won’t happen until September.

Despite pushback from some members of her party, Jayapal said she thinks the bills can pass the House, especially if the subcommittee’s report is highlighted.

“I think we’re looking to make sure we can give people the information we need to show them the bipartisan way that we did this, to show them kind of the detailed testimony we got, and the effects on small businesses and why this is important,” she told The Hill.

“I think we can get there. This is a really important piece of the Democratic party’s agenda and I also think, as you see, that there’s a lot of bipartisan support.”

Click:china tours from china travel agent

North Korea said on Wednesday that it would not be engaging in talks with the United States that it believes would not make any progress.

“We are not considering even the possibility of any contact with the U.S., let alone having it, which would get us nowhere, only taking up precious time,” Foreign Minister Ri Son Gwon said, Reuters reported, citing state media.

North Korea and the U.S. have been at odds for years over the country’s nuclear missile program.

ADVERTISEMENT

The new U.S. envoy for North Korea said he was looking for a “positive response soon” from the country, with Ri’s comment seemingly making that unlikely, Reuters noted.

Kim Jong Yo, the sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong UnKim Jong Un North Korea says it won’t engage in talks with U.S. that would get nowhere Sister of North Korean leader dismisses prospects for talks with US Sullivan: Comments by North Korea’s Kim an ‘interesting signal’ MORE, said on Tuesday after the envoy’s comments that the U.S.’s thoughts of a meeting “would plunge them into a greater disappointment.”

The back-and-forth between the two countries began recently when Kim Jong Un “stressed the need to get prepared for both dialogue and confrontation, especially to get fully prepared for confrontation” at a meeting last week.

“We are awaiting a clear signal from Pyongyang as to whether they are prepared to sit down at the table to begin working in that direction,” national security adviser Jake SullivanJake Sullivan North Korea says it won’t engage in talks with U.S. that would get nowhere Iran claims U.S. to lift all oil sanctions but State Department says ‘nothing is agreed’ Iran says US has agreed to lift sanctions on oil, shipping MORE said in response. “His comments this week we regard as an interesting signal. And we will wait to see whether they are followed up with any kind of more direct communication to us about a potential path forward.” 

Click Here: cheap gold coast titans jerseys

Click:electronic spare parts

A top NATO official on Monday said the alliance will expand its defense clause to include attacks in space, ahead of a scheduled summit between member state leaders.

Click Here: Essendon Bombers guernsey

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, the coalition’s top civilian official, announced the group’s intention to expand Article 5, which says any attack on one of the alliance’s 30 allies will be considered an attack on them all.

“I think it is important [with] our Article 5, which states that an attack on one will be regarded as an attack on all, that we all will respond,” Stoltenberg said at a German Marshall Fund think tank event, according to The Associated Press.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We will make it clear at this summit that, of course, any attack on space capabilities like satellites and so on or attacks from space will or could trigger Article 5,” he added.

The U.S. Space Force was officially created in December 2019, after then-President TrumpDonald TrumpBiden prepares to confront Putin Biden aims to bolster troubled Turkey ties in first Erdoğan meeting Senate investigation of insurrection falls short MORE signed the annual defense policy bill that established the force as the sixth branch of the U.S. military.

That same month, NATO leaders proclaimed space to be the coalition’s “fifth domain” of operations, following land, sea, air and cyberspace, according to the AP.

The wire service noted that of the around 2,000 satellites orbiting earth, more than half are operated by NATO countries.

Biden is scheduled to participate in a NATO Summit on Monday in Brussels.

Click:ecommerce web design

A House antitrust panel on Friday unveiled a bipartisan agenda made up of five bills that would give regulators greater authority to rein in the power of tech giants.

The bills put forward by leaders of the House Judiciary antitrust subcommittee follow a blockbuster report released by the Judiciary panel last year alleging ways that Alphabet, Amazon, Apple and Facebook abuse their market power. The report was approved on a party-line vote earlier this year. 

Each of the five bills unveiled on Friday includes a Republican co-sponsor.

ADVERTISEMENT

A bill sponsored by subcommittee Chairman David CicillineDavid CicillineHillicon Valley: House targets tech giants with antitrust bills | Oversight chair presses JBS over payment to hackers | Trump spokesman to join tech company | YouTube suspends GOP senator House unveils antitrust package to rein in tech giants On the Money: Tech giants face rising pressure from shareholder activists | House Democrats urge IRS to reverse Trump-era rule reducing donor disclosure | Sen. Warren, Jamie Dimon spar over overdraft fees at Senate hearing MORE (D-R.I.) and co-sponsored by Rep. Lance GoodenLance GoodenHillicon Valley: House targets tech giants with antitrust bills | Oversight chair presses JBS over payment to hackers | Trump spokesman to join tech company | YouTube suspends GOP senator House unveils antitrust package to rein in tech giants Roy introduces bill blocking Chinese Communist Party members from buying US land MORE (R-Texas) would prohibit tech giants from self-preferencing their own products on their platforms, targeting alleged anti-competitive behavior from Apple in its App Store and Amazon on its digital marketplace. 

Another bill, sponsored by Reps. Pramila JayapalPramila JayapalHillicon Valley: House targets tech giants with antitrust bills | Oversight chair presses JBS over payment to hackers | Trump spokesman to join tech company | YouTube suspends GOP senator Simmering Democratic tensions show signs of boiling over Pelosi signals no further action against Omar MORE (D-Wash.) and Gooden, would eliminate the ability of dominant platforms to use their control over multiple businesses to self-preference or disadvantage competitors in ways that undermine free and fair competition. 

Rep. Hakeem JeffriesHakeem Sekou JeffriesPelosi signals no further action against Omar House unveils antitrust package to rein in tech giants Wray grilled on FBI’s handling of Jan. 6 MORE (D-N.Y.) and ranking member Ken BuckKenneth (Ken) Robert BuckHouse unveils antitrust package to rein in tech giants Roy introduces bill blocking Chinese Communist Party members from buying US land Conservative group pressuring lawmakers with financial ties to tech giants MORE (R-Colo.) are sponsoring a bill that would prohibit platforms from acquiring competitive threats by dominant platforms.

This bill comes as Facebook is facing a lawsuit from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and state attorneys general that targets its acquisition of WhatsApp and Instagram, and similar criticism has been raised over Google’s deal to buy fitness tracking company Fitbit.

Another bill sponsored by Reps. Mary Gay ScanlonMary Gay ScanlonHouse unveils antitrust package to rein in tech giants House Democrats to Schumer: Vote again on Jan. 6 probe Democrats introduce bill seeking to protect voting rights of people in subsidized housing MORE (D-Pa.) and Burgess Owens (R-Utah) would require online platforms to lower barriers for users and businesses to switch data to other services. 

The final bill introduced Friday by Reps. Joe NeguseJoseph (Joe) NeguseHouse unveils antitrust package to rein in tech giants Overnight Health Care: House Democrats pressure Biden to expand Medicare | Intel community: Competing COVID-19 origin theories not ‘more likely than the other’ | WHO: Africa in ‘urgent need’ of 20 million second vaccine doses 70 percent of House Democrats pressure Biden to expand Medicare in American Families Plan MORE (D-Colo.) and Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.) would increase the filing fees paid to antitrust agencies for merger reviews. It’s a companion bill to one introduced by Sens. Amy KlobucharAmy KlobucharHouse unveils antitrust package to rein in tech giants Democrats reintroduce bill to create ‘millionaires surtax’ Senate Democrats befuddled by Joe Manchin MORE (D-Minn.) and Chuck GrassleyChuck GrassleyHouse unveils antitrust package to rein in tech giants Iowa governor questions lack of notice on migrant children flights to Des Moines Senate crafts Pelosi alternative on drug prices MORE (R-Iowa) that was added to the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act that the upper chamber passed Tuesday. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have been critical of the market power of tech giants, but House Republicans had been hesitant to back some of the recommendations outlined by Democrats in last year’s report. 

Although the report did not receive GOP support, Buck at the time released a separate GOP-backed report that agreed with the majority’s staff views of the effects of big tech’s market dominance but opposed some of the recommendations. 

In a statement announcing the legislation Friday, Buck underscored the need for immediacy on the issue. 

“These companies have maintained monopoly power in the online marketplace by using a variety of anticompetitive behaviors to stifle competition. This legislation breaks up Big Tech’s monopoly power to control what Americans see and say online, and fosters an online market that encourages innovation and provides American small businesses with a fair playing field. Doing nothing is not an option, we must act now,” Buck said. 

Cicilline touted the bills as a way to “level the playing field.” 

“Right now, unregulated tech monopolies have too much power over our economy. They are in a unique position to pick winners and losers, destroy small businesses, raise prices on consumers, and put folks out of work. Our agenda will level the playing field and ensure the wealthiest, most powerful tech monopolies play by the same rules as the rest of us,” he said in a statement. 

The bipartisan bills are already facing pushback from the tech industry. 

Adam Kovacevich, CEO of Chamber of Progress, a self-described “center left” tech industry coalition, argued the legislation could lead to banning conveniences for consumers from Amazon, Apple and Google. 

“Instead of focusing on helping families, these proposals inexplicably target a bunch of technological conveniences that most people really like,” Kovacevich said in a statement. 

But other companies that have been critical of the leading tech giants, such as Spotify and Roku, cheered the proposed legislation. 

The agenda comes as the biggest tech firms are also facing increased legal challenges over allegations of anti-competitive behavior. 

In addition to the case the FTC and many states are beginning against Facebook, Google is facing a series of antitrust lawsuits from states and the DOJ. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Last month, Washington, D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine (D) filed an antitrust lawsuit against Amazon, alleging the e-commerce behemoth has engaged in anti-competitive business practices. 

The companies have all defended themselves against the allegations of anticompetitive behavior. 

Apple is also facing antitrust allegations, but from the developer behind the popular Fortnite game, Epic Games. 

The lawsuit in California federal court wrapped up last month and a decision is expected from the judge next month. The case revolves around Apple’s 30 percent commission fees for apps, and its requirement for developers to use the Apple in-app payment system. 

Apple has defended its policies, arguing that it helps maintain privacy and security for users.

—Updated at 3:27 p.m.

Click Here: cardiff blues rugby jersey

Click:geomembrana hdpe 2mm

Former President TrumpDonald TrumpJack Ciattarelli wins GOP primary in New Jersey governor’s race House Judiciary Democrats call on DOJ to reverse decision on Trump defense Democratic super PAC targets Youngkin over voting rights MORE on Tuesday applauded Nigeria’s Twitter ban and called on other countries to follow suit.

Trump praised the West African country for banning use of the social media platform after the Twitter suspended the account of Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari for comparing gunmen attacking national electoral commission offices to the Nigeria Civil War. The company deleted the tweet, saying it violated their abusive behavior policy.

“Congratulations to the country of Nigeria, who just banned Twitter because they banned their President. More COUNTRIES should ban Twitter and Facebook for not allowing free and open speech—all voices should be heard,” Trump said in a statement Tuesday.

ADVERTISEMENT

Nigeria indefinitely suspended Twitter’s operations in the country late last week.

Trump, an avid social media user during his 2016 presidential campaign and while in office, was permanently banned by Twitter for his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Facebook also kicked him off its platform, recently extended his suspension until 2023.

Click Here: gold coast titans rugby store

Click:wps官网下载

The World Health Organization (WHO) on Thursday warned of a continentwide third wave of coronavirus cases in Africa as the continent’s countries see major spikes in COVID-19 infections. 

“In the last two weeks, Africa recorded a 20% increase in cases compared with the previous fortnight. The pandemic is trending upwards in 14 countries and in the past week alone, eight countries witnessed an abrupt rise of over 30% in cases,” the world health body said in a statement.

The WHO believes the spike in cases on the continent is due to the African winter approaching, an increase in travel and a premature relaxing of coronavirus restrictions. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Africa has had 3.7 percent of the world’s coronavirus deaths but only 2.9 percent of the globe’s reported cases. 

“The threat of a third wave in Africa is real and rising. Our priority is clear – it’s crucial that we swiftly get vaccines into the arms of Africans at high risk of falling seriously ill and dying of COVID-19,” Matshidiso Moeti, the WHO’s regional director for Africa, said in the body’s statement. 

The WHO said that vaccine distribution has also lagged in African countries — 31.4 million doses have been administered in 50 countries in Africa, where around 2 percent of the population has received at least one dose of the vaccine. By comparison, 24 percent have been vaccinated globally.

In addition, almost 20 countries in Africa have already gone through 66 percent of their vaccine doses.

“While many countries outside Africa have now vaccinated their high-priority groups and are able to even consider vaccinating their children, African countries are unable to even follow up with second doses for high-risk groups. I’m urging countries that have reached a significant vaccination coverage to release doses and keep the most vulnerable Africans out of critical care,” Moeti said.

President BidenJoe BidenWHO warns of continent-wide third wave of coronavirus infections in Africa 30 House Democrats urge Biden to do more for global vaccine distribution Manchin isn’t ready to support Democrats passing infrastructure on their own MORE announced Thursday that he would be sending 25 million vaccine doses abroad, 5 million of which are going to Africa.

Click Here: Gremio soccer tracksuit

Click:filling point lighter

Department of Justice lawyers asked a federal judge to dismiss lawsuits against former President TrumpDonald TrumpNY, NJ rail project gets key federal approval Senate meltdown reveals deepening partisan divide DHS formally bans family separations for illicit border crossings MORE, former attorney general William BarrBill BarrWatchdog pushes back on DOJ effort to block release of Trump obstruction memo How long will Trump remain immune? Federal appeals court tosses out challenge to bump stock ban MORE and other administration officials for the forced clearing of racial justice protesters at Lafayette Square last June. 

The Washington, D.C., chapters of the ACLU, Black Lives Matter and other civil rights organizations sued the Trump administration and law enforcement officials for the use of chemical agents, rubber bullets and other violent action to disperse protesters before Trump walked across the square to pose for photographs with a Bible outside of St. John’s Episcopal Church. 

The legal action also targeted the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department and several specific officers in the actions used against protesters, who had gathered in the days following the police killing of George Floyd in May, 2020. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The incident resulted in four overlapping lawsuits against the Trump administration and law enforcement agencies filed on behalf of more than 100 U.S., D.C. and Arlington County defendants. 

Lawyers for the plaintiffs and the Justice Department presented oral arguments before a federal judge on Friday, with government lawyers arguing that Trump and other U.S. officials could not be included in civil lawsuits against police over actions taken to protect a president, The Washington Post reported. 

Trump’s photo-op outside the church following the forced removal of more than 1,000 largely peaceful protesters has been viewed by critics as a political stunt. 

According to the Post, Justice Department lawyers also argued Friday that because of Trump’s 2020 election loss, future violations are unlikely, adding that President BidenJoe BidenPutin backs up Belarus’s Lukashenko amid international pressure Biden administration to reimpose sanctions on Belarus over diverted flight Senate passes resolution urging probe into COVID-19 origins MORE’s administration does not share the same hostility Trump presented toward the wave of civil unrest and demonstrations that erupted in the months following Floyd’s death. 

Meanwhile, ACLU attorneys argued that by dismissing the lawsuits, the court would “authorize brutality with impunity” near the White House. Washington’s ACLU legal director Scott Michelman said that U.S. authorities “could have used live ammunition to clear the park, and nobody would have a claim against that as an assault on their constitutional rights.” 

ADVERTISEMENT

The Justice Department then responded by calling presidential security a “paramount” government interest, according to the Post. 

After nearly three hours of oral arguments, U.S. District Judge Dabney L. Friedrich of Washington said that she would deliver rulings on motions to dismiss the lawsuits “in the near future.”

The Hill has reached out to the Justice Department for comment. 

Lafayette Square reopened earlier this month for the first time since it was shuttered following police’s removal of the protesters.

Click Here: gold coast titans team jersey

Click:algaecide Factory

Will Clarke tackles his first race in the Middle East tomorrow confident that under new coach Mark Pearce he’s in his best shape for years.

Advertisement