Senate Republicans Pressure FTC on Transparency
FTC Chair Lina Khan’s open meeting approach is drawing the ire of some Senate Republicans. Judiciary Committee ranking member Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, told us he stands by his vote for Khan’s confirmation. Last week, Sens. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.; John Cornyn, R-Texas; Thom Tillis, R-N.C.; Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo.; and Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn., wrote Khan expressing concerns about the “FTC’s level of transparency.” They drew attention to the lack of opportunity for public comment leading to recent party-line votes (see 2107210061 and 2107010081).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
If legislators are “finding fault with her being aggressive, making sure the free market works and that there’s competition, I’m going to reserve judgment on that, but I think we need a strong person in that position, and I think she’s strong,” Grassley said now. “On the issues of transparency, I’m pretty much a purist. Anything that’s public business ought to be public.”
Asked how he feels about his vote confirming Khan, Senate Commerce Committee ranking member Roger Wicker, R-Miss., said, “I’m not sure.” Earlier in the conversation, he said, “Transparency is essential, and I hope we can get something worked out.”
“The main thing we can do now is just through oversight and pressure, but I am concerned,” Tillis told us. “And I don’t think it’s going to abate.” The commission didn’t comment Wednesday.
House Republicans, meanwhile, are turning attention to Communications Decency Act Section 230 (see 2107280069). Fred Upton, Mich., included a legislative discussion draft in a package of Republican proposals that would amend 230 to remove liability protections for “actions brought against a company” by the FTC.
Antitrust Subcommittee ranking member Ken Buck, Colo., told us he’s “open to limiting immunity in certain circumstances.” Buck showed support for one proposal in particular: a “terrorism carve-out” from Alabama's Gary Palmer. The proposal would amend 230 to remove liability protections for claims based on foreign terrorism content. “I think that’s absolutely appropriate,” said Buck.
Republicans want to bring some balance to digital accountability, said Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif. If companies are going to intervene “on a partisan basis, they have to be held accountable,” said Issa. “Their immunity is based on their not intervening in any way, shape or form.”
House Democrats are hoping the Senate will move legislation to bolster the agency’s authority to seek equitable monetary relief like restitution or disgorgement (see 2106210054). The House recently passed the Consumer Protection and Recovery Act (HR-2668). Lead sponsor Tony Cardenas, D-Calif., said Democrats are hoping they’re “days away” from confirming a Democratic senator co-sponsor. Wicker told us the legislation isn’t “in the center of the radar screen at the moment,” citing budget proceedings.
“We’re hopefully going to get a few Republican senators to start realizing that we all need to reenact this,” said Cardenas. The Supreme Court got it wrong, and now it’s Congress’ job to right that wrong, he said.
Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., told us they are working toward reintroduction of the Earn It Act and advancing it through the Senate Judiciary Committee (see 2105180041). “I’m trying to get” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., “to bring it up,” said Graham. “We got a unanimous vote [last session]. I wish he would.” Blumenthal said he’s talking generally with Durbin about Section 230 and the Earn It Act.