the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is r in support of h.r. 7521, the protecting americans from foreigd applications act.

foreign adversaries pose the greatest national threat of our time. american users makes it a valuable propaganda tool for the c.c.p. to exploit. over the past week, we sn real-time how the c.c.p. controlled tiktok, used its influence and power to force users to contact their representatives if they even wanted to continue using the app. and this is just a small taste of how the c.c.p. weaponizes applications i cols to manipulate tens of millions of people to further its agenda. today's legislation will end this abuse by preventinlled by n adversaries from targeting, surveilling and manipulating the american people. we have given tiktok a clear choice. separate from your parent company, which is beholden to the c.c.p., and remain operational in the united states, or side with the c.c.p.

and face the consequences. the choice is tiktok agencies. companies control conscious tiktok's -- is tiktok's. companies controlled by a foreign adversary like the c.c.p. will never embrace american also have like freedom of speech, human right, the rule of lawnd a free press. if give the choice, they will always choose the path for more control, more surveillance and more manipulation. and in the case of tiktok, we wouldn't even know it. today we send a clear message that we will not tolerate our adversaries weaponizing our freedoms against us. i encourage my colleagues to support this bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from washington reserves. the gentleman from ktus recognized. >> mr. speaker, i know the sponsors of this bill are sincere in their concerns and in their effort to protect americanve described the tiktok application as a

trojan horse, but there's some of us who feel that either intentionally or unintentionally this legislation to ban tiktok is actually a trojan horse. some of us are conceed thatst at implications here. americans have the right to view information. we don't need to be protected by the government from information. some of us just don't want the president picking which apps we can put on our phones or which websites we can visit. we don't think that's appropriate. we also think it's dangerous to give the president that kind of power, to give him the power to decide what americans can see on their phones and their computers, to give him that sort of discretion we also think is days roing. now, people say that -- dangerous. now, people say that this tiktok bapply to tiktok or maybe another company that pops up you just like -- up just like tiktok but the bill is written so broadly that the president could abuse that discretion and include other companies that

aren't just social media companies. and that aren't, you know, as some people would believe, controlled by foreign adversaries. again, we're giving the president that discretion to decide whether it is controlled by a foreign adversary. there were some people who were legitimately concerned that this was an overly broad bill and they got an exclusio read. it says, the term covered company does not include an entity that operates a website pplication, whose primary purpose is to allow users to post product reviews, business reviews or travel information and reviews. bill?s this exception in the why did somebody feel like they needed this exception if the bill itself only covers social media applications that foreign adversaries are running? these and other questions we hope to answer in the course of this debate and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman fro kentucky reserves. the gentlewoman from washington is recognized. mrs. rodgers: mr. speaker, i

yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. ploan, and ask unanimous -- mr. pallone, and ask unanimous consent that he be permitted to control that time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pallone: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: mr. speaker, i yielee minutes. mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 7521, the protecting americans from foreign adversary controlled applications act. big tech has transformed social media platforms into modern day media companies and unfortunately these netrkuqge ie practices by collecting americans' most sensitive personal data. foreign adversaries also see access to americans' data, communication networks, devices and applications as the entry points to disrupt our daily lives and conduct espionahis enr national security interests. we have a long history of restricting our tv and radio airwaves fro83m ownership by foreign governments and individuals due to the national security concerns that these

arrangements pose. social media companies should also face similar scrutiny. after all, while technology has evolved, the threats are very much the same. and i also take the concerns raised by the intelligence community verered congress to ge them more authority to act and narrowly -- in narrowly defined situations. i believe this bill will do just that by addressing the national security risks posed by applications operated by companies controlled by foreign adversaries. while this bill establishes a national security framework that uld apply to other applications, much of the public attention is focused on tiktok. the combination of tiktok's beijing communist-based ownership and the fact that more thns use it exacerbates its dangerous -- its dangers to our country and our privacy. laws in china allow the chinese communist party like tiktok to share data with them, whether the companies want to or not. this means that the c.c.p. has the ability with tiktok to compromise device security, maliciously access americans'

data, promote pro-communist propaganda and undermine our nation's interests. this is extremely troubling. beijing, china, should not have the control over americans that tiktok gives them. it is my hope that if enacted, this legislation will force divestment of tiktok so that americans will be able to continue using this platform without the risk that it's being opna. however, even if tiktok is divested, china and other foreign adversaries will still be able to acquire vast amounts because we place no restrictions on data brokers who sell data to them and that must stop as well. i look forward to the house considering next week legislation that i introduced with chair rogers that would -- chair rodgers that would stop this from happening. we need to hold big tech accountable for transforming the information superhighway into a superspreader of har harmful content, invasive surveillance practices and addictive andn fel with the goal of collecting more data. we must enact a comprehensive

data privacy bill so that we finally give americans control over how their data is■$ used ad collected. so i want to thank representative krishnamoorthi. and i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 7521 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: th reserves. the gentlewoman from washington is recognized. mrs. rodgers: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield a minute and a half to thgentleman from wisconsin, mr. gallagher. mr. gallagher: thank you. tiktok is a threat to our national security because it is owned by a company which does the bidding of thenp chinese communityist party. we know this because their leadership says so and because chinese law requires it. this bill therefore forces tiktok to break up with the chinese communist party. it does not apply to american companies. it only applies to companies foreign adversaries defined by congress.

it says nothing about election interference and cannot be turned again■ñst any american social media platform. it does not impact websites in general. the only impacted sites are those associated with foreign adversary apps such as tiktok.com. it can never be used to penalize individuals. the text explicitly prohibits that. and it cannot, cannot be used to sensor speech, it takes no position at all on the content of speech, onlygn adversary control. foreign adversary control of what is becoming the dominant news platform for americans under 30. this is a commonsense measure to protect our national security. i urge my colleagues to support this critical bipartisan legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. from washington. i'll you know recognize -- i'll now recognize the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield three minutes now to the

gentleman from illinois, the democratic sponsor of the bill. mr. krishnamoorthi: thank you, chair pallone. thank you to cathy mcmorrismy rodgers. thank you to all the members of the select committee. first, this bill is not a ban and it's not about tiktok. it's about bite dance. bite dance is a 100% owner of tiktok. they are controlled by the chinese communist party. er he has been charged with making -- he has been chaed with making sure that tiktok and all products of bytedance have political direction. this ensures that bytedance divest itself of the vast

majority of ownership of tiktok. our index is for tiktok -- our intention is foriktok to continue to operate, but not underhe control of the chinese communist party. this isn't without precedent. when the app, grindr, was acquired by a chinese company and the unid states gover sensia of lgbtq members of the military and u.s. government officials got into the hands of the chinese communist party, they required dwieftment -- divestment. this happened quickly. why? because it was a veryal same iso tiktok and there will be no disruption to users, just as there was with grindr. third point. unfortunately when tiktok has appeared before congress, whether it's bmp the -- before the house energy and commerce committee or otherwise, it has no bnandid, my friends. it has not been candid. first, tiktok said its data is not accessible to china-based

bytedance employees.■7 ls china-based employees routinely access this data, even unbeknownst to employees of tiktok tiktok said its data will not be weaponized and has not been weaponized against american citizens. again, false. have shown that tiktok data, geolocation data has been used to surveil american journalists who reported on problems with chinese-based employees having access to american user data. finally, last week under the leadership of the chairman, chairwoman and the ranking member, they brought up for consideration our bill before the house energy and commerce committee. on the morning of that vote, tiktok delivered a push notification and a pop-up to

thousands of users across the ua targeting minor children to then force them to call congressional offices in ordero continue using the app. and in doing so, these children called and they asked the quesongress and what is a congressman? this influence campaign illustrates the need for this bill. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman the gentleman from new jersey reserves. now i'll recognize the gentleman from kentucky. mr. massie: i recognize data privacy champion, mr. warren davidson from ohio, for three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized. ms. davids: i thank -- mr.avidson: i thank the gentleman for yielding time. the gentleman from new jersey who isn't actually opposed to the bill seems to have identified the real issue which is data privacy. i think it's important that we solve the correct problem. our problem is all these

companies, social mediaings, otherwise -- media, otherwise, your car, your phone, you name it, it's surveillance. the spying that goes on with american citizens does need to be addressed and it should be addressed by the energy and commerce committee. i've long pleaded with members of both sides of the aisle to pass h.r. 4, to reclaim the privacy rights that are so deeply infringed in our country. and by avoiding that problem, we take away the energy and momentum to address the root issue. frankly, the people sponsoring this bill today claim that the real issue is ownership. but who owns this company? it's not 100% owned by bytedance. 60% of it is owned by investors, including american investors. 20% are owned by the founders and 20% are owned by employees, over 7,000 employees. the company's headquarters is not in china, it's in singapore, and the american user data isn't

housed in china, it's housed in texas. controlled by a database owned by oracle. the administration seems to believe they can ban the export of americans' sensitive data, not just on tiktok, but on all platforms, because they just issued an executive order banning the export. now, i wish this was the bill that ms. jayapal and i have sponsored that we were moving, the fourth amendment's not for sale, past judiciary, but stopping foreigners from buying it would also address the privacy concerns. . if we think we can address the privacy concerns, what's left to address? content moderation. remember before elon musk bought the crime scene at twitter. it was a conspiracy theory. these algorithms were silencing and canceling people. you guys are crazy. when musk bought twitter, he kept it operating with fewer

employees, but we found a the employees were trying to shape content information. which algorithms were used how it promotes certain people and filters others. what you're saying here is if you're not fully engaged with america's three-leer agencies in content moderation we plan to tiktok you. this bill isn't limited to tiktok. it's a coercive■5■" power that applied to others. like telegram, tour, things that provide privacy would be targeted by this bill. perhaps tether, one of the things they can't control as a monetary system. when you look at companies, if it enables one user to see content that isn't approved, it's subject it a $500 fine per user. $500 million. 30 seconds? this is meant to be able to take out anything, including

its one user see it is. it could target an infinite number of companies but not places. so for that i do applaud the work that was done to back off from the dystopian restrict act, but this is essentially a down payment on the restrict act.■h the restrict act, i encourage everyone to look it up. this is what the administration really wanted to do. what members of congress, both sides of the aisle, wante to do is to create a bigger surveillance state. that's what the intel committee wants to do. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. davidson: we have to shrink it and protect fourth amendment right to privacy. i yield. mr. massie: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky reserves. now recognizeó the gentlewoman from washington. mrs. rodgers: thank you, mr. speaker. it is not true that this is a down payment on a restrict a ret act. with that i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from ohio, mr. latta.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. latta: i thank the gentlewoman for yielding. the c.e.o. of tiktok appeared before the energy and commerce committee and admitted to me que dance has access to u.s. data. this should be an alarm to every tiktok user. no reason why the chinese communist party should be in control of an app that can access information on a user's phone. because companies are owned or linked to the chinese communist party are■7 forced to comply wih their laws beetdance and the employ -- bytedance are taking orders from the communist regime. if bytedance is the ownership of tiktok, tiktok will be available to its u.s. all my colleagues to support this legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. mrs. rodgers: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. i recognize the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: i yield two minutes to the speaker emeritus, ms. pelosi. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlewoman is recognized. ms. pelosi: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership on this very important issue. i thank the distinguished chairwoman of t■heis energy and commerce committee, associate myself with her remarks as well as with mr. pallone's. i thank mr. krishnamoorthi and mr. gallagher, chairman gallagher of the select committee on china for their great leadership. bringing this legislation forward to the committee of legislative jurisdiction. i have a few points to make. it's interesting to hearhi respectful debate. first of all, this is not a ban on tiktok. i'm a grandmother of teenagers, i understand the entertainment val you a, educational val a. communication value, the business value for some businesses. this is not an attempt to ban tiktok. to make tiktok better. tic-tac-toe, a winner.

the people of cna come forth. the tibetans have come forth and said on tiktok in china they are suppressed. they cannot put their messa out. that, the chinese government misrepresents the situation in tibet. in hong kong, let me tell you about hong kong. during the taiwan election, tiktok, tiktoked into taiwan that the uyghurs, on whom there is a genocide exercised by the chinese government, they have told the people in taiwan that the uyghurs like that genocide. they told them that the people of hong kong like the destruction of their democracy. they don't frame it that way, but that's and again, suppressing the communication from tibet. then just yesterday on the steps, we heard from the taiw he tibetans, we heard from the hong kong, and we heard from a woman whose husband was arrested because of his communication

with somebody with shared view. this is controlled by the chinese communist government. but forgetting that, if y i can't, think of this. the speaker pro tempore: the lady's time has expired. ms. pelosi: the chinese the a at-gore rhythm. a yes vote, thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. from kentucky. the gentleman mr. massie: i recognize my friend and fellow colleague on judiciary committee, mr. bishop from north carolina, for four minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for four minutes. mr. bishop: mr. speaker, this is not the first time that res restricting speech has been pursued in the interest of national security. in fact, in five day's time next monday i'll go to the supreme court for the first time i have attended case of murthy v. missouri. the case where agents from the white house and the departmen jl

agencies embedded themselves on american social media companies to manipulate what could appear on social media. express by the american people. described by the lower court as the most massive attack on free speech in u.s. history. and even as that pins for decision by the supreme court, congress would in this legislation would say, ineffect. i don't use tiktok. i think it's ill-advised to do so. members of this body are famous on tiktok. and i think that's unwise. but i respect the choices of 170 million users in the united states. the trump administration attempted to ban tiktok in 2020. and it was held that it couldn't do so in two court decisions because, under the international

emergency economic powers act are subject to the berman amendment. passed in 1988 by this body, to provide that in the interest of dealing with hostile foreign powers, the president can do all sorts of things with respect to commerce, but cannot ban the free flow of information across international boundaries. i heard that described as a gap in the law. but it's a feature, sir. it's not a bug. this change cannot be -- this legislation cannot be described as other than receiving from the berman amendment and that principle in american law. whichs the way, did not emerge from the brow of representative berman in 1988 but predicated on a much earlier principle of first amendment law established in 1965 by the united states supreme court. in the case postmaster -- lamont

vs. postmaster general. which said, the american people have a right of first amendment right of access to foreign propaganda. at first it may be remarkable or strike one it's odd to hear that, that's because the proper relationship between government and citizen in the united states is that the citizen decides what to be exposed to and what ideologies to embrace and consider. and is always free to engage in expression, including acrossin . that remains the prevailing constitutional law today. and it begs this question, how could it be that congress should be working hard to devise a means to circumvent that principle, that prevailing principle of the first amendment. against the use of a particular means of expression by

million americans. and isn't the technical advisors in the construct of this legislation to design it so it can get around legislation challenges, including isolating litigation challenges to 180 days, and only in the court of appeals of the district of columbia. those technical advisors are the same folks at the department of justice who devised that plan to embed agents of the department of justice and other federal agencies withia media platforms in the united states to restrict what americans could say online. mr. speaker, america confronts a grave challenge in china. and it will not prevail by becoming more like it. i tempore: the gentleman from kentucky reserves. i now recognize the gentlewoman from washingn.yield 30 seconds e

gentleman from kentucky, mr. guthrie. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. guthrie: i want to emphasize this bill does not ban tiktok. it simply would chinese communist party affiliated bytedance to sell tiktok and die vest their interest. i affect tiktok? no. it's any foreign adversary or app, owned, controlled, or unduly influenced by a foreign adversary. we must keep america's private data out of the hands of@ our foreigndvsari. i urge support, and yield back. mrs. rodgers: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. i recognize the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. spea i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from california, ms. eshoo, member of the committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. eshoo: i thank the ranking member of the energy and commerce committee. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of 7521, the

protecting americans from foreign adversary-controlled a.m. applications act. this bill will ensure the divestiture of tiktok from its people's republic of china controlled parent company, bytedance. why is it essential for congress to do this? because the p.r.c. controls bytedance, and this presents a serious national security threat to our country. tiktok has 170 million-plus u.s÷ users. and it collects tremendous amounts of sensitive data. they also collect substantial background data that may be proprietary, which may only be available to tiktok. the national security law of the p.r.c. requires chinese organizations to, quote, sup support, assets, assist, and cooperate with national intelligence efforts.

under this law bytedance could be compelled by the chinese government to provide data on every american tiktok user. they can weaponize this data to exploit and manipulate americans through surveillance and disinformation this legislation separates tiktok's data, algorithms, and source code from bytedance. importantly, this bill does not ban tiktok, something i do not support. i support divestiture because our first and most important responsibility as members of the congress is to defend our constitution and defend the united states of america. the bill would also give americans secure ownership of their data, including posts, photos, and videos, and give this administration and future administration's the authority to respond to future national

for all these reasons i urge all colleagues to vote for this legislation. name of our nationl security. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey's time has expired. i now recognize the gentleman fr mr. massie: i yield four minutes to my good friend from georgia, miss marjorie taylor greene. the speaker pro tempore: the representative is recognized for four minutes. ms. greene: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today as the only member of congress that has ever been banned by social media. on january 2 of 2022, twitter banned me. banned my personal account. on which i was campaigning for congress, raising money, and using my free speech to inform the voters in my can vote for me. this was not by a company owned by china, this was by american-owned twitter.

this came on the heels of our own united states government working with big tech and working with social media companies to censor and ban americans' free speech. . i believe this bill is opening pandora's box and i'm opposed to this bill. most americans don't trust the united states government it. never forget that the united states government also was the one that provided the russia hoax to americans. it also worked to ban americans' free speech. it also has worked in so many ways to illegally warrantlessly spy on americans through those if favor will vote ayes. if we wand tout stopping a foreign adversary, if we wanted to be serious about stopping china, we would stop china from buying our u.s. farmland. weould raise up our american

energy independence, we would also stop the green new deal and not rely on china who and operates 85% of the battery market worldwide. there are dangers that lie ahead in this. this is really about controlling americans' data. and if we cared about americans' data, then we sale of americans' data universally. not just with china. there's some further issues. this is a pandora's box. whereas to stop congress or the united states -- what's to stop congress or the united states government in the future for forcing the sale of another social media company, claiming that it's protecting americans' data from foreign adversaries? i think we can see in the future another russia, russia, russia and possibly force the sale of x as many members in this body claim that elon musk is altering

the algorithms of x. by the way, it was elon musk's purchase of x thattored my social media account on twitter and allowed me to have my free speech back onere's also members body, the democrats are claiming that election meddling can happen on social media. well, we can never"k forget mark zuckerberg and facebook, we can never forget the election meddling that happened there. by the way, american-owned facebook a instagram is where most of the garbage like the gender lies and the woke lies exist. manyme many teenagers believe awful things and they don't just see them on tiktok, they see them on facebook and instagram too. i don't think this will accomplish what the goal is to accomplish. so there's other concerns, i think, here. when the government moves into forcing the sale of tiktok, who

is going to buy it? that's the question that we who is going to buy it? who will be the next to control the data of over 170 million americans? are we going toz3 trust mark zuckerberg to control their data? i certainly don't. by the way, most of the time my posts on facebook are shadow banned. and i certainly don't have the reach on that social media account. i think that there's many other ways to protect data and i thi this body is capable of it, if we choose to be. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. . thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky reserves. i recognize the gentleman from washington. mrs. rodgers: i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from texas, gentleman from texas is recognized for a minute and a half. mr. roy: i thank the speaker. we are in a cold war with china. and some of my colleagues want to ignore this fact.

we have legislation before us that is 12 pages long. the bill is not a ban, it forceg chinese communists, to divest. the bill is not a bill of attainer, it's not violate the t amendment. it focuses on conduct, not content. it requires both being controlled by a foreign adversary and conduct that itself is espionage. if you just have one alone, it might be debatable, as the gentleman from north carolina or senator paul notes in that it might protect americans' rights to seek out and obtain foreign propaganda. but again, that is not because e as a trigger in this bill demonstrates national security conduct harm. to be clear, we've properly taken action at the device layer by banning huawei and z.x.e. spy gear. we've taken action at the carrier level, prohibiting china telecomfrom connecting to --

telecom from connecting to our networks. we now need to take action at an malign c.c.p. control has been demonstrated, lest we render we should ban china ownership of our farmland bute should fight them here and stop apologizing for the chinese communists. i yield back. mrs. rodgers: morse i res the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from washington reserves. and i'll recognize the gentleman from kentucky. mr. massie: i yield one minute to my friend on the other side of the aisle, mr. garcia from california. gentleman r pro tempore: the minute. mr. garcia: thank you, mr. speaker. i have enormous respect foresters of my colleagues to foe does -- respect for my colleagues. but i disagree with this approach and bill that could impact 170 million americans who use tiktok. 1/3 of all u.s. adults use the app and millions of

entrepreneurs and small business owners use the platform to support their family. yes, justr social media platform, there is misinformation and privacy concerns on tiktok and i share those. however, it's important that wey than other platforms. if we're going to address this issue, we've got to take the same approach to also mediaplate out one. i join many of my colleagues and the aclu in voicing concern over the freedom of expression. now, i'm a strong supporter o tn open marketplace and there's no guarantee in this bill that there won't be an interruption of service an end of this app. i don't think we fully appreciate the impact that is going to have and for that i'm a strong no. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky reserves. i rogentlewoman from washington. mrs. rodgers: i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from indiana,

mr. bucshon. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. bucshon: one of the most importanto protect the american people and safeguard our national security. after hearing from national security experts last week, it f media platforms controlled by the chinese communist party and other foreign adversaries poses a danger to our country. i am grateful to my bipartisan colleagues for moving this legislation, showing we will take action to protect the american people, their personal data and security from foreign interference and manipulation. we took an oath to do so. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. i now recognize the gentleman from kentucky. mr. massie: i now yield one minute to my friend on the other side of the aisle from california, ms. kamlager-dove. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. kamlager-dove: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to oppose h.r. 7521. banning tiktok is an insufficient bd- national secury concerns the app raises and

exposes. the bill seriously undermines civil liberties by essentially banning a platform that 150 million americans use to engage in free speech and expression. a statewide tiktok ban already been paused by a federal judge on first amendment grounds. even without tiktok, the p.r.c. couldti to conduct influence operations on other social media platforms and obtain sensitive u.s. user data through hacking or data brokers. finally, this bill would greatly expand the executive's authority to ban tech companies with zero i cannot sign a blank check to some future president who would easily endanger -- and dangerously weaponize this legislation to profit and silence -- in silence. creatives,creators and businessy district will get caught in the crossfire of this bill and deserve better than federal overreach as a substitute for a thoughtful solution to a

complicated national security challenge. thank you, i yield back. mr. massie: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman cky reserves. i recognize the gentlewoman from washington. mrs. rodgers: mr. speaker, i yield 40 seconds to the gentlewoman from mrs. hinson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for 40 seconds. mrs. hinson: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of this bill. the day after we introduced our bill, tiktok went into panic mode. they lied to their users, saying congress was going to ban tiktok, using young kids as political pawns. tiktok's gross stunt proved our point. what if on election day tiktok sent elections were canceled, we must act now. today we're sending a message to the c.c.p. that we are going to deflate the 140 million spy balloons that they have installed on american phones. we must act and pass this bill today. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. i now recognize the gentleman from kentucky. mr. massie: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from kentucky reserves. i■■e now recognize the gentlelay from washington. mrs. rodgers: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentlewoman from florida, mrs. cammack. the splelady from florida is recognized for one minute. mrs. cammack: thank you, mr. speaker. today we take a stand against the chinese communist party and their efforts to turncreators it soldiers for the c.c.p. you know, we aren't banning a company as the high paid bytedah is owned by china, would lead to you believe. we aren't infringing on constitutionally protected speech or growing the size of government. all we're saying is, break up with the chinese communist party. as a constitutional conservative, i don't want my gorn have unfettered access to my private data. so why in the hell would we want

and allow the chinese communist party to have access to our private data? the c.c.p. is an adversary of the united states and this legislation narrowly, thoughtfully and directly addresses the national security threat and protecting americans' data and by extension their first amendment rights because let us not pretend for one second that is not infringing on our first amendment rights. i would say that this bill, as represen■ntativeoy is about conduct, not content. conduct, not content. and there is no restriction mentioned onontent bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. mrs. cammack: but i will mention -- the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlelady from washington reserve? mrs. cammack: the espionage is not covered or protected as one of the -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is no longer recognized. the gentlewoman from washington, you have a minute and 3/4 time left. and i now recognize the

gentleman from kentucky. mr. massie: i'd like to now yield one minute to my good friend from arizona, in schweikert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. schweikert: thank you, mr. speaker pro temp -- mr. speaker pro tempore and to my friends, i am about to try to make■. e yay. i actually believe data is a private property right. it belongs to you as an american citizen. the problem with our design here, it's really well meaning. but it doesn't the structural problem. so you have an entity over here, they divest. what makes them not then take the data, sell it to a data broker, and it gets washed and ends up still in the bad actors' hands? you got to understand, there's even an article out this week of even our own three-letter

agencies buying their data now from data brokers instead of doing the tracking. we need to think dramatically more globally. is a private proy right. that will be the only way we end actors and sometimes even ourbad ownselves. with that, i yield back -- our owselves. with that, iie gentleman from kentucky has 3 1/2 minutes available. i'll recognize the gentloman from washington. mrs. rodgers: mr. speaker, i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from. walberg. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recogzed for 30 seconds. mr. walberg: mr. speaker, last march when i asked the -- about americ stored in excess by china, tiktok c.e.o. stated under oath that it was not accsible by the c. krmpt p. however, this statement -- c.c.p. however, this statement was a lie as their o internal recording sai everything is seen in china.

h.r. 7521 gives and similar acts six months to divest from their parent company, bytedance. it's their choice. tiktok needs to dece whether they value their users or their ties to the chinese communist party mor simple as that. vote for this bill. i yieldack. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields and the gentlelady from washington yields -- reserves. the gentleman from kentucky will be recognize. mr. massie: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky reserves. i'll recognize the gentlelady from washington. mrs. rodgers: i reserve.hington reserves. mr. massie: is the gentlelady prepared to close? mrs. rodgers: i'm prepared to close. mr. massie: you have no or speakers? mrs. rodgers: i have one other speaker. we'd like to close. so i'm going to reserve until you are ready to -- until your time is expired.

well, are you prepared to close? . close. mrs. rodgers: ok. mr. massie: if the gentleladies into further speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from washington has the right to close. mrs. rodgers: yes. i'd like to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. massie: thank you, mr. speaker. . i know the other side is■z i know the other side is sincere. i won't question their sincerity. i think they identified at least three problems we have in america. moral decay of our society. invasion of american's privacy. our competitiveness with china. in this case their cure is worse than the diseases. there are ways to get at these root problems. we just haven't taken it upon ourselves to address those root problems with actual legislative solutions. that have been put forth instane fourth amendment is not for sale act. we put a strong stake in the

ground to protect americans' privacy. whether it's from our own government or some foreign governments. that is the kind of thing we need. we need warrants in the fisa program. i government shouldn't be able to spy on americans without a warrant. yet they are. let's bring that to the floor and vote on it. these are the kind of cures we need. not the bill that's offered here today. the bill that's offered here today, even though i know it's offered genuinely, it could also be named, the facebook protection and enhancement act. because it's not the american people who are going to benefit most from this, it will be facebook. their stock is going to go up if this bill should pass the senate. what are some ways that we could improve this bill? it should at least have a sunset. that's the only reason we are able totb debate whether fisa should have warrants in it because it sunsets. what have we observed? fisa's been abused.

that's my person with this if it's just banning tiktok and bytedance and copies of that, why does it need to be 13 pages long? i know they say it doesn't ban it, it forces divestiture of the company t sounds like when american companies try told countries and a dictator says you can do business. you have to give me your company. and now you can continue to lety take over ford motor company for selling ford cars in their country. yet that's what we are wanting to do here. and again, this is a cure that is worse than the disease. who is going to be prosecuted by this bill? is it bytedance or tiktok? will they be taken to court? no. they are the target of this, how do you effect a ban on them? by prosecuting americans. the only way you can ban tiker m

being here is to say what this bill says. which is we will bring civil action, the government will bring a civilit against you in you -- if you so much as host them here. if you have an app store that allows them to be here. you are an american or americant company, you will be the target of this bill. those are the only people who can be pursued under this bill. tiktok, so they say. to go after i would just close by saying that we are sitting here with phones made in china. wearing suits made maid in ch china. we drove cars here with chips made in china. and there are foreign adversary, by golly we are going to do something about it. what are we going to do? we are going to tell americans they can't put a piece of software on their computer. they can't go to certain websites that the president designates. i urge my colleagues to oppose this well-intentioned bill

because it will have bad consequences. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. i'll recognize the gentlelady from washington. such time as remains to the gentleman from texas, mr. crenshaw. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 1:15. mr. crenshaw: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to address all my colleagues who i think are confused about the first amendment. confused about the nature of tiktok. and the intentions of the chinese communist party. let me explain this simple. tiktok is owned by bytedance. bytedance is in china. and when you are in china, you have to do whatever the chinese communist party says you have to do. that's according national intelligence law passed in 2017. if they want you to spy for them, you will spy for them. that's how that works. they have a board member from the c communist party on bytedance. you wouldn't allow a radio tower owned by the chinese to be put

up right in the middle of washington, d.c., and then allow it to just put out chinese propaganda. you probably complain about that. that's for because millions of americans are addicted to it. they see it and the chinese can absolutely manipulate those algorithms. the first amendment does not give the chinese communist party the right to american data or the right to manipulate the minds of americans. that would be a really weird interpretation of the first amendment. the primary counter arguments to this bill seem to be as shallow as it does do everything i want and facebook is really mean. i don't want them to make money. lvthat means you owe chinese access to all of our data and manipulate the minds of americans? i don't think so. this is a very specific bill. very specifically tailored. it does not harm american companies or individuals. ♪

♪ good morning, everyone, welcome to the "washington journal." e house yesterday passed a bill 352-65 with one present vote that could been tiktok in the united states. we want to get your reaction to that debate and