Should the RESTRICT Act pass?

[Continential]

https://www.vice.com/en/article/4a3ddb/restrict-act-insanely-broad-ban-tiktok-vpns
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/686

It absolutely shouldn't.

[BG-NY]

No. Some provisions are akin to the Patriot Act. No more spying.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Hell no.

[It’s so Joever]

Absolutely not.

[Pink Panther]

Nah, I'm good.

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

Absolutely not

[oldtimer]

Personally I'm against broad measures.

[Make America Grumpy Again]

No. There are legitimate concerns with Tiktok but the bill is way too broad and could result in a Patriot Act on steroids'.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Absolutely not

[Comrade Funk]

Bipartisanship is almost always bad. This is another example.

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

No no no no no

[Independents against George Santos]

I would normally oppose decreasing privacy but I would throw that all away to ban more social media.

[Blue3]

I would normally oppose decreasing privacy but I would throw that all away to ban more social media.

...err, what?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Mark Warner is a terrible person.

[Vosem]

No, of course not. Surprised to see opinions on Atlas so reasonable on this question.

[John Dule]

No. If you're concerned about Chinese authoritarianism, the answer isn't American authoritarianism.

[Comrade Funk]

Mark Warner has always sucked

[dead0man]

of course our sitting Elderly In Chief has a boner to sign it

We applaud the bipartisan group of Senators, led by Senators Warner and Thune, who today introduced the Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology (RESTRICT) Act. This legislation would empower the United States government to prevent certain foreign governments from exploiting technology services operating in the United States in a way that poses risks to Americans’ sensitive data and our national security.
 
The information and communications technology products and services supply chain is integral to the lives of Americans and the functioning of U.S. businesses. This bill presents a systematic framework for addressing technology-based threats to the security and safety of Americans. This legislation would provide the U.S. government with new mechanisms to mitigate the national security risks posed by high-risk technology businesses operating in the United States. Critically, it would strengthen our ability to address discrete risks posed by individual transactions, and systemic risks posed by certain classes of transactions involving countries of concern in sensitive technology sectors. This will help us address the threats we face today, and also prevent such risks from arising in the future.
 
We look forward to continue working with both Democrats and Republicans on this bill, and urge Congress to act quickly to send it to the President’s desk.

[Independents against George Santos]

I would normally oppose decreasing privacy but I would throw that all away to ban more social media.

...err, what?

I don't care if online privacy is undermined, if it means that social media apps of any and all kinds can be banned. I'm being deliberately hyperbolic but I wholeheartedly believe that decreasing access to social media and other online frivolities will make up for any negative outcome caused elsewhere.

[It’s so Joever]

of course our sitting Elderly In Chief has a boner to sign it

We applaud the bipartisan group of Senators, led by Senators Warner and Thune, who today introduced the Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology (RESTRICT) Act. This legislation would empower the United States government to prevent certain foreign governments from exploiting technology services operating in the United States in a way that poses risks to Americans’ sensitive data and our national security.
 
The information and communications technology products and services supply chain is integral to the lives of Americans and the functioning of U.S. businesses. This bill presents a systematic framework for addressing technology-based threats to the security and safety of Americans. This legislation would provide the U.S. government with new mechanisms to mitigate the national security risks posed by high-risk technology businesses operating in the United States. Critically, it would strengthen our ability to address discrete risks posed by individual transactions, and systemic risks posed by certain classes of transactions involving countries of concern in sensitive technology sectors. This will help us address the threats we face today, and also prevent such risks from arising in the future.
 
We look forward to continue working with both Democrats and Republicans on this bill, and urge Congress to act quickly to send it to the President’s desk.

If he signs this act, I will not be voting in 2024 or I may protest vote a 3rd party. I don’t even care about his opponent anymore, there has to be some standard. This is genuinely pacing the way for a downright GOP-communist regime, and I that was why I voted for Biden last time. If he’s going to just enable it, I may as let it happen and not make myself a target.

[Person Man]

 uck that. This is just like the 9/11 situation where we had to make major changes in our foreign policy and go to war but the Administration was able to twist enough arms in Congress to push our domestic policy beyond what was necessary and went too far!

[Mercenary]

One thing that always unites both parties is authoritarian b.s.
With how awful the two parties are, when they agree on something you know it has to be tremendously bad.

[Horus]

If Biden signs this I'll find it very difficult to vote for him next year. This looks worse than the Patriot Act.

[Hammy]

The second Biden's signature touches this bill, he's lost reelection.

[FloridaMan1845]

https://www.vice.com/en/article/4a3ddb/restrict-act-insanely-broad-ban-tiktok-vpns
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/686

It absolutely shouldn't.

I agree. Why can’t the government just say “TikTok is henceforth banned in all jurisdictions of the United States” or some other ordinary thing like that and be on their way?