Tim Cook’s Lobbying Threatens Kids Online Safety Vote

A crucial congressional committee is preparing to vote on a package of internet safety bills aimed at protecting children online, yet the most intense discussion centered on a notable absence and a powerful visitor. Lawmakers are moving forward with 18 proposals that could reshape how young people interact with digital platforms, but several members expressed concern that Big Tech lobbying has already weakened the legislation, leaving core problems unaddressed. The debate revealed deep divisions over strategy, with some arguing the current approach empowers the very companies with poor safety records instead of challenging their control.

The legislative package includes a modified version of the prominent Senate bill known as the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA). However, supporters of the original argue the new version has been gutted to the point of being harmful. They contend it would override stronger state laws, potentially even those covering general consumer protections. The bill advanced from subcommittee on a party-line vote after losing Democratic support, with former co-sponsor Representative Kathy Castor accusing Republicans of abandoning parent advocates. Another bill, an update to children’s privacy rules called COPPA 2.0, also moved forward with a similar party-line vote after being amended to include a broad provision that would preempt state laws.

The most revealing moment, however, stemmed from Apple CEO Tim Cook’s surprise meetings with committee leaders just one day before the session. During debate on bills concerning age verification at the app store level, Representative Kat Cammack pointedly noted the committee had not considered the App Store Freedom Act, which she co-sponsored with Representative Lori Trahan. Their bill would compel companies like Apple and Google to permit users to install alternative app stores and set them as defaults. The lawmakers argue this would let parents choose a curated, kid-friendly app store as the default, simplifying safety far more than navigating a general marketplace.

Cammack criticized the alternative approach as “asking the fox to guard the hen house.” She argued that entrusting age verification and data protection to companies with questionable safety records, while forcing users to remain in their walled marketplaces, is a flawed solution. Both she and Trahan characterized the other proposals as marginal tweaks to a broken system. Trahan suggested a more direct path: enforcing existing antitrust laws to break the duopoly that grants Apple and Google exclusive control over what stores can be on a child’s device.

Committee Chair Brett Guthrie, who met with Cook, confirmed the App Store Freedom Act was discussed and that Apple opposes it. He denied the meeting influenced the bill’s exclusion, stating he wanted to keep the session focused on child safety and that the broader implications of allowing all types of third-party stores required more study. He also hinted the bill might fall under another committee’s jurisdiction.

This explanation did not satisfy the bill’s sponsors. Trahan voiced clear suspicion, noting the coincidence of Apple’s lobbying presence coinciding with the exclusion of their top-priority bill from debate. “All the bills we’re debating today need work,” Trahan said, “but this one isn’t even allowed to be discussed… and that just breeds a bit of suspicion.” While both representatives said they believed Guthrie was acting in good faith, Cammack pointed the finger squarely at the tech giant, stating, “I think the people acting in bad faith [are] Apple.” The episode underscores how industry influence looms over the legislative process, even as lawmakers profess a shared goal of making the internet safer for children.

(Source: The Verge)