Tim Cook, Ted Cruz and the strange politics of tech antitrust

Democrats and Republicans have found the tech reform debate scrambles traditional party politics — and the Apple CEO and Texas senator have found themselves chatting.

Capitol building

The Senate Judiciary Committee advanced a bill on Thursday that could remake the tech industry.

Photo: PartTime Portraits/Unsplash

Strange alliances formed ahead of Thursday's vote to advance a key antitrust bill to the Senate floor, with frequent foes like Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Ted Cruz supporting the measure, and prominent Democrats including California Sen. Dianne Feinstein pushing back against it.

Ultimately the bill moved out of the Senate Judiciary Committee by a vote of 16-6 after a surprisingly speedy debate (at least, speedy for the Senate). Even some of the lawmakers who called for further changes agreed to move the bill forward — a sign that the itch to finally regulate Big Tech after years of congressional inaction is intensifying, even as the issue scrambles traditional party politics in a way that could threaten its final passage.

The bipartisan measure, which is led by Klobuchar and would ban self-preferencing by Big Tech platforms such as Amazon or Google, represents the most serious and far-reaching proposal to remake the mightiest tech businesses. The American Innovation and Choice Online Act prohibits online gatekeepers from "favoring their own products or services," and would largely prevent Google, for instance, from giving a boost to its own local search results over Yelp's. It has brought out an unusual coalition, uniting Democrats hoping to extend competition rules with Republicans who object to platforms’ treatment of conservative speech.

“We have a lot of support for this bill,” Klobuchar said early in the session.

On the other side, the bill’s opponents consisted largely of the usual suspects: Republicans who have been historically sympathetic to business leaders who themselves are loud opponents of the bill. Some other lawmakers, from both sides of the aisle, expressed concerns about the measure’s effect on issues like privacy.

Yet it was California Democrats, concerned about a measure that would target some of the biggest employers in their state, who exposed perhaps the biggest fissures.

“It’s specifically designed to target a small number of specific companies, most of which are headquartered in my home state,” Feinstein complained, saying that she had heard that some federal agencies might have concerns about the bill’s effect on national security. Some lawmakers have worried that provisions designed to stop Big Tech from hoarding data as a way to box out rivals could allow foreign companies to obtain useful information, or even that an assault on U.S. tech giants could give China a leg up.

Klobuchar later jumped in to defend her bill against her longtime colleague, calling Feinstein's allegation a “bold statement” that she believed was "not true.”

Despite her concerns, Feinstein ultimately voted to advance the bill, as did several other senators who said they wanted to see additional changes before final passage. Those included Democrats Patrick Leahy and Alex Padilla (the other senator from California), as well as Cruz and John Kennedy, both Republicans.

Cruz and Cook

During the hearing, Klobuchar said the bill was informed by extensive consultation and scholarship, answering concerns from lawmakers and the tech industry that the full committee had not held a hearing on the measure.

Big Tech companies and trade groups, including the powerful U.S. Chamber of Commerce, have lobbied furiously in opposition to the bill with a flurry of letters and public statements arguing that the bill did not have sufficient legislative hearing and that it posed a danger to privacy and popular services.

There’s been lobbying behind the scenes too: At one point during the hearing, Cruz said he’d spent 40 minutes on the phone with Tim Cook on Wednesday, during which the Apple CEO worried the bill would “erect obstacles to Apple giving consumers the ability to opt out of apps monitoring what they’re doing online,” Cruz said.

Apple has spent recent years feuding with Meta, and the conflict got particularly hot last year when Apple allowed users to opt out of Facebook and other apps' tracking on the iPhone.

Klobuchar and Chuck Grassley, the bill’s co-sponsor and the top Republican on the judiciary panel, successfully introduced changes that Klobuchar said would protect users’ ability to opt out of third-party data sharing and would ensure that firms could still offer popular add-on subscription services, such as Amazon Prime or Google Maps.

Apple didn’t respond to requests for comment on the conversation. Cruz ultimately voted to move the bill out of committee, despite calling Cook’s concerns reasonable.

‘Get to a yes’

While the bill is ostensibly about antitrust, Thursday’s debate also included familiar partisan debates about what the bill would mean for regulating speech online. Like several Republicans who spoke, Cruz urged the panel to do more to address conservative allegations that social media platforms silence right-wing speech. On the opposite end of the spectrum, Padilla, the California Democrat, said the measure would actually do too much to tip the scales away from content moderation because a provision within it could allow services like, say, Parler to argue that blocking them is anticompetitive.

“This provision can be a gift to bad actors seeking to prevent platforms from blocking business users that peddle hate speech or … election disinformation,” he said.

Several Republicans also worried that the bill gave too much power to the Federal Trade Commission and other agencies, and offered little opportunity for companies to argue that their conduct benefits consumers more than it hurts them — a common antitrust defense.

“I have questions about who’s covered by the law, what it permits and what’s going to happen in terms of enforcement,” said Republican Thom Tillis, who prepared dozens of amendments, though he didn’t bring them up for a vote and said he hoped “to work to get to a yes.”

Klobuchar originally introduced the bill last fall, after several months of work, many of which were devoted to modifying a proposal that grew out of the House’s 16-month investigation into Big Tech’s competitive practices.

Although the House proposal was also bipartisan, Klobuchar will still need a filibuster-proof majority to pass her version in the Senate, meaning she and her allies will need to spend more time at the negotiating table. The fact that Klobuchar’s bill has such broad and high-level support on both sides of the aisle has excited tech critics. Yet the complicated politics and conflicting calls for further changes signal that the bill still has to overcome the intense legislative inertia that has doomed many other efforts, even as time runs out in the current Congress.

“Nearly 40 years later, we are still here without a single piece of meaningful competition legislation addressing the massive economy that [the internet] has created,” Klobuchar said in her introduction. “This is our moment.”



Michael Pryor, co-founder of Trello (now a part of Atlassian), explains what he's learned along the way and his advice for other companies that are looking to build a truly collaborative culture that keeps employees feeling connected — from wherever they choose to work.

Learn more


What the economic downturn means for pay packages

The war for talent rages on, but dynamics are shifting back to the employers.

Compensation packages could start to look different as companies reshuffle the balance of cash and equity.

Illustration: Nuthawut Somsuk/Getty Images

The market is turning. Tech stocks are slumping — which is bad news for employees — and even industry powerhouses are slowing hiring and laying people off. Tech talent is still in high demand, but compensation packages could start to look different as companies recruit.

“It’s a little bit like whiplash,” compensation consultant Ashish Raina said of the downturn. Raina, who mainly works with startups that have 200 to 800 employees, previously worked as the director of Talent at Index Ventures and head of Compensation and Talent Analytics at Box. “I do think there’s going to be an interesting reckoning in terms of pay increases going forward, how that pay is delivered.”

Keep Reading Show less
Allison Levitsky
Allison Levitsky is a reporter at Protocol covering workplace issues in tech. She previously covered big tech companies and the tech workforce for the Silicon Valley Business Journal. Allison grew up in the Bay Area and graduated from UC Berkeley.
Sponsored Content

Why the digital transformation of industries is creating a more sustainable future

Qualcomm’s chief sustainability officer Angela Baker on how companies can view going “digital” as a way not only toward growth, as laid out in a recent report, but also toward establishing and meeting environmental, social and governance goals.

Three letters dominate business practice at present: ESG, or environmental, social and governance goals. The number of mentions of the environment in financial earnings has doubled in the last five years, according to GlobalData: 600,000 companies mentioned the term in their annual or quarterly results last year.

But meeting those ESG goals can be a challenge — one that businesses can’t and shouldn’t take lightly. Ahead of an exclusive fireside chat at Davos, Angela Baker, chief sustainability officer at Qualcomm, sat down with Protocol to speak about how best to achieve those targets and how Qualcomm thinks about its own sustainability strategy, net zero commitment, other ESG targets and more.

Keep Reading Show less
Chris Stokel-Walker

Chris Stokel-Walker is a freelance technology and culture journalist and author of "YouTubers: How YouTube Shook Up TV and Created a New Generation of Stars." His work has been published in The New York Times, The Guardian and Wired.


How 'Zuck Bucks' saved the 2020 election — and fueled the Big Lie

The true story of how Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan’s $419 million donation became the 2020 election’s most enduring conspiracy theory.

Mark Zuckerberg is smack in the center of one of the 2020 election’s multitudinous conspiracies.

Illustration: Mike McQuade; Photos: Getty Images

If Mark Zuckerberg could have imagined the worst possible outcome of his decision to insert himself into the 2020 election, it might have looked something like the scene that unfolded inside Mar-a-Lago on a steamy evening in early April.

There in a gilded ballroom-turned-theater, MAGA world icons including Kellyanne Conway, Corey Lewandowski, Hope Hicks and former president Donald Trump himself were gathered for the premiere of “Rigged: The Zuckerberg Funded Plot to Defeat Donald Trump.”

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.


From frenzy to fear: Trading apps grapple with anxious investors

After riding the stock-trading wave last year, trading apps like Robinhood have disenchanted customers and jittery investors.

Retail stock trading is still an attractive business, as shown by the news that crypto exchange FTX is dipping its toes in the market by letting some U.S. customers trade stocks.

Photo: Lam Yik/Bloomberg via Getty Images

For a brief moment, last year’s GameStop craze made buying and selling stocks cool, even exciting, for a new generation of young investors. Now, that frenzy has turned to fear.

Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev pointed to “a challenging macro environment” marked by rising prices and interest rates and a slumping market in a call with analysts explaining his company’s lackluster results. The downturn, he said, was something “most of our customers have never experienced in their lifetimes.”

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at bpimentel@protocol.com or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.


Broadcom is reportedly in talks to acquire VMware

It hasn't been long since it left the ownership of Dell Technologies.

Photo: Yichuan Cao/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Broadcom is said to be in discussions with VMware to buy the cloud computing company for as much as $50 billion.

Keep Reading Show less
Jamie Condliffe

Jamie Condliffe ( @jme_c) is the executive editor at Protocol, based in London. Prior to joining Protocol in 2019, he worked on the business desk at The New York Times, where he edited the DealBook newsletter and wrote Bits, the weekly tech newsletter. He has previously worked at MIT Technology Review, Gizmodo, and New Scientist, and has held lectureships at the University of Oxford and Imperial College London. He also holds a doctorate in engineering from the University of Oxford.

Latest Stories