-
IntroducedFeb 13, 2023
-
Passed House
-
Passed Senate
-
Signed into Law
Relating to a prohibition of certain social media platforms developed or provided by certain foreign entities.
Last Action See all actions
House • Apr 27, 2023: Reported favorably as substituted
Latest Bill Text See all bill texts
Do you support this bill?
Official Summary/Bill Text
Comments on HB 2206
YUCHONG CHEN wrote 6 months ago
Opposing the proposal to prohibit certain social media platforms developed or provided by foreign entities is justified for several reasons. Firstly, there is no clear evidence to suggest that such an action is necessary. While it is important to ensure the safety and security of residents, there is no data to support the notion that these social media platforms pose a significant threat to local populations. Furthermore, such a prohibition would be extremely inconvenient for the group of residents who rely on these platforms for their daily communication. Many individuals use these social media platforms to stay connected with family and friends, conduct business, and even access news and other important information. By restricting access to these platforms, residents would be left without reliable means of communication, leading to social isolation and potentially negative economic consequences. In addition, implementing a ban on these social media platforms would send a negative message to foreign entities, potentially damaging diplomatic relations, and increasing tensions. It could also create a sense of mistrust among local residents towards foreign businesses and technologies, which could have negative implications for future innovation and investment. Ultimately, it is important to carefully consider any proposed measures that restrict access to communication technologies. While security concerns are certainly valid, they must be weighed against the potential negative impact on residents and the broader implications for foreign relations and innovation. Without clear evidence of a pressing security threat, a prohibition of certain social media platforms developed or provided by certain foreign entities should be avoided.
Opposing the proposal to prohibit certain social media platforms developed or provided by foreign entities is justified for several reasons. Firstly, there is no clear evidence to suggest that such an action is necessary. While it is important to ensure the safety and security of residents, there is no data to support the notion that these social media platforms pose a significant threat to local populations. Furthermore, such a prohibition would be extremely inconvenient for the group of residents who rely on these platforms for their daily communication. Many individuals use these social media platforms to stay connected with family and friends, conduct business, and even access news and other important information. By restricting access to these platforms, residents would be left without reliable means of communication, leading to social isolation and potentially negative economic consequences. In addition, implementing a ban on these social media platforms would send a negative message to foreign entities, potentially damaging diplomatic relations, and increasing tensions. It could also create a sense of mistrust among local residents towards foreign businesses and technologies, which could have negative implications for future innovation and investment. Ultimately, it is important to carefully consider any proposed measures that restrict access to communication technologies. While security concerns are certainly valid, they must be weighed against the potential negative impact on residents and the broader implications for foreign relations and innovation. Without clear evidence of a pressing security threat, a prohibition of certain social media platforms developed or provided by certain foreign entities should be avoided.
Xiaobai Li wrote 5 months ago
discrimination
discrimination
Tweets
Whip Lists
Sponsors
Votes
Looks like there aren't any voting records available at this moment.
Actions
- Apr 27, 2023 | House
- Considered in formal meeting
- Committee substitute considered in committee
- Reported favorably as substituted
- Mar 22, 2023 | House
- Scheduled for public hearing on . . . 03/22/2023
- Considered in public hearing
- Testimony taken/registration(s) recorded in committee
- Left pending in committee
- Mar 09, 2023 | House
- Read first time
- Referred to State Affairs
- Feb 13, 2023 | House
- Filed
Bill Texts
Report a comment
×
Do you want to add this event to your calendar?