The @OversightBoard's decision to uphold the suspension is the wrong one—and one that all Americans, regardless of political affiliation, should be concerned about. 🧵
However, it was entirely appropriate to admonish Facebook's vague, standardless penalty.
Big Tech companies should not be allowed to play by a set of rules that give them undue influence over American society while avoiding any accountability for how they use that influence.
It is time for Congress to act and reform Section 230 in a way that respects the rights of those engaged in private enterprise but also ensures companies take responsibility for the choices they make—especially when it comes to censoring individuals and opinions they don’t like.
Letting politically motivated companies police themselves as they manipulate civic discourse is not a long-term solution consistent with America’s values.
Whether it’s the president of the United States or an average American citizen in Des Moines, Big Tech should not have the ability to suppress viewpoints it finds objectionable—and it certainly shouldn’t have the ability to hide behind outdated laws in justifying such behavior.
Censorship is a threat to our American republic, and woke corporations like Google, Twitter, and Facebook should not be allowed to engage in such behavior without consequence.
Today’s decision concerns one individual—but we all know that if Big Tech continues to feel emboldened to silence a sitting president, they can and will silence the rest of us.
While @OversightBoard has spent months deliberating whether Facebook and Instagram should grant a democratically elected president access, these companies have allowed dictatorial regimes in China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea to pump out propaganda on those same platforms.
Big Tech companies have put their hypocrisy on full display and, as a result, have lost the public’s trust.
There are ways for these companies to remove truly objectionable, obscene, inciting content from their platforms—and there are ways Congress can and should change the law to allow them to do so.
However, as these woke corporations continue to swing the sword of censorship, we will fight back.
Big Tech faces a choice: work to reform Section 230 and treat users with consistency and transparency now, or face more dire policy consequences in the future.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
How reliable are government declarations that mask mandates prevent the spread of the coronavirus?
Our recent experience has left us less than confident that the public should trust the CDC’s published research—much less any pronouncements based on that research.
Our problem involves a paper that the CDC published in November.
The paper studies mask mandates in Kansas because, in July, Gov. Laura Kelly issued an optional mask mandate. Counties could decide whether to enforce the mandate or opt-out.
Many counties DID opt-out, but...
...the larger metropolitan areas did not.
Overall, 24 counties implemented a mask mandate, and 81 opted out.
The left is pushing a false narrative about #HR1 ahead of today's vote in the House—and the media certainly isn't going to call them out on it.
We should be working to secure elections and restore faith in outcomes.
Here's how HR1 would send us in the opposite direction:
#HR1 would seize the authority of states to regulate voter registration and the voting process—by forcing states to implement early voting, automatic voter registration, same-day registration, online voter registration, and no-fault absentee balloting.
#HR1 would make it easier to commit fraud and promote chaos at the polls through same-day registration.
This week the House is expected to consider a massive package being sold as another COVID-19 relief measure
It's stuffed with provisions that have nothing to do with COVID-19 or economic hardship—and in many cases would actually slow economic rebound and destroy jobs 🧵👇
What should Americans know?
It is a COVID-19 bill that treats COVID-19 as an afterthought
While combatting the pandemic ought to be the centerpiece of legislation referred to as “COVID-19 relief,” public health represents less than 10% of spending in the package
The legislation throws massive amounts of taxpayer dollars at causes that are barely or entirely unrelated to the pandemic—yet neglects some potentially crucial approaches to bringing the disease under control
Welfare desperately needs reform—but expanding benefits and eliminating work requirements while allowing anti-marriage penalties will not truly help the poor.
Here's how President Biden’s plan to expand child credits restores welfare as we knew it:
President Biden and some in Congress are calling for a massive increase in welfare cash aid while undoing work requirements could erase gains made since the 1996 welfare reform.
The administration suggests these changes would be limited to a single year to help families suffering under the COVID-19 recession—but the Biden plan is similar to legislation that would create permanent new entitlements.
Today President Trump will lay out his vision for health care—and he's right to address it.
Health care is a top issue for Americans because Obamacare has not delivered on its promises to lower costs or increase choices.
There is a plan to improve health care.
The 2020 #HealthCareChoices proposal would leave Americans better off in at least 10 ways:
First, it empowers Americans to keep their health coverage and doctors when they change or lose a job.
It also would let low-income patients access better, private health plans.
Medical care is one of the few services where Americans don’t know the price of care until weeks or months after receiving it. Our proposal would save them money care and prescription drugs by making prices more transparent.
Facebook is allowing its “fact-checking” program to be gamed by political partisans.
@PolitiFact justifies labeling an ad campaign by @approject as “missing context” (and is thereby preventing the ads from running on the platform) by arguing, “we can't predict the future.”
Well, here is one thing about the future that's sure: Facebook's credibility is on the line.
As @KlonKitchen said: This is not a case where there is any ambiguity—PolitiFact is gaming the system for political points and should be suspended from Facebook's fact-checking program.