\n<\/p>\n
A legislative package that promises to be the largest overhaul of kids\u2019 online safety regulation in decades was advanced last month by the House Energy & Commerce Committee.<\/span> A good sign of a bill\u2019s efficacy, however, is how strongly the industry it aims to regulate opposes it.<\/span><\/p>\n So far, most of the package \u2014 including the <\/span>Kids Internet and Digital Safety (KIDS) Act<\/span><\/a> and the <\/span>Children\u2019s Online Privacy Protection<\/span><\/a> (COPPA 2.0) Act \u2014 has not drawn serious opposition from Big Tech. What gives?<\/span><\/p>\n On balance, Silicon Valley has much to gain if these laws pass as drafted.<\/span><\/p>\n For starters, the Senate version of COPPA 2.0 doubles down on the existing age of internet adulthood being 13, thus maintaining the industry-preferred status quo. This ignores the harms social media can cause teens well after 13, such as fueling depression, social isolation, or worse. David Molak, to offer just one heartbreaking example, was <\/span>driven by online cyberbullying<\/span><\/a> to commit suicide at 16 years old. That\u2019s why eminent figures like <\/span>Jean Twenge<\/span><\/a> and <\/span>Jonathan Haidt<\/span><\/a> call for raising the age of social media eligibility to 16, and others <\/span>call for 18<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n This is bad, but perhaps the legislation\u2019s biggest gift to Big Tech is its numerous provisions to preempt or block a growing crop of state laws designed to hold these companies accountable. A look at the finer details of the legislation reveal that Congress would replace robust state regulation with a far lighter \u201cfederal standard,\u201d setting a very low ceiling for kids\u2019 online safety at the state level.<\/span><\/p>\n Republican sponsors, of course, frame things differently.<\/span><\/p>\n In the Washington Post, <\/span>Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-KY), E&C Committee Chair<\/span><\/a> and lead sponsor of the KIDS Act, described the package in adversarial terms, as Congress moving to correct Big Tech\u2019s egregious failure to \u201cself-regulate.\u201d Guthrie is doubtless correct about Big Tech\u2019s shortcomings. But this only makes it more noteworthy that the tech industry does not oppose this legislation.<\/span><\/p>\n Big Tech hasn\u2019t been silent about every bill in the package. The App Store Accountability Act, which has been enacted in four states (thus far), has received significant pushback. The Apple-backed App Association <\/span>decried<\/span><\/a> the bill as a \u201cpoison pill\u201d that would stifle \u201cinnovation,\u201d explicitly calling it a \u201cfly in the AI package ointment.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n By openly referring to the child safety package as \u201cthe AI package,\u201d the App Association gives away the game. Insiders in Washington regularly admit that they are using the child safety package to mollify the concerns of parents and child safety advocates to pave the way for Congress to pass \u2014 <\/span>what the White House calls<\/span><\/a> \u2014 a \u201cminimally burdensome\u201d federal AI standard. In an unguarded interview, Amy Bos, vice president of governmental affairs for industry group NetChoice, <\/span>speaks of<\/span><\/a> \u201cleveraging, or using, possibly, a kid\u2019s package \u2026 to get AI across the finish line.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Big Tech is only interested in kids\u2019 safety if it comes with a much bigger payoff: a federal law that would stop states from enforcing tougher AI regulations. In fact, with help from Republican leadership, Big Tech has already tried twice \u2014 and failed twice \u2014 to get Congress to do exactly that.<\/span><\/p>\n According to a recent <\/span>announcement<\/span><\/a> by Senator Ted Cruz, one of Big Tech\u2019s key Congressional allies, it looks like Silicon Valley is gearing up for a third attempt. And it seems they\u2019ll have the buy-in to try again. As <\/span>Politico recently reported<\/span><\/a>, Senate Majority Leader John Thune said that a federal AI standard is \u201ca \u2018big priority\u2019 for the Trump administration, and [he] said a potential bill could be folded into a larger package with other proposals like a kids\u2019 online safety bill.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n But the American people see things differently. Weakening kids\u2019 online safety legislation by tying it to a sweeping \u201cAI package\u201d is a non-starter for American families. Parents nationwide have heard the terrifying story of <\/span>Adam Raine<\/span><\/a>, a 16-year-old boy who was goaded into taking his own life by ChatGPT. They fear that their child might be next.\u00a0<\/span>It\u2019s no surprise, then, why, according to a\u00a0national poll<\/a> by the Institute for Family Studies, American voters want Congress to prioritize kids\u2019 online safety over industry carveouts by a margin of nine to one.<\/p>\n Robust online safety for kids is a winning electoral strategy, but tying it to deregulation of AI is a political loser. As a second <\/span>national Institute for Family Studies poll found<\/span><\/a>, Republican voters in red states support Congressional candidates who protect children from AI harms and oppose those who push preemption. For a party expected to face serious challenges during midterms, it would seem that Republican leadership would be eager to champion the desires of its voters.<\/span><\/p>\n Congress should, like countless state legislatures, side with voters and not protect Big Tech companies from responsibility. We have had enough of that.<\/span><\/p>\n Ultimately, Rep. Guthrie is right: American families \u201cdeserve more than gestures and idle promises. They deserve laws that work.\u201d That includes his.<\/span><\/p>\n * * *<\/p>\n Jared Hayden is a policy analyst at the Institute for Family Studies\u2019 Family First Technology Initiative.\u00a0<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n