Searching for smart, safe news you can TRUST?

Support safe, smart, REAL journalism. Sign up for our Axios AM & PM newsletters and get smarter, faster.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Searching for smart, safe news you can TRUST?

Support safe, smart, REAL journalism. Sign up for our Axios AM & PM newsletters and get smarter, faster.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Denver news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Denver

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Des Moines news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Des Moines

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Minneapolis-St. Paul news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Minneapolis-St. Paul

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Tampa-St. Petersburg news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Tampa-St. Petersburg

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Photo illustration: Lazaro Gamio / Axios

Republican Sen. Rob Portman and Democrat Sen. Richard Blumenthal are on a collision course with Silicon Valley's giants over a bill that would allow victims to sue sites that facilitate sex trafficking.

Internet companies say it will endanger their business models by sending them down a slippery slope to being liable to user content. Portman and Blumenthal, not surprisingly, disagree. They talked with Axios last week about the bill and their disagreements with tech, and their hope that they still might be able to find common ground with the Valley.

Why you'll hear about this again: This debate is heating up as the Senate Commerce Committee convenes a Tuesday hearing on the bill featuring defenders and opponents of the proposal. Some corporations in tech and media — like Oracle and 21st Century Fox — have endorsed the proposal in recent weeks.

What's the pitch you're making to your colleagues?

  • Portman: "I just gave a little talk to some colleagues and I just said that it is a national embarrassment that we permit people to be sold online in the 21st Century in America, and it's increasing. … It's a very simple message."
  • Blumenthal: "I haven't found colleagues really pushing back with any degree of enthusiasm. It's more, you know, 'What I've heard is…," and then [you say], "But these are kids sold online." And at that point it's sort of game over on the intellectual side. Now, politically, [tech companies are] very powerful. They have a lot of sway, and in my view they should be regarded as potential allies, not adversaries."

Why do you think tech companies feel that they can say they're not going to work with you on this?

  • Blumenthal: "I have to confess I don't know. There is in the culture a sense of freedom and autonomy. An adverseness to any sort of government intervention or interference."

Do you mean the culture of Silicon Valley?

  • Blumenthal: "Well, I don't know whether it's the culture of Silicon Valley or libertarian culture, but just an adverseness to any sort of intervention."

On the idea the law would broadly hurt web companies:

  • Portman: "You have to actually be participating in it. So it's not enough to say, just I knew it was happening on my website, in order to be subject to this you have to know about it and be involved with it. … But again, it''s in the context of, for those folks you cover everyday in Silicon Valley, they need to open their eyes and see what's happening."
  • Blumenthal: "When they talk about 'Oh my goodness, lawsuits, deluge of lawsuits.' You have to be a victim or survivor. … And that's a very limited group of people."

On the critique that companies would have to stop their current anti-trafficking efforts because it might make them legally vulnerable:

  • Blumenthal: "Now, if you're participating with law enforcement, prosecutors are not going to take action against you if you are truly cooperating. And for some limited period of time, if in fact you are cooperating in good faith, and survivors are aided, that would be a defense to a civil lawsuit as well."
  • Portman: "The other part of this is you know there's a Good Samaritan provision in the [current] law, and we purposely keep that provision in the law for the companies you're talking about. If you're the prosecutor, that's a total defense right there."

On having major companies say they aren't interested in moving the legislation over the line:

  • Blumenthal: "I think that's just the opening to the conversation. … These are people who don't like this crime any more than we do. They're parents, they're citizens, they're human beings. I mean, they have a company to run, but — and I may sound naive — but I think it's still possible to reach some common ground or at least address some of their concerns."

On the possibility that liability protections could be included in a renegotiated North American Free Trade Agreement:

  • Portman: "The last thing we want to do is export the part of [the current law] that provides an immunity for sex trafficking. … We've talked to [the United States Trade Representative] at some length about it."

What's next?: The lawmakers said they don't expect to try to attach their bill to legislation that funds the armed services — as has been speculated — instead opting to proceed through the standard process of vetting the bill through hearings and markups. They'd like to resolve the issue by the end of the year. "I think we're gaining a lot of momentum, I really do," Portman said. A similar bill in the House is considered harsher, and has not attracted as much attention as the Senate proposal.

Go deeper

1 hour ago - Health

Boris Johnson announces month-long COVID-19 lockdown in U.K.

Prime Minsiter Boris Johnson. Photo: NurPhoto / Getty Images

A new national lockdown will be imposed in the U.K., Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced Saturday, as the number of COVID-19 cases in the country topped 1 million.

Details: Starting Thursday, people in England must stay at home, and bars and restaurants will close, except for takeout and deliveries. All non-essential retail will also be shuttered. Different households will be banned from mixing indoors. International travel, unless for business purposes, will be banned. The new measures will last through at least December 2.

Updated 2 hours ago - Politics & Policy

The massive early vote

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

Early voting in the 2020 election across the U.S. on Saturday had already reached 65.5% of 2016's total turnout, according to state data compiled by the U.S. Elections Project.

Why it matters: The coronavirus pandemic and its resultant social-distancing measures prompted a massive uptick in both mail-in ballots and early voting nationwide, setting up an unprecedented and potentially tumultuous count in the hours and days after the polls close on Nov. 3.

Updated 2 hours ago - Politics & Policy

Coronavirus dashboard

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

  1. Health: Ipsos poll: COVID trick-or-treat.
  2. World: Greece tightens coronavirus restrictions as Europe cases spike — Austria reimposes coronavirus lockdowns amid surge of infections
  3. Economy: Conference Board predicts economy won’t fully recover until late 2021.
  4. Technology: Fully at-home rapid COVID test to move forward.
  5. States: New York rolls out new testing requirements for visitors.