3 ms·

I don't see anything in the old act like that. https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/s3933/BILLS-116s3933is.pdf https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/s3933/BILLS-116s

I don't see anything in the old act like that. https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/s3933/BILLS-116s3933is.pdf https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/s3933/BILLS-116s3933is.pd... And the new act contains way more anti-China language and provisions than the old act. https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/CFC99CC6-CE84-4B1A-8BBF-8D2E84BD7965 https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/CFC99CC6-CE84... The problem is, these right-wing "news" sites never cite their sources. They could easily have linked to a version of the bill saying "they removed lines 40-44" and that's the problem. But they don't. Because it's not about news, it's about fake outrage.

keneda7 4y ago
Here are a couple links to a source for you. It is the second of the three amendments purposed in the first link. You can click on the amendment to see the actual text of it. The second link should link you to the video of Rubio in session talking about how the amendment was killed. Rubio's site is the first google result for "democrats block amendment to keep china from receiving chips funds". https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=5712EBB1-680F-4144-BA13-C91A036905FF https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases... https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=81741F0B-454A-466A-81F5-AA3ED98F8A08 https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases...
- light_hue_1 4y ago
  This is not at all what those right wing "news" articles are talking about. For one thing, this is Rubio. Wrong senator. Another thing, did you read his amendment? This is again, nonsense posturing by people disinterested in the truth. Read his amendment vs the original. The original literally says the Secretary of Defense decides what legacy semiconductors are which aren't protected by the act. His amendment makes congress play a role in that decision in addition to the Secretary. That's it. It adds no meaningful protections. Unless you think the Secretary of Defense is a Chinese spy.

keneda7 4y ago

Here are a couple links to a source for you. It is the second of the three amendments purposed in the first link. You can click on the amendment to see the actual text of it. The second link should link you to the video of Rubio in session talking about how the amendment was killed. Rubio's site is the first google result for "democrats block amendment to keep china from receiving chips funds". https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=5712EBB1-680F-4144-BA13-C91A036905FF https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases... https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=81741F0B-454A-466A-81F5-AA3ED98F8A08 https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases...

light_hue_1 4y ago
This is not at all what those right wing "news" articles are talking about. For one thing, this is Rubio. Wrong senator. Another thing, did you read his amendment? This is again, nonsense posturing by people disinterested in the truth. Read his amendment vs the original. The original literally says the Secretary of Defense decides what legacy semiconductors are which aren't protected by the act. His amendment makes congress play a role in that decision in addition to the Secretary. That's it. It adds no meaningful protections. Unless you think the Secretary of Defense is a Chinese spy.