Ms Pelosi has been addressing Mr Cook’s concerns about the bills, according to two people who are aware of the conversations. When Mr Cook asked for a delay in the judicial committee’s review of the bills, Ms. Pelosi urged him to identify specific political objections to the measures, one of the people said.
Morgan Reed, president of the App Association, a trade organization sponsored by Apple and other technology and telecommunications companies, said in a letter to lawmakers Tuesday that the dismantling of platforms and “limiting the services they can offer to our member companies , Would harm your damage ”. Components. “
Another outspoken critic is the Chamber of Progress, a left-wing trading group founded in March by a former Google executive, Adam Kovacevich.
“Tech had a very long political honeymoon,” said Kovacevich. “Many politicians and decision-makers think that they may have been too easy with technology for a long time, and now there is a desire to punish technology either through new laws or governmental measures. And that is contrary to what consumers want. “
He authored and organized support for a letter mailed this week calling on members of the Judiciary Committee to oppose two of the bills. It warned that the bills would harm consumers, resulting in Amazon without Prime, the iPhone with no text or phone functionality preinstalled, and Google without Maps. The letter was signed by Mr. Kovacevich’s group and an unusual mix of 12 other organizations including technology associations, conservative free market organizations and consumer groups, most of which were funded by Amazon, Apple, Facebook or Google.
Eli Lehrer, the president of the fiscal conservative think tank R Street Institute, who signed the letter, criticized Republican proponents of the bills for turning their backs on free market principles by “asking the government to use its power to direct against some of the most successful companies in the history of our country. “
The institute has received funding from Google, but Teacher said the funding did not affect its stance on the legislation, as did representatives of other signatory groups.