Government isn't rightfully in the business of picking winners and losers in the economy. Note the qualifier: "rightfully." This is, sadly, something government at all levels routinely tries to do, and while Democrats are more egregious about it, Republicans, honestly, aren't immune from the temptation to put a thumb on that scale.
This time, the thumb on the scale attempt comes in the form of something called the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA), which is back in the Senate for another attempt at passage.
Federal lawmakers backing a new bill introduced in the Senate say they want there to be more online shopping options for consumers. However, a close review of their proposal shows their draft legislation may only strengthen entrenched brick-and-mortar stores while weakening the biggest online marketplace in the world, possibly making shopping worse for consumers overall.
The American Innovation and Choice Online Act has been circling Congress for years and was recently reintroduced in slightly tweaked form. Originally, the legislation was borne out of allegations that Big Tech was “self-preferencing” certain products.
The bill is sponsored by veteran Republican Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA). But what's interesting is the companies that would benefit from this bill, and the Democratic senators who have signed on to it. These include:
- Target. Annual gross revenues, $106 billion. Headquartered in Minnesota, home to a co-sponsor of AICOA, Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN).
- Walgreens. Annual gross revenue, $154 billion. Headquartered in Illinois, home to a co-sponsor of AICOA, Senator Dick Burban (D-IL).
- CVS. Annual gross revenue, $407 billion. Headquartered in Rhode Island, home to a co-sponsor of AICOA, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).
As for how this would work:
The bill targets so-called “systemically important” platforms with average annual gross revenues of at least $175 billion, banning target firms from self-promoting private-label brand products, such as batteries or clothing; misusing nonpublic business-user data against small businesses; and limiting competitor access to platform features. The Justice Department, Federal Trade Commission, and state attorneys general can civilly sue companies to enforce the rules. The bill looks like a direct assault on Amazon, in particular, though some critics say it could also affect Walmart, at least theoretically.
If anyone can show me in the Constitution where the federal government has any authority to regulate business in this manner, I'd be interested in having it pointed out, because I sure can't find it.
Read More: The Stuff of Bad Dreams: What If Amy Klobuchar Won MN Governor's Race, Appointed Tim Walz to Senate?
Here's the thing: The history of this bill would indicate it's not going anywhere in the Senate. It was previously introduced by Senator Klobuchar and Senator Grassley in the 117th Congress as S. 2992 in October of 2021. It made it out of committee but died on the Senate floor. They reintroduced it in the 118th Congress as S. 2033, then again in the 119th Congress (the current one) in June 2026, where it currently languishes in committee.
This is a bill that not only isn't going anywhere, but it also shouldn't go anywhere. Government, at any level, has no business picking winners and losers, and the federal government, under the Constitution and the 10th Amendment, least of all. Add in a dose of rather obvious cronyism on the part of three Democrat Senators, and it becomes even more egregious.
Editor’s Note: Thanks to President Trump’s leadership and bold policies, America’s economy is back on track.
Help us continue to report on the president’s economic successes and combat the lies of the Democrats. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member