Joe Kennedy

Technological innovation has long been and will continue to be critically important to per-capita income growth, economic competitiveness, and national security. So it is important to examine President-elect Joe Biden’s policy agenda through that lens. This report compiles information from the president-elect’s campaign website and policy documents, from the Democratic Party platform, and from media accounts of statements he has made.

The report begins with an overview of each candidate’s general philosophy on technology, innovation, and trade policy, and then compares the candidates’ policy positions across 10 specific issue areas:

• Innovation and Research and Development (R&D)
• Internet and Digital Economy
• Broadband and Telecommunications
• Education and Skills
• Taxes
• Regulation
• Trade
• Advanced Manufacturing
• Life Sciences and Biotechnology
• Clean Energy Innovation

The candidates’ positions on broadband:

The rapid growth of large platforms has caused some activists, scholars, and political officials to worry about their impact on competition. Concern seems to be aimed at two issues. First, certain companies, such as Amazon, sell directly to customers but also run a platform that connects third-party suppliers to customers. Some people are concerned that platforms could compete unfairly by using data about sales by third-party sellers to decide whether to develop and sell competing products. Second, because of network effects, many platform markets have one or two dominant players.

Arguments used to justify digital services taxes on large Internet companies are flawed. The United States should counter these proposals and work to restore international consensus around tax treatment for multinational companies.

The application of antitrust policy, through which the government seeks to shape the general rules of competition, has always been contentious. But for roughly 40 years there has been a consensus that its ultimate goal should be the welfare of consumers, broadly defined to mean maximizing overall economic growth.

Recently, a number of legal experts and policy activists have called on antitrust regulators to incorporate the possession of data into their analyses of mergers and possible anticompetitive practices. These observers fear that control of large amounts of data will give companies an unfair advantage over competitors, allowing them to use their market power to harm consumers and competitors. These claims are incorrect.

Data-rich companies are not an economic threat, but rather an important source of innovation, which policymakers should encourage, not limit. And because the use of data is non-rivalrous, one company’s possession of data does not come at the expense of another’s. As such, there is no need to impose additional antitrust scrutiny merely because a company relies on data to conduct business. Moreover, regulators already have sufficient powers to deal with any actual behavioral problems that may arise.