I wonder if the bill should also include other countries that used forced labor and incarcerate very large numbers of people especially from minorities? Why not draw a line and say any nation that has an incarceration rate of greater than 500 per 100k should be treated as a rogue state?
Shouldn't we be trying to clean up our own act before pointing fingers?
"According to sources I have spoken to with knowledge of the matter, this Washington Post story does not accurately characterize Apple's position on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act."
There is something extremely fishy and unreliable about this entire story. The details are way too vague and unverified. Sure I can buy the whole "Apple is secretly evil" narrative but Patagonia is a goddamn certified B-Corp and have always ensured ethical sourcing and manufacturing of their products (even the CEO goes to far as to discourage customers to buy new apparel if something can just be repaired). It will take some extraordinarily strong evidence to make me believe they are part of this lobby.
Apple has been quite public about its opposition to forced labour, but only a simpleton would read this article and think Apple's contradicting itself. Given the bill-making process, I should think it's quite likely that the bill has some untenable provisions in it that can't realistically be enacted as quickly as the bill calls for (news flash, Apple can't just drop a supplier on Tuesday and have a new one on Wednesday).
Apple is very likely trying to educate the bill's well-intentioned authors on the realities of the supply chain and how fast you can turn some things around. Apple has had a stellar track record on raising the standard of human rights and environmental concerns amongst its suppliers but it takes time and diplomacy to do so. I haven't perused the bill in question (thanks for the link, Mknelson), but while "watering down" may be an accurate descriptor (or not), the ultimate goal of both the bill's authors and Apple are likely to be towards the same end goal, and they're just quibbling about which route to that goal will be the least disruptive while being the most effective. This is in fact how a lot of bills that target specific companies work.
Comments
"According to sources I have spoken to with knowledge of the matter, this Washington Post story does not accurately characterize Apple's position on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act."
https://twitter.com/BethanyAllenEbr
China reporter
Perhaps it is best to hold off on any condemnations of Apple until the details are better known.
https://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/219024/apples-proposed-changes-to-uighur-forced-labor-prevent-act-leak#latest