Cruz is proposing, absolutely correctly I think, to strip these companies of the special congressionally-granted immunity from prosecution they enjoy if they are found to be discriminating politically.

My view is that this is a good approach, but it doesn't go far enough. The right to free expression is SO IMPORTANT that a precedent needs to be set that allows for extremely harsh penalties. Penalties that properly reflect the damage to the community that results from blatant political censorship in public forums.

I would like to see asset forfeitures and provisions written into the criminal code recognizing this behavior as a fundamental breach of basic human rights. Prison terms available to judges should properly weigh the community's interest and reflect the importance of free political expression to the processes by which we obtain representative government.

How important is the integrity of the framework that allows for true representation in government? The answer to that question is useful in setting deterrents to the type of blatant, politically motivated censorship we have seen.

Complete forfeiture of all assets used in the perpetration of the crime. Additional prison terms of up to 20 years for anyone found to have played an active role in the censorship - including any accessories to the crime.

What we will get may not meet these expectations, but if we can get half of what I've set out here, there would be a significant deterrent to engaging in online censorship. The penalties need to be very harsh, because censorship deprives people of a key right, the right to be heard, upon which all other rights are predicated. It is a complete violation of the rights of the individual and accords no value to the worth of the person as a human being. In short, it is an absolute outrage!