As a lifelong conservative and advocate for free markets, I’ve always believed that competition drives innovation and economic growth. Unfortunately, in today’s tech landscape, we’re facing a threat to this fundamental principle from an unexpected source: Microsoft. Once a symbol of American ingenuity, Microsoft now provides email and office services for approximately 85% of the U.S. government, and it acts more like an inefficient, bloated government agency than a private company.
Through restrictive licensing practices and other barriers, the company leverages its dominant position to make it difficult and costly for customers to use alternatives. This overreliance on a single provider has also created significant security vulnerabilities, degraded quality, and harmed data privacy.
The risks were exposed in 2023, when Chinese state-backed hackers breached Microsoft Exchange Online, accessing emails from U.S. government agencies and high-ranking officials, including the U.S. Ambassador to China and the U.S. Secretary of Commerce. A subsequent Department of Homeland Security Cyber Safety Review Board report criticized Microsoft for a “cascade” of “avoidable errors” that led to the breach. The report called for Microsoft to undergo a “rapid cultural change” and become more transparent about security failures.
Microsoft’s extensive operations in China compound these concerns. Microsoft can only operate in the country if they comply with China’s National Cybersecurity Law, which requires foreign technology companies to provide the Chinese government with access to source code and other sensitive information. This situation potentially allows the Chinese Communist Party to access critical U.S. government systems.
As conservatives, we should be alarmed by threats to fair competition and national security. Microsoft’s market dominance appears to have reduced pressure on the company to innovate or improve product security. We need a comprehensive examination of how Microsoft’s licensing practices impact competition, innovation, and security in government IT systems.
This isn’t about punishing success – it’s about ensuring that success stems from innovation and fair competition rather than anti-competitive practices. We should promote an environment where multiple providers can compete on a level playing field, driving innovation and enhancing overall cybersecurity.
The stakes are too high to maintain the status quo. As we face unprecedented challenges from foreign adversaries and cyber threats, we can’t afford to have our digital infrastructure overly reliant on a single provider whose dismal record of failing to protect government systems has recently been laid bare. It’s time to foster a more diverse tech ecosystem that better serves the American people and protects our national interests.
Let’s return to the principles that made America a leader in technology and innovation. Let’s embrace competition, prioritize security, and put the interests of the American people first. Our nation’s technological future depends on it.
Adlai Elison is the Director of Election Hive & Honey Communications
