It will be possible to get one of the most powerful shots for enacting antitrust legislation in transformative technology on Thursday.

The Senate Judiciary Committee set to deliberateThe following are the American Innovation and Choice Online Actwhich some expertsConsider the following to be the best chance for the legislation to become law: a broad array of reforms; major industry change. In the schedule of the committee is also a list of the markups. Open App Markets ActA bipartisan legislation promoting competition.

These bills have a lot in common. They both prevent dominant tech platforms blocking from favoring certain products and services over other businesses that depend on their marketplaces. However, the Open App Markets Act will have little effect on those who run apps stores like Apple. Apple GoogleThe American Innovation and Choice Online Act is more comprehensive and could potentially prevent a company from like AmazonA private label product can be given a higher ranking than any third-party competitor in the search engine results page.

Apple and Google might also be prohibited from ranking their apps higher than their competitors in mobile app stores. The same would hold true for Google’s general search engine.

American Innovation and Choice Online Act was led by Senators. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), respectively, were the chairs of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee of Antitrust and the ranking member of that full committee. They found a sweet spot in the legislative landscape.

It’s both a radical and broad bill, which could have a significant impact on the operation of major consumer services. On the other, it has a strong co-sponsor and long list bipartisan backers that give it a good chance to pass.

It doesn’t necessarily mean that it will be passed. Although the fight against the tech sector has been a bipartisan favorite for many years, the two sides continue to disagree over several details of how best to go about it. The promise of antitrust reform is greater than that of content moderation and other topics. forming consensusHowever, members from both sides still have doubts.

The fact that it has been sponsored by members of the committee indicates that it will most likely be passed to the markup phase with substantial support.

Similar bill already passed in the House last summer. Although the Senate version is less comprehensive than the original, this gives progressives the opportunity to finally reach the Senate floor.

Although the White House is not expected to comment on the bill in any official capacity, it has supported measures that reduce concentration of power as well as competition reform and has supported its general push for such policies. Top White House officials will be present on Wednesday met with a group of companies including Big Tech critics Sonos YelpListen to their worries about the barriers that prevent them from competing in the technology industry.

Amazon, Apple, and Google will all be available Tuesday at 8:00 a.m. addressed concerns in the billThrough letters to the public or committee blog posts. Apple and Google raised concerns that they would have to make risky decisions with their users’ data. They might share it with other services, or let users download unvetted applications. Klobuchar’s office has denied these claims.

Google and Amazon stressed that this bill may have negative implications for small businesses and consumers that depend on their services. Amazon, for example, wrote that it would “make it difficult for us to guarantee one or two-day shipping for those small businesses’ products — key benefits of Amazon Prime for sellers and customers alike.” Klobuchar previously stated that the bill wouldn’t force Amazon to cease offering Prime benefits.

CNBC saw a draft of the amendment from the manager to the bill before it was marked up and also shared in part by an industry group on social mediaRecapitated some changes made to the original text in order to better address the privacy concerns of companies. The bill is not intended to force companies to reveal information to others that could pose a threat to national security. To avoid being held liable under the statute, companies can use narrowly-tailored security and privacy protections in affirmative defense.

CNBC was contacted by a senior Democratic adviser who said that the original bill contained such security and privacy protections, however the amended version is intended to clarify this.

Despite this, industry representatives said that the proposed changes did not address their concerns.

Adam Kovacevich (tech-backed left of centre Chamber of Progress) wrote the following: TwitterWhile the bills’ problematic elements are still intact, the amendments could create additional problems.

He pointed out a clause in the proposed amended bill that said it wouldn’t impose liability to companies for charging subscription services. But he suggested that this may be an opportunity to encourage platforms to pay subscription fees rather than for free services, to avoid any liability.

“These changes concede every concern that has been raised about the bill — and solve none of them,” Google Chief Legal Officer Kent Walker wrote in a statement. The amendment, for example acknowledges security weaknesses in the bill and states that platforms will not be required to share data with U.S. sanctioned companies. It does not mention any provisions which could lead to data sharing with foreign or other criminal actors.

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

WATCH: How US antitrust law works, and what it means for Big Tech