Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Requires the Secretary of Commerce (via the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information) to produce a report identifying critical information and communication technology (ICT), assess industrial capacity and dependence on "not trusted" vendors, and then develop a whole-of-Government strategy to bolster the economic competitiveness of "trusted" ICT vendors. The bill sets timelines (report within 1 year, strategy within 180 days of the report), requires interagency and industry consultation, and defines key terms including "trusted" and "not trusted" linked to the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act.
Role of federal industrial policy versus market solutions
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-structured reporting and strategy mandate that clearly assigns responsibility, timelines, and substantive report elements intended to produce a whole-of-Government ICT competitiveness strategy.
Requires the Secretary of Commerce (via the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information) to produce a report identifying critical information and communication technology (ICT), assess industrial capacity and dependence on "not trusted" vendors, and then develop a whole-of-Government strategy to bolster the economic competitiveness of "trusted" ICT vendors.
The bill sets timelines (report within 1 year, strategy within 180 days of the report), requires interagency and industry consultation, and defines key terms including "trusted" and "not trusted" linked to the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act.
Modest likelihood: bill is narrow, technocratic, and low‑cost, favoring passage, but Senate procedure and any geopolitical pushback raise barriers.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-structured reporting and strategy mandate that clearly assigns responsibility, timelines, and substantive report elements intended to produce a whole-of-Government ICT competitiveness strategy. It integrates relevant statutory definitions and requires interagency and industry consultation.
Role of federal industrial policy versus market solutions
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Role of federal industrial policy versus market solutions
Likely supportive of a coordinated federal strategy to strengthen domestic, trusted ICT suppliers and reduce foreign dependence.
Will emphasize safeguards for civil liberties, labor, and environmental standards in any resulting policies, and will watch for protectionist or industry-capture outcomes.
Will view the bill as a practical, bipartisan step to map vulnerabilities and coordinate agencies before pursuing policy.
Supports the study-and-strategy approach but wants clear cost estimates, measurable goals, and care to avoid heavy-handed, unfunded mandates.
Generally favorable due to national-security and supply-chain resilience focus and reducing reliance on untrusted foreign vendors.
Concerned about potential expansion of federal industrial policy, bureaucratic growth, and favoritism toward certain companies.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Modest likelihood: bill is narrow, technocratic, and low‑cost, favoring passage, but Senate procedure and any geopolitical pushback raise barriers.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Role of federal industrial policy versus market solutions
Modest likelihood: bill is narrow, technocratic, and low‑cost, favoring passage, but Senate procedure and any geopolitical pushback raise b…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-structured reporting and strategy mandate that clearly assigns responsibility, timelines, and substantive report elements intended to produce a whole-of-Gov…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.