Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
The bill forbids the Director of the National Science Foundation from awarding grants or other assistance to any person or entity that is affiliated or has a relationship with entities listed in certain U.S. export control and NDAA lists of Chinese Communist military companies and successors. It also bars awards to parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, or entities owned or controlled by those listed entities.
Progressives emphasize academic openness and nondiscrimination risks
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill articulates a direct substantive restriction on NSF grant and assistance authority and ties that restriction to existing statutory/regulatory lists, but it lacks explanatory findings, precise definitions, implementation procedures, fiscal acknowledgment, edge-case treatment, and oversight mechanisms.
The bill forbids the Director of the National Science Foundation from awarding grants or other assistance to any person or entity that is affiliated or has a relationship with entities listed in certain U.S. export control and NDAA lists of Chinese Communist military companies and successors.
It also bars awards to parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, or entities owned or controlled by those listed entities.
The definition of the Export Administration Regulations is noted for reference.
Content is narrow and tied to national security, aiding support, but China-related research restrictions provoke stakeholder resistance and Senate procedural hurdles.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill articulates a direct substantive restriction on NSF grant and assistance authority and ties that restriction to existing statutory/regulatory lists, but it lacks explanatory findings, precise definitions, implementation procedures, fiscal acknowledgment, edge-case treatment, and oversight mechanisms.
Progressives emphasize academic openness and nondiscrimination risks
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize academic openness and nondiscrimination risks
Likely generally supportive of restricting taxpayer-funded research access by entities tied to foreign military programs, while worrying about impacts on academic openness.
Concerned about broad “affiliated” language harming collaborations with benign Chinese institutions and individual researchers.
Will want safeguards for civil liberties, nondiscrimination, and basic research exceptions.
Views the bill as a reasonable national security-focused constraint but wants clearer implementation details.
Sees merit in preventing taxpayer-funded assistance to entities with known military links, but worries about administrative burden and legal risk.
Would seek targeted, narrowly tailored language and oversight mechanisms.
Strongly favors the bill as a necessary step to block Chinese Communist military-linked entities from accessing U.S. research funding.
Sees it as closing loopholes and enforcing national security.
May push for even broader restrictions and rapid enactment.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is narrow and tied to national security, aiding support, but China-related research restrictions provoke stakeholder resistance and Senate procedural hurdles.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize academic openness and nondiscrimination risks
Content is narrow and tied to national security, aiding support, but China-related research restrictions provoke stakeholder resistance and…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill articulates a direct substantive restriction on NSF grant and assistance authority and ties that restriction to existing statutory/regulatory lists, but it lacks expl…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.