S. 137 (119th)Bill Overview

FIND Act

Government Operations and Politics|Firearms and explosivesGovernment Operations and Politics
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Jan 16, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

The bill (Firearm Industry Non-Discrimination Act) adds section 4715 to title 41, prohibiting executive agencies from entering procurement contracts with entities that have policies or practices that "discriminate" against defined firearm or ammunition industries. Prime contractors must certify they and large first-tier subcontractors have no such discriminatory policies and will not adopt them during the contract; structuring tiers to evade the rule is banned.

Why people may split

Whether federal procurement should block private corporate choices on firearm ties

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear substantive prohibition and provides concrete contractual mechanisms and definitions, but it omits several implementation, fiscal, and oversight details that are typically needed to operationalize a government-wide procurement prohibition.

The bill (Firearm Industry Non-Discrimination Act) adds section 4715 to title 41, prohibiting executive agencies from entering procurement contracts with entities that have policies or practices that "discriminate" against defined firearm or ammunition industries.

Prime contractors must certify they and large first-tier subcontractors have no such discriminatory policies and will not adopt them during the contract; structuring tiers to evade the rule is banned.

Violations trigger contract termination for default and initiation of suspension or debarment proceedings; sole-source contracts are excepted. "Discriminate," "firearm entity," and related terms are defined in the statute, and the rule applies to contracts awarded after enactment.

Passage35/100

Administrative scope helps narrow appeal, but high controversy over firearms and corporate-policy limits reduces bipartisan support.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear substantive prohibition and provides concrete contractual mechanisms and definitions, but it omits several implementation, fiscal, and oversight details that are typically needed to operationalize a government-wide procurement prohibition.

Contention70/100

Whether federal procurement should block private corporate choices on firearm ties

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Federal agenciesFederal agencies

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Federal agenciesProtects firearm manufacturers, dealers, and ammunition sellers from exclusion by federal contractors.
  • Potential benefitMay preserve jobs in firearm and ammunition supply chains by maintaining market access.
  • Federal agenciesReduces risk of private-sector boycotts affecting federally connected business partners.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesLimits agency discretion to set contractor standards related to corporate policies or risk management.
  • Potential burdenAdds compliance and certification requirements for contractors and subcontractors, increasing administrative burden.
  • Potential burdenMay compel contractors to retain or do business with entities contrary to private company policies.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Whether federal procurement should block private corporate choices on firearm ties
Progressive15%

Likely opposed.

The persona views the bill as using federal procurement to limit private-sector and institutional decisions about engagement with the firearm industry.

They worry it constrains corporate responsibility, public-safety-oriented policies, and could blunt efforts to reduce gun violence.

Likely resistant
Centrist55%

Mixed view.

The persona recognizes protecting lawful businesses from arbitrary exclusion, but is concerned about vague terms, procurement complexity, and potential unintended consequences.

They would seek clearer definitions and targeted limits to reduce compliance and legal risks.

Split reaction
Conservative90%

Supportive.

The persona views the bill as necessary to stop federal procurement from enabling de facto boycotts of lawful firearm and ammunition businesses.

They see it as protecting commerce, free-market participation, and constituents employed in the firearms supply chain.

Leans supportive
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood35/100

Administrative scope helps narrow appeal, but high controversy over firearms and corporate-policy limits reduces bipartisan support.

Scope and complexity
52%
Scopemoderate
52%
Complexitymedium
Why this could stall
  • No CBO or cost estimate included
  • Potential litigation over compelled speech or contractor rights
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Whether federal procurement should block private corporate choices on firearm ties

Administrative scope helps narrow appeal, but high controversy over firearms and corporate-policy limits reduces bipartisan support.

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear substantive prohibition and provides concrete contractual mechanisms and definitions, but it omits several implementation, fiscal, and oversight d…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis