Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 87.
The bill directs the Secretary of Commerce, through the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information, to study national security risks and cybersecurity vulnerabilities posed by consumer routers, modems, and modem-router combo devices. The study focuses on devices designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied by persons owned, controlled, or subject to influence of a "covered country" as defined in 10 U.S.C. 4872.
Progressive requests transparency and consumer cost mitigation
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise study mandate that clearly identifies the subject matter, responsible official, and reporting deadline, but it provides limited operational detail.
The bill directs the Secretary of Commerce, through the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information, to study national security risks and cybersecurity vulnerabilities posed by consumer routers, modems, and modem-router combo devices.
The study focuses on devices designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied by persons owned, controlled, or subject to influence of a "covered country" as defined in 10 U.S.C. 4872.
The Secretary must report the study results to the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee within one year of enactment.
Modest, nonregulatory study with clear deadline and national-security framing tends to be acceptable to both sides; funding or amendments are main risks.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise study mandate that clearly identifies the subject matter, responsible official, and reporting deadline, but it provides limited operational detail.
Progressive requests transparency and consumer cost mitigation
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressive requests transparency and consumer cost mitigation
Likely supportive of a focused study that addresses supply-chain and privacy risks, while wanting safeguards for civil liberties and consumer costs.
Concerned the study could lead to blunt trade or racialized policies without transparency and mitigation for affected consumers and communities.
Likely favors the bill as a prudent, evidence-seeking step on national security and cybersecurity.
Wants clarity on scope, interagency coordination, costs, and a clear path from study to policy decisions to avoid delay or mission creep.
Likely strongly supportive, viewing the study as a necessary step to expose and remediate foreign-influenced devices that threaten national security.
May push for quicker action and stronger follow-on measures, including removal or bans of risky vendors.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Modest, nonregulatory study with clear deadline and national-security framing tends to be acceptable to both sides; funding or amendments are main risks.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressive requests transparency and consumer cost mitigation
Modest, nonregulatory study with clear deadline and national-security framing tends to be acceptable to both sides; funding or amendments a…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise study mandate that clearly identifies the subject matter, responsible official, and reporting deadline, but it provides limited operational detail.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.