China AI Power Report Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/6275
Last Updated: June 24, 2026

Sponsored by

Del. Moylan, James C. [R-GU-At Large]

ID: M001219

Follow the money

The bill

China AI Power Report Act

HR. 6275, 119th Congress — read as touching Semiconductors & Hardware.

The sponsor

Del. Moylan, James C. [R-GU-At Large]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$55,750 raised

23 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

66% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 248-250 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 47 - 0.

January 20, 2026

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Another brilliant example of congressional theater, where our esteemed representatives pretend to care about national security while lining their pockets with lobbying cash. The China AI Power Report Act, because what's more pressing than creating a new bureaucracy to "monitor" China's AI capabilities?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's primary objective is to require the Secretary of Commerce to submit an annual report on China's advanced artificial intelligence capabilities. Because, you know, we didn't already have enough redundant reports and committees. This one will surely be different, I'm sure.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill demands a comprehensive report on China's AI capabilities, including assessments of integrated circuits, semiconductor fabrication facilities, and software ecosystems. Oh, and it also requires the Secretary of Commerce to consult with "covered agency heads," because who doesn't love a good game of bureaucratic telephone? The real change here is that it creates another layer of regulatory oversight, which will undoubtedly be exploited by special interest groups.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: China (because we need to keep pretending they're the boogeyman), the Secretary of Commerce (who gets to add another report to their already overflowing inbox), and the various lobbying groups that will inevitably use this bill as a vehicle to push their own agendas. Don't forget the poor souls who will have to actually write these reports, only to have them collect dust on some forgotten shelf in a congressional office.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The impact will be minimal, aside from providing a new avenue for politicians to grandstand about national security while doing nothing meaningful to address it. The real implication is that this bill will further entrench the revolving door between government and industry, as former officials become lobbyists and vice versa. It's a never-ending cycle of corruption, and we're all just along for the ride.

In conclusion, the China AI Power Report Act is a masterclass in legislative theater, designed to create the illusion of action while actually accomplishing nothing. It's a symptom of a deeper disease: the chronic inability of our government to address real problems, instead opting for superficial fixes and PR stunts. So, let's all just take a deep breath and pretend that this bill will somehow make a difference. After all, as the great philosopher once said, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Related Topics

National Security & Intelligence
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Del. Moylan, James C. [R-GU-At Large]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$55,750
21 donors
PACs
$5,000
Organizations
$250
Committees
$2,000
Individuals
$48,500
1
EYE OF THE TIGER PAC
1 transaction
$5,000
1
ROBERT J. TORRES TRUST
1 transaction
$250
1
JOHNSON FOR LOUISIANA
1 transaction
$2,000
1
FLORES, PHILIP J.
2 transactions
$6,000
2
MOYLAN, TROY K.
2 transactions
$5,500
3
MOYLAN, JUDITH A.
1 transaction
$3,300
4
ANDERSON, KIM FELL
1 transaction
$3,300
5
HABECK, TERRY W
1 transaction
$3,300
6
YSRAEL, MICHAEL
1 transaction
$3,300
7
YSRAEL, THERESA
1 transaction
$3,300
8
SGRO, ANTHONY P
1 transaction
$3,000
9
CASTRO, CASEY L.
1 transaction
$2,500
10
FELIX, CHRISTOPHER K.
1 transaction
$2,000
11
ALCORN, LUCY
1 transaction
$2,000
12
SGRO, ANTHONY PETER
1 transaction
$2,000
13
SGRO, MICHAEL
1 transaction
$2,000
14
TAN, JERRY
1 transaction
$2,000
15
ALCORN, LUCY M.
1 transaction
$1,500
16
LEON GUERRERO, PAUL D
1 transaction
$1,500
17
CASSIDY, MICHAEL C.
1 transaction
$1,000
18
CASSIDY, WEST LG
1 transaction
$1,000

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 7 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Vindman, Eugene Simon [D-VA-7]

ID: V000138

Top Contributors

10

1
LUX FOR VIRGINIA
OrganizationLADYSMITH, VA
$500
Mar 29, 2024
2
LUX FOR VIRGINIA
OrganizationLADYSMITH, VA
$500
Mar 31, 2024
3
FORSTER-BURKE, DIANE
NOT EMPLOYEDNOT EMPLOYED
IndividualCOTTONWOOD HEIGHTS, UT
$4,000
Apr 20, 2024
4
FORSTER-BURKE, DIANE
IndividualCOTTONWOOD HEIGHTS, UT
$4,000
May 5, 2024
5
VON STEIN, THOMSON
IndividualROCKVILLE, MD
$3,500
Aug 7, 2024
6
HULL, MEGAN
SELFACTIVIST
IndividualWASHINGTON, DC
$3,300
Nov 2, 2024
7
KAISER, GEORGE
GBK CORPORATIONEXECUTIVE
IndividualTULSA, OK
$3,300
Oct 25, 2024
8
PARSONS, KATHLEEN
NOT EMPLOYEDNOT EMPLOYED
IndividualPOTOMAC, MD
$3,300
Oct 18, 2024
9
STAPLE, HARISE
SELFMD
IndividualLOS ALTOS, CA
$3,300
Oct 18, 2024
10
HOLMES, LAURA
SELFREAL ESTATE INVESTOR
IndividualBOCA RATON, FL
$3,300
Oct 22, 2024

Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]

ID: H001058

Top Contributors

10

1
POKAGON BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationDOWAGIAC, MI
$3,300
Dec 11, 2023
2
THALOP LLC
OrganizationINDIANAPOLIS, IN
$1,000
Aug 29, 2024
3
BARREL DOG, LLC
OrganizationHOLLAND, MI
$1,000
Sep 1, 2024
4
NOAH HOMES LLC
OrganizationINDIANAPOLIS, IN
$1,000
Sep 30, 2024
5
THALOP LLC
OrganizationINDIANAPOLIS, IN
$1,000
Sep 30, 2024
6
B&B DAIRY
OrganizationPLAINVIEW, TX
$500
Jul 28, 2024
7
B&B DAIRY
OrganizationPLAINVIEW, TX
$500
Sep 5, 2024
8
STRAIGHT LINE RED ANGUS
OrganizationBANGOR, MI
$250
Jul 23, 2024
9
VAN ANDEL, AMY
THE STEVE AND AMY VAN ANDEL FOUNDATIONEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
IndividualADA, MI
$75,000
Mar 29, 2024
10
VAN ANDEL, STEPHEN
AMWAYCHAIRMAN
IndividualADA, MI
$75,000
Mar 29, 2024

Rep. Shreve, Jefferson [R-IN-6]

ID: S001229

Top Contributors

10

1
SASSO, APRIL
HOMEMAKERHOMEMAKER
IndividualCARMEL, IN
$6,600
Oct 30, 2024
2
PONDER, JACQUELINE
BOWMAN FAMILY HOLDINGSLAWYER
IndividualGREENWOOD, IN
$3,437
Oct 29, 2024
3
KING, CHRISTOPHER M.
RUNNEBOHM CONSTRUCTION, INC.OWNER
IndividualSHELBYVILLE, IN
$3,300
Jun 7, 2024
4
CALDWELL, JORDAN
CALDWELL'S INC.EXECUTIVE
IndividualSHELBYVILLE, IN
$3,300
Oct 20, 2024
5
DOPPELT, BRIAN
BAINBRIDGE COMPANIESEXECUTIVE
IndividualBOCA RATON, FL
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
6
KING, KYLIE A.
HOMEMAKERHOMEMAKER
IndividualSHELBYVILLE, IN
$3,300
Oct 20, 2024
7
SASSO, RICK C.
INDIANA SPINE GROUPPHYSICIAN
IndividualCARMEL, IN
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
8
SCHUMACHER, AMY MAE
THE HERITAGE GROUPCEO
IndividualCARMEL, IN
$3,300
Oct 22, 2024
9
MCALLISTER, CHRIS
TARBERT PROPERTIES LPPARTNER
IndividualINDIANAPOLIS, IN
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
10
ZINK, JAMES C.
ZINK DISTRIBUTINGCHAIRMAN / CEO
IndividualINDIANAPOLIS, IN
$3,300
Nov 2, 2024

Rep. Tran, Derek [D-CA-45]

ID: T000491

Top Contributors

10

1
FEHER, ERICA
FEHER LAWMARKETING
OrganizationTORRANCE, CA
$3,300
Feb 22, 2024
2
COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY LLP
OrganizationBURLINGAME, CA
$1,700
Jul 7, 2024
3
BRACAMONTES VLASAK, PC
OrganizationOAKLAND, CA
$1,000
Mar 31, 2024
4
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$1,000
Aug 27, 2024
5
SOSNICK, AARON
IndividualRENO, NV
$3,392
Jun 24, 2024
6
ABIR, DANNY
ACTS LAW FIRMATTORNEY
IndividualENCINO, CA
$3,300
Oct 2, 2023
7
ABRON, BYRON
BYRON ABRONATTORNEY
IndividualLOS ANGELES, CA
$3,300
Oct 2, 2023
8
ARDALAN, PEZHMAN CHRISTOPHER
ARDALAN & ASSOCIATES, APLCATTORNEY
IndividualTHOUSAND OAKS, CA
$3,300
Oct 2, 2023
9
AREVALO, KRISTY
MCCUNE LAW GROUPATTORNEY
IndividualUPLAND, CA
$3,300
Oct 1, 2023
10
BABBITT, GREGORY
AUTO FRAUD LEGAL CENTERATTORNEY
IndividualSAN DIEGO, CA
$3,300
Nov 24, 2023

Rep. Lawler, Michael [R-NY-17]

ID: L000599

Top Contributors

10

1
MURTAGH, COSSU, VENDITTI & CASTRO-BLANCO, LLP
OrganizationWHITE PLAINS, NY
$1,000
Feb 24, 2024
2
BATMASIAN, JAMES
INVESTMENTS LIMITEDOWNER
IndividualBOCA RATON, FL
$6,600
Sep 27, 2023
3
BATMASIAN, JAMES
IndividualBOCA RATON, FL
$6,600
Sep 29, 2023
4
AUSTIN, ROBERT
UNAKA CO., INC.BUSINESSMAN
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$6,600
Jul 18, 2024
5
SILVERMAN, JEFFREY
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualSURFSIDE, FL
$6,534
Feb 15, 2024
6
SILVERMAN, JEFFREY
IndividualSURFSIDE, FL
$6,534
Feb 22, 2024
7
SCALA, MARY ELLEN
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualPORT CHESTER, NY
$5,300
Aug 27, 2023
8
DEUTSCH, SHMULEY
SELFPRESIDENT
IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY
$3,900
Jun 24, 2024
9
DEUTSCH, SHMULEY
IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY
$3,900
Jun 25, 2024
10
PERLMUTTER, RAFUEL
GOLDEN TASTECEO
IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY
$3,400
Jun 24, 2024

Rep. Sherman, Brad [D-CA-32]

ID: S000344

Top Contributors

10

1
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$2,000
Oct 30, 2023
2
MS BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS
OrganizationCHOCTAW, MS
$2,000
Oct 5, 2023
3
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$2,000
Sep 30, 2024
4
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$1,300
Oct 21, 2024
5
BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA
$1,000
Oct 28, 2024
6
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$700
Oct 21, 2024
7
AHMED, TAIMOOR
MARKHOR LOGISTICSCEO
IndividualSACRAMENTO, CA
$3,300
Mar 30, 2023
8
GARHWAL, HARI
GARHWAL, CHAN & WILLIAMSCPA
IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA
$3,300
Mar 23, 2023
9
GARHWAL, HARI
GARHWAL, CHAN & WILLIAMSCPA
IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA
$3,300
Mar 23, 2023
10
GARHWAL, SANJEEV
WWMGPHYSICIAN
IndividualSEATTLE, WA
$3,300
Mar 29, 2023

Rep. Lee, Susie [D-NV-3]

ID: L000590

Top Contributors

10

1
EMILY'S LIST
CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD
PACWASHINGTON, DC
$250
Feb 13, 2024
2
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$3,300
Jun 27, 2023
3
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$3,300
Jun 27, 2023
4
TIGUA INDIAN RESERVATION YSLETA DEL SUR PUEBLO
OrganizationEL PASO, TX
$3,000
Dec 31, 2023
5
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,650
Jun 5, 2023
6
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,650
May 9, 2024
7
BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLAS VEGAS, NV
$1,500
Jun 30, 2024
8
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$1,000
Dec 28, 2023
9
RENO SPARKS INDIAN COLONY
OrganizationRENO, NV
$1,000
Jun 21, 2024
10
BRONZE CAFE
OrganizationLAS VEGAS, NV
$550
Mar 30, 2023

Donor Network - Del. Moylan, James C. [R-GU-At Large]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 41 nodes and 38 connections (23 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $99,587

Top Donors - Del. Moylan, James C. [R-GU-At Large]

Showing top 21 donors by contribution amount

1 PAC1 Org1 Committee18 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 harmed.

  • Section 3(b)(1)-(4) requires detailed reporting on Chinese semiconductor design, fabrication, equipment, and EDA software, which could inform future export controls or restrictions that would negatively impact the semiconductor industry's ability to operate in or with China.

  • Section 3(b)(6)-(10) mandates assessment of Chinese AI models, compute infrastructure, and data center capabilities, which could lead to regulatory scrutiny or limitations on AI/cloud services involving Chinese technology, affecting AI & cloud infrastructure providers.

  • Big Tech Platformsconfidence 0.80

    Section 3(b)(11) assesses AI-powered applications developed by Chinese entities, including their use in the United States, which could result in restrictions on deployment or use of such platforms, impacting big tech platforms that may rely on or compete with these technologies.

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.

Introduction

Moderate65.9%
Pages: 248-250

— 216 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Stiffer penalties and mandatory investigations when intelligence leaks are aimed at domestic political targets, l Tighter controls on otherwise lawful intercepts that also collect the communications of domestic political figures, l An express prohibition on politically motivated use of intelligence authorities, and l Reforms to improve the accountability of the Justice Department and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. To keep intelligence credentials from being used for partisan purposes, former high-ranking intelligence officials who retain a clearance should remain subject to the Hatch Act after they leave government to deter them from tying their political stands or activism to their continuing privilege of access to classified government information. The IC should be prohibited from monitoring so-called domestic disinformation. Such activity can easily slip into suppression of an opposition party’s speech, is corrosive of First Amendment protections, and raises questions about impartiality when the IC chooses not to act. CHINA-FOCUSED CHANGES, REFORMS, AND RESOURCES The term “whole of government” is all too frequently overused, but in responding to the generational threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party, that is exactly the approach that our national security apparatus should adopt. CIA Director William Burns has formally established a China Mission Center focused on these efforts, but it can be successful only if it is given the necessary personnel, cross-community collaboration, and resources. That is uncertain at this point, and just how seriously the organization is taking the staffing of the center is unclear. A critical strategic question for an incoming Administration and IC lead- ers will be: How, when, and with whom do we share our classified intelligence? Understanding when to pass things to liaisons and for what purpose will be vital to outmaneuvering China in the intelligence sphere. Questions for a President will include: l What is our overarching conception of the adversarial relationship and competition? l How does intelligence-sharing fit into that conception? — 217 — Intelligence Community Some Members of Congress have said that intelligence relationships such as the Five Eyes28 should be expanded to include other allies in the Asia–Pacific in, for example, a “Nine Eyes” framework. This fails to take into account the fact that any blanket expansion would necessarily involve protecting the sources and methods of a larger and quite possibly more diverse group of member countries that might or might not have congruent interests. That being said, however, a future conservative President should consider what resources and information-sharing relationships could be included in an ad hoc or quasi-formal intelligence expansion (for example, with the Quad) among nations trying to counter the threat from China. Significant technology, language skills, and financial intelligence resources are needed to counter China’s capabilities.29 The IC was caught flat-footed by the recent discovery of China’s successful test of a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile. No longer can America’s information and technological dominance be assumed. China’s gains and intense focus on emerging technologies have taken it in some areas from being a near-peer competitor to probably being ahead of the United States. China’s centralized government allocates endless resources (sometimes inefficiently) to its strategic “Made in China 2025” and military apparatuses, which combine government, military, and private-sector activities on quantum infor- mation sciences and technologies, artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, biotechnologies, and advanced robotics. The IC must do more than understand these advancements: It must rally non- government and allied partners and inspire unified action to counter them. In addition, to combat China’s economic espionage, authorities and loopholes in the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA)30 will have to be examined and addressed in conjunction with the Attorney General. Many issues within the broader government can be tied back to a more general congressional understanding of the threat due to the compartmentalization of committee jurisdictions and the responsibilities of executive agencies to brief on the nature of the threat. Broader committee jurisdictions should receive additional intelligence from IC agencies as necessary to inform China’s unique and more com- prehensive threat across layers of the U.S. government bureaucracy and economy. Former DNI John Ratcliffe increased the intelligence budget as it related to China by 20 percent. “When people ask me why I did that,” he explained in an interview, “I say, ‘Because no one would let me increase it by 40%.’ I had an $85 billion combined annual budget for both the national intelligence program and military intelligence program. My perspective was, ‘Whatever we’re spending on countering China, it isn’t enough.’”31 From an intelligence standpoint, the need to understand Chinese motivations, capabilities, and intent will be of paramount importance to a future conservative President. It is therefore also of paramount importance that the “whole of government” be rowing together.

Introduction

Moderate65.1%
Pages: 254-256

— 221 — Intelligence Community influence and the FBI’s warnings about continued efforts through the 2022 mid- terms highlight the folly of undue certainty without consideration of alternatives. On election influence and other controversial issues, such as the origin of COVID-19, analysts at the most powerful intelligence agencies have increasingly tended to use the leeway they have been given to insert their political views into their work in order to influence (if possibly even control) the analytic process. They do this in ways that attempt to squash dissent and impair the creation of a culture in which entrenched views are challenged and unpopular analytical lines can sur- vive or not according to their merits. To help the United States and its leaders to outcompete China across mul- tifaceted societal, economic, military, and technological threats, the IC’s capability to conduct strategic intelligence analysis that is relevant to policymak- ers in both parties must be rebuilt and strengthened. Because Beijing may be a peer or even exceed U.S. capabilities in some areas, the post-9/11 analytic focus on quick-turnaround secrets is not good enough. Strategic planning—informed by intelligence—must take place for the United States to stay ahead of whatever new threats China may pose. An incoming conservative President will have the opportunity to signal the demand for such strategic products and prioritize their production through communications to intelligence leaders and formal mechanisms such as shifting priorities within the National Intelligence Priority Framework and structuring the President’s Daily Brief. The incoming DNI should also emphasize implementing the recommendations in the Ombudsman’s report, especially regarding objectiv- ity, the inclusion of dissenting viewpoints, and more serious efforts to hold senior leaders accountable for backchannel attempts to change or suppress analytic views. Accounting for the long history of intelligence failures and surprises, an incom- ing conservative President must appreciate the ambiguity, complexity, limits, and assumptions inherent in intelligence assessments. Intelligence often deals with the human dimension in complex decision systems within a foreign country or organi- zation, and this makes consistently accurate predictions difficult if not impossible to develop. Seeing something and understanding what you are seeing are two dif- ferent things, so a President should consistently and patiently press the IC about its potential biases, assumptions, methodology, and sourcing. With regard to election-threat analysis and politically controversial topics, agency leaders should take seriously the Ombudsman’s admonition that we need to maintain tradecraft standards across all countries and topics by ensuring that equitable standards apply across all foreign threat actors. Analysis should be put forward without regard to the domestic political ramifications of intelligence conclusions. “Obligation to Share” and Real-Time Auditing Capability. The fed- eral government has made admirable progress in recent years by being more — 222 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise forward-leaning in sharing cyber threat intelligence with private-sector partners and the public, emphasizing that the protective nature of such information is of value only if put into the right hands at the right time. Since critical infrastructure and services are overwhelmingly owned, managed, and defended by the private sector in the United States, there has been an increasing emphasis on declassify- ing intelligence and sharing actionable information with private-sector partners, often through industry-specific Information Sharing and Analysis Centers (ISACs); regional meetings of government and private-sector experts called InfraGard, run by the FBI; direct public notification from the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and (increasingly) the NSA; and more discreet one-on-one engagements led by the collecting agencies. These programs properly recognize the private sector’s role in providing cyber- security for Americans; in practice, however, the intelligence shared by the U.S. government through these venues is too often already known or no longer relevant by the time it makes its way through the downgrade process for sharing. In addition, government-shared information often needs to take advantage of the opportunity to provide contexts, such as attribution, trends, and size of the observed cyber problem. As warranted, additional context should be provided to the private sector as a matter of routine. To continue improving the U.S. government’s ability to defend the country’s most vital networks, the IC must adopt an “obligation to share” policy process, including the capacity for “write to release” intelligence products whereby newly discovered technical indicators, targeting, and other intelligence relevant to cyber defense are automatically provided either to the public or to targeted entities within 48 hours of their collection—which is how counterterrorism intel- ligence has been managed for years when it comes to a “duty to warn.” Under this policy, agency heads should still have the flexibility to withhold intelligence for operational or counterintelligence reasons but would need to report regularly to Congress on the number of and justification for exceptions. This policy would make sharing intelligence and defending networks the default, as it already is in the rest of the cybersecurity community outside the IC, to improve the quantity, relevance, and timeliness of defensive information while ensuring accountability for top leaders when they must withhold this information. One of the most significant challenges within the IC is presented by the need to share information promptly among the 18 elements of the intelligence enterprise. The only long-term solution to the understandable tension between the need to share information and the need to protect intelligence sources and methods is a robust real-time auditing capability that electronically flags unauthorized access. Under an identity management system with real-time audit, even the most sensi- tive information acquired by America’s intelligence agencies can be shared, and the access to and use of that information are appropriately monitored. Establishing

Introduction

Moderate65.1%
Pages: 254-256

— 221 — Intelligence Community influence and the FBI’s warnings about continued efforts through the 2022 mid- terms highlight the folly of undue certainty without consideration of alternatives. On election influence and other controversial issues, such as the origin of COVID-19, analysts at the most powerful intelligence agencies have increasingly tended to use the leeway they have been given to insert their political views into their work in order to influence (if possibly even control) the analytic process. They do this in ways that attempt to squash dissent and impair the creation of a culture in which entrenched views are challenged and unpopular analytical lines can sur- vive or not according to their merits. To help the United States and its leaders to outcompete China across mul- tifaceted societal, economic, military, and technological threats, the IC’s capability to conduct strategic intelligence analysis that is relevant to policymak- ers in both parties must be rebuilt and strengthened. Because Beijing may be a peer or even exceed U.S. capabilities in some areas, the post-9/11 analytic focus on quick-turnaround secrets is not good enough. Strategic planning—informed by intelligence—must take place for the United States to stay ahead of whatever new threats China may pose. An incoming conservative President will have the opportunity to signal the demand for such strategic products and prioritize their production through communications to intelligence leaders and formal mechanisms such as shifting priorities within the National Intelligence Priority Framework and structuring the President’s Daily Brief. The incoming DNI should also emphasize implementing the recommendations in the Ombudsman’s report, especially regarding objectiv- ity, the inclusion of dissenting viewpoints, and more serious efforts to hold senior leaders accountable for backchannel attempts to change or suppress analytic views. Accounting for the long history of intelligence failures and surprises, an incom- ing conservative President must appreciate the ambiguity, complexity, limits, and assumptions inherent in intelligence assessments. Intelligence often deals with the human dimension in complex decision systems within a foreign country or organi- zation, and this makes consistently accurate predictions difficult if not impossible to develop. Seeing something and understanding what you are seeing are two dif- ferent things, so a President should consistently and patiently press the IC about its potential biases, assumptions, methodology, and sourcing. With regard to election-threat analysis and politically controversial topics, agency leaders should take seriously the Ombudsman’s admonition that we need to maintain tradecraft standards across all countries and topics by ensuring that equitable standards apply across all foreign threat actors. Analysis should be put forward without regard to the domestic political ramifications of intelligence conclusions. “Obligation to Share” and Real-Time Auditing Capability. The fed- eral government has made admirable progress in recent years by being more

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills