Critical Infrastructure Manufacturing Feasibility Act
Summary
What This Bill Does
The Critical Infrastructure Manufacturing Feasibility Act requires the Commerce Secretary to conduct a one-year study of domestic manufacturing opportunities in critical infrastructure supply chains. For each of the 16 critical infrastructure sectors identified in Presidential Policy Directive 21, Commerce must identify high-demand products imported because of U.S. manufacturing, material, or supply-chain constraints. The study must analyze the costs and benefits of manufacturing those products in the United States, including effects on jobs, employment rates, labor conditions, and product costs. It must identify which products could feasibly be manufactured domestically and analyze feasibility and impediments for making them in rural areas, industrial parks, or industrial parks located in rural areas. Within 18 months after enactment, Commerce must report the study results and recommendations to Congress and publish the report on the Commerce website. The bill expressly does not give Commerce authority to compel any person to provide information for the study.
Who Benefits and How
Domestic manufacturers, rural economic-development agencies, industrial park operators, critical infrastructure owners, supply-chain planners, manufacturing workers, state commerce agencies, congressional manufacturing committees, Commerce Department analysts, and investors in reshoring projects benefit from a public map of imported high-demand critical infrastructure products, supply constraints, domestic feasibility, rural-site opportunities, costs, job effects, and product-cost tradeoffs.
Who Bears the Burden and How
The Department of Commerce, Commerce supply-chain analysts, sector-risk specialists, manufacturing economists, rural-development analysts, industrial-park planners, critical infrastructure sector coordinators, report writers, and congressional review staff must conduct the study, collect voluntary information, analyze costs and benefits, identify impediments, write recommendations, publish the report, and do the work without compelled-disclosure authority.
Key Provisions
- Requires Commerce to study imported high-demand products in all 16 PPD-21 critical infrastructure sectors.
- Requires analysis of U.S. manufacturing costs, benefits, jobs, employment rates, labor conditions, and product costs.
- Requires identification of products feasibly manufacturable in the United States.
- Requires feasibility analysis for rural areas, industrial parks, and rural industrial parks.
- Requires an 18-month congressional and public report with domestic manufacturing recommendations.
- Bars construing the bill as authority for Commerce to compel information.
Evidence Chain:
This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.
At a Glance
What This Bill Does
Requires Commerce to study high-demand products imported because of U.S. manufacturing, material, or supply-chain constraints in each of the 16 PPD-21 critical infrastructure sectors, analyze costs and benefits of U.S. manufacturing, assess rural-area and industrial-park feasibility, report recommendations to Congress within 18 months, publish the report, and avoid any new authority to compel private information.
Key Policy Areas
Manufacturing, Supply Chain, Critical Infrastructure
Primary Purpose
Requires Commerce to study high-demand products imported because of U.S. manufacturing, material, or supply-chain constraints in each of the 16 PPD-21 critical infrastructure sectors, analyze costs and benefits of U.S. manufacturing, assess rural-area and industrial-park feasibility, report recommendations to Congress within 18 months, publish the report, and avoid any new authority to compel private information.
Policy Domains
Substantive provisions
Identified Gains
- Domestic manufacturers
- Rural economic-development agencies
- Industrial park operators
- Critical infrastructure owners
- Supply-chain planners
- Manufacturing workers
- State commerce agencies
- Congressional manufacturing committees
Identified Costs
- Department of Commerce
- Commerce supply-chain analysts
- Sector-risk specialists
- Manufacturing economists
- Rural-development analysts
- Industrial-park planners
- Critical infrastructure sector coordinators
- Report writers
Sponsors
Legislative Progress
Passed HouseReceived; read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, …
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to …
Passed House (inferred from eh version)
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1651-1652)
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without …
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill …
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules …
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate …
Mr. Bilirakis moved to suspend the rules and pass the …
Additional sponsor: Mrs. Houchin
Stakeholder Effects
cui bono?How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.
Commerce supply-chain analysts, Congressional manufacturing committees, Department of Commerce
Positive-direction: Congressional manufacturing committees
Negative-direction: Commerce supply-chain analysts, Department of Commerce
Bill Structure & Actor Mappings
Who is "The Secretary" in each section?
- "secretary"
- → Secretary of Commerce
We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.
Learn more about our methodology