PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 11, 2025
Information and Communication Technology Strategy Act
This bill requires the National Telecommunications and Information Administration to report on the information and communication technology supply chain and to develop a strategy to ensure the economic competitiveness of trusted information and communication technology vendors.
The report must include (1) an identification of technology that is critical to U.S. economic competitiveness and the industrial capacity of U.S. vendors and other trusted vendors that produce such technology, (2) an assessment of whether and to what extent there is a dependence by providers of advanced telecommunications capability in the United States on technology that is not trusted, and (3) an identification of federal government actions and resources needed to support the economic competitiveness of trusted vendors and reduce dependence on companies that are not trusted.
People & committees
Rep. Joyce, John [R-PA-13] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 27, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2061 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2061 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2061 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2061 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-03-11 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This proposal would require the Commerce Department to study the companies that supply communications technology and develop a coordinated federal strategy to strengthen trusted suppliers’ competitiveness. The study would examine critical technologies, suppliers’ production capacity, and U.S. telecommunications providers’ reliance on technology classified as not trusted. The strategy would recommend federal actions and resources; these requirements would not themselves establish that suppliers become more competitive.
the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report on the information and communication technology supply chain
(1) identifies— (A) information and communication technology critical to the economic competitiveness of the United States; and (B) the industrial capacity of— (i) United States vendors that produce information and communication technology identified under subparagraph (A); and (ii) trusted information and communication technology vendors that produce information and communication technology identified under subparagraph (A);
(3) assesses whether, and to what extent, there is a dependence by providers of advanced telecommunications capability in the United States on information and communication technology identified under paragraph (1)(A) that is not trusted;
The Secretary shall develop, on the basis of the report required by subsection (a), a whole-of-Government strategy to ensure the economic competitiveness of trusted information and communication technology vendors
(C) a description of— (i) any change to a Federal program, Federal law, or structure of the Federal Government necessary to implement any recommendation under subparagraph (A); and (ii) any additional Federal resource necessary to implement any recommendation under subparagraph (A).
Section 1 would name the proposal the Information and Communication Technology Strategy Act.
1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Information and Communication Technology Strategy Act.
The Commerce Secretary, acting through the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information, would carry out the requirements. Covered technology would include software, components, and materials that enable radio or wire communications; the supply chain would mean all companies producing that technology.
(5) Secretary The term Secretary means the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information.
(2) Information and communication technology The term information and communication technology means a technology (including software), component, or material that enables communications by radio or wire. (3) Information and communication technology supply chain The term information and communication technology supply chain means all of the companies that produce information and communication technology.
Within one year after enactment, the Secretary would have to submit the initial supply-chain report to the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. This deadline depends on enactment, rather than the bill’s introduction date.
Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report on the information and communication technology supply chain
The report would identify communications technologies critical to U.S. economic competitiveness, examine the production capacity of U.S. suppliers and trusted suppliers producing those technologies, and assess those suppliers’ competitiveness.
(1) identifies— (A) information and communication technology critical to the economic competitiveness of the United States; and (B) the industrial capacity of— (i) United States vendors that produce information and communication technology identified under subparagraph (A); and (ii) trusted information and communication technology vendors that produce information and communication technology identified under subparagraph (A); (2) assesses the economic competitiveness of vendors described under paragraph (1)(B);
The report would assess whether U.S. providers of advanced telecommunications capability depend on critical technology classified as not trusted, and how much. It would identify federal actions needed to support trusted suppliers and federal resources needed to reduce providers’ dependence on companies classified as not trusted. The proposal uses an existing statutory definition of advanced telecommunications capability.
(3) assesses whether, and to what extent, there is a dependence by providers of advanced telecommunications capability in the United States on information and communication technology identified under paragraph (1)(A) that is not trusted; (4) identifies— (A) what actions by the Federal Government are needed to support, and bolster the economic competitiveness of, trusted information and communication technology vendors; and (B) what Federal resources are needed to reduce dependence by providers of advanced telecommunications capability in the United States on companies that— (i) produce information and communication technology; and (ii) are not trusted;
(1) Advanced telecommunications capability The term advanced telecommunications capability has the meaning given that term in section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 1302).
The initial report would define work areas and assign responsibilities for a coordinated federal response. The subsequent strategy would also specify work areas and federal agencies’ implementation responsibilities.
(5) defines lines of effort and assigns responsibilities for a whole-of-Government response to ensuring the competitiveness of the information and communication technology supply chain in the United States.
(B) defined lines of effort and responsibilities for Federal agencies to implement the strategy;
Based on the initial report, the Secretary would develop a strategy recommending how federal organization, resources, and legal powers could support trusted suppliers, including trusted U.S. suppliers. It would also recommend how to address barriers to improving those suppliers’ competitiveness through market activity and describe any federal program, legal, organizational, or resource changes needed to carry out the recommendations.
The Secretary shall develop, on the basis of the report required by subsection (a), a whole-of-Government strategy to ensure the economic competitiveness of trusted information and communication technology vendors that includes— (A) recommendations on how— (i) to strengthen the structure, resources, and authorities of the Federal Government to support the economic competitiveness of trusted information and communication technology vendors, including United States vendors that are trusted information and communication technology vendors; and (ii) the Federal Government can address any barriers to a market-based solution for increasing the economic competitiveness of such information and communication technology vendors;
(C) a description of— (i) any change to a Federal program, Federal law, or structure of the Federal Government necessary to implement any recommendation under subparagraph (A); and (ii) any additional Federal resource necessary to implement any recommendation under subparagraph (A).
The Secretary would have to submit the strategy to the same two congressional committees within 180 days after submitting the initial report.
(2) Report Not later than 180 days after the submission of the report required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report containing the strategy developed under paragraph (1).
In preparing the report and strategy, the Secretary would have to consult a cross-section of trusted suppliers, the heads of State and Homeland Security, the Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Federal Communications Commission chair. The Secretary could determine which additional agency heads need to be consulted.
(c) Consultation required In carrying out subsections (a) and (b), the Secretary shall consult with— (1) a cross-section of trusted information and communication technology vendors; and (2) the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, the Chair of the Federal Communications Commission, and any other head of an agency the Secretary determines necessary.
A company or technology would be classified as not trusted if the Secretary determines it poses an unacceptable risk to U.S. national security or the security and safety of U.S. persons, based solely on specified determinations under an existing communications-security law. A company would count as trusted whenever the Secretary has not determined it is not trusted; the definition does not require an affirmative approval. A trusted supplier must also produce covered communications technology.
(4) Not trusted The term not trusted means, with respect to a company or information and communication technology, that the company or information and communication technology is determined by the Secretary to pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States or the security and safety of United States persons based solely on one or more determinations described under paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 2(c) of the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 (47 U.S.C. 1601(c)).
(6) Trusted The term trusted means, with respect to a company, that the Secretary has not determined that the company is not trusted. (7) Trusted information and communication technology vendor The term trusted information and communication technology vendor means a company— (A) that produces information and communication technology; and (B) that is trusted.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated March 27, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Energy and Commerce Committee on March 11, 2025. This snapshot does not establish subsequent legislative action or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-03-27T01:19:55Z. 2025-03-11: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. 2025-03-11: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-11. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish the absence of earmarks in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential exception was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. The strategy’s intended beneficiaries do not alone constitute a targeted-benefit finding. This conclusion is limited to this version.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Mar 27, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI