PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · May 15, 2024
Promoting Resilient Supply Chains Act of 2023
This bill requires the Industry and Analysis office of the International Trade Administration of the Department of Commerce to monitor and respond to disruptions in critical industries and supply chains.
Specifically, the office must establish a critical supply chain resiliency program to (1) map, monitor, and model critical supply chains; (2) identify high-priority supply chain gaps and vulnerabilities in critical industries; (3) identify and evaluate the effect of potential supply chain disruptions on U.S. economic security; and (4) collaborate with other governmental bodies and key international partners to identify opportunities to reduce supply chain gaps and vulnerabilities. The office also must establish a unified coordination group to oversee the interagency response to supply chain shocks and the office must designate critical industries, critical supply chains, and critical goods.
Additionally, the office must facilitate the development of guidelines and best practices to reduce the risk of critical supply chain disruption.
The bill includes various program evaluation and reporting requirements.
People & committees
Rep. Bucshon, Larry [R-IN-8] · R–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 390 - 19 (Roll no. 211). (text: 5/14/2024 CR H3035-3039)
House roll call 211 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 390 - 19 (Roll no. 211). (text: 5/14/2024 CR H3035-3039)
House roll call 211 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3257-3258)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6571.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3035-3040)
Mr. Bilirakis moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 392.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 118-473.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 118-473.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 44 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 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.6571 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.6571 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.6571 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.6571 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.