PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 19, 2003
Defense Production Act Reauthorization of 2003 - (Sec. 2) Amends the Defense Production Act of 1950 to extend its expiration date and authorization of appropriations through FY 2008.
(Sec. 3) Authorizes the President to: (1) take action to correct an industrial resource shortfall for radiation-hardened electronics to the extent that such action does not cause the aggregate outstanding amount of all such actions for industrial resource shortfalls to exceed $200 million; and (2) obtain information in order to perform industry studies assessing capabilities of the U.S. industrial base to support the national defense. Requires a report from the Secretary of Defense to specified congressional committees on the current state of the domestic industrial base for, and Department of Defense requirements, intentions, and plans for, radiation-hardened electronics. (Sec. 4) Defines "critical infrastructure" under such Act as systems and assets, whether physical or cyber-based, so vital to the United States that their degradation or destruction would have a debilitating impact on national security, including national economic security and national public health or safety. (Sec. 6) Directs the Secretary to report to specified congressional committees on the extent to which contracts entered into under such Act during the one-year period after the enactment of this Act have been contracts with minority- and women-owned businesses. (Sec. 7) Requires the Secretary of Commerce, as part of an annual report from the President to specified congressional committees on the impact of offsets on U.S. defense preparedness, industrial competitiveness, employment, and trade, to: (1) detail the number of foreign contracts involving domestic contractors that used offsets or similar arrangements during the preceding five-year period; (2) calculate the values of such contracts and offsets; and (3) describe the impact of international or foreign sales of U.S. defense products and related offsets and arrangements on domestic prime contractors and lower-tier subcontractors during the preceding five-year period. Expresses the policy of Congress that the President shall designate a chairman of an interagency team to consult with foreign nations on limiting the adverse effects of offsets in defense procurement without damaging the U.S. economy, industrial base, or defense production or preparedness. Requires annual interagency team reports to Congress. Directs the interagency team to make recommendations to the President for modifications of any existing or proposed memorandum of understanding between the United States and one or more foreign countries relating to: (1) research, development, or production of defense equipment; or (2) the reciprocal procurement of defense items.
People & committees
Sen. Shelby, Richard C. [R-AL] · R–AL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 108-195.
Became Public Law No: 108-195.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment to the House amendment Agreed to without objection. (text as House agreed to Senate amendment to House amendment: CR H12861)
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment to the House amendment Agreed to without objection.(text as House agreed to Senate amendment to House amendment: CR H12861)
Mr. Ney asked unanimous consent that the House agree to the Senate amendment to the House amendment. (consideration: CR H12861-12862)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Senate concurred in the House amendment with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S15480-15481; text as Senate agreed to House amendment with an amendment: CR S15480-15481)
Resolving differences -- Senate actions: Senate concurred in the House amendment with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S15480-15481; text as Senate agreed to House amendment with an amendment: CR S15480-15481)
Message on House action received in Senate and at desk: House amendment to Senate bill.
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 voice vote. (text: CR H9416-9417)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H9416-9417)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 1680.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9416-9418)
Mr. King (NY) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S12206-12208)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 294.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Original measure reported to Senate by Senator Shelby. With written report No. 108-156.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Original measure reported to Senate by Senator Shelby. With written report No. 108-156.
Introduced in Senate
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs ordered to be reported an original measure.
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. 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 S.1680 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 S.1680 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 S.1680 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 S.1680 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.