PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 6, 2025
Decoupling from Foreign Adversarial Battery Dependence Act
This bill prohibits the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from using appropriated funds to procure a battery produced by certain entities, particularly six specific companies owned and operated in China. This prohibition begins on October 1, 2027.
The bill allows DHS to waive the prohibition if DHS assesses in the affirmative that (1) the batteries to be procured do not pose a risk to U.S. national security, data, or infrastructure; and (2) there is no available alternative to procure batteries that are of similar or better cost and quality and that are produced by an entity not specified in this bill.
DHS may also waive the prohibition upon a determination that the batteries to be procured are for the sole purpose of research, evaluation, training, testing, or analysis.
The bill requires DHS to notify Congress within 15 days after granting a waiver under this bill.
The bill also requires DHS to report to Congress on the anticipated impacts associated with carrying out this bill, including with respect to specified agencies of DHS.
People & committees
Sen. Scott, Rick [R-FL] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 6, 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.450 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.450 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.450 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.450 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.