PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 298.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Feb 5, 2018
Made in America Manufacturing Communities Act of 2017
(Sec. 3) This bill requires the Department of Commerce to establish a Manufacturing Community Support Program to improve the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing by: (1) designating consortiums as manufacturing communities, and (2) authorizing federal agencies electing to participate in the program to provide such communities preferential consideration in awarding financial and technical assistance.
A consortium, to be eligible for such designation and assistance, must:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
represent a region that is large enough to contain critical elements of the key technologies or supply chain prioritized by the consortium and small enough to enable close collaboration among the consortium's members;
include at least one institution of higher education, a private sector entity, and a government entity; and
have a lead applicant that is a district organization, an Indian tribe, a state or political subdivision of a state, an institution of higher education, a nonprofit organization or association with an application supported by a state, a political subdivision of a state, or a native community.
Commerce shall make such designations for a two-year period, and may renew a designation for additional two-year periods, based on specified criteria.
Recipients may use such financial or technical assistance to support investments in ecosystems that will improve the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing, including:
infrastructure;
access to capital;
promotion of exports and foreign direct investment;
equipment or facility upgrades;
workforce training, retraining, or recruitment and retention, including that of women and underrepresented minorities;
energy or process efficiency;
business incubators;
site preparation;
advanced research;
supply chain development; and
small business assistance.
People & committees
Sen. Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 298.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator Thune with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 115-204.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator Thune with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 115-204.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Introduced in Senate
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 S.701 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.701 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.701 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.701 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.