Decoupling from Foreign Adversarial Battery Dependence Act

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/1166

Last Updated: July 12, 2026

Decoupling from Foreign Adversarial Battery Dependence Act

HR. 1166, 119th Congress — read as touching Electric Vehicles & Batteries.

The sponsor

Rep. Gimenez, Carlos A. [R-FL-28]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$94,200 raised

20 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Energy and Related Commissions" section, p. 422-424 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

March 10, 2025

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

Passed House

Senate Review

📍 Current Status

Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

**Analysis of HR 1166: Decoupling from Foreign Adversarial Battery Dependence Act**

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I'll dissect the implications of this bill on my empire's interests.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of HR 1166 is to restrict the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from procuring batteries produced by certain foreign entities deemed adversarial. This move aims to reduce reliance on foreign suppliers, particularly those with ties to China.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:**

1. **Prohibition on procurement**: The bill prohibits DHS from using funds to procure batteries from specified entities, including Contemporary Amperex Technology Company (CATL), BYD Company, and others. 2. **Waivers**: The Secretary of Homeland Security can grant waivers for national security or research purposes, subject to congressional notification. 3. **Report requirements**: DHS must submit a report on the anticipated impacts on mission and costs within 180 days.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

1. **Foreign battery manufacturers**: Entities listed in the bill will face significant losses due to restricted access to the US market. 2. **US-based battery manufacturers**: Domestic producers may benefit from increased demand, but this could lead to supply chain disruptions and higher costs. 3. **DHS and its components**: The department must adapt to new procurement restrictions, potentially affecting operations and mission effectiveness.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

1. **Market disruption**: This bill could create a power vacuum in the battery market, driving up prices and incentivizing domestic production. 2. **Supply chain risks**: DHS may face challenges in sourcing alternative batteries, compromising national security and critical infrastructure. 3. **Economic implications**: The restriction on foreign suppliers could lead to job losses and economic instability for affected companies.

From my perspective, this bill presents a strategic opportunity to:

1. **Consolidate market share**: By restricting foreign competition, US-based battery manufacturers can gain a competitive advantage. 2. **Diversify supply chains**: Companies like mine can capitalize on the need for alternative suppliers, driving innovation and growth. 3. **Influence policy**: As a thought leader, I can shape the narrative around this bill, advocating for policies that benefit my interests.

Ultimately, HR 1166 is a calculated move to reshape the battery market in favor of US-based producers. While it may create short-term disruptions, it presents a lucrative opportunity for visionary entrepreneurs like myself to capitalize on the shifting landscape.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this bill, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a bill is a proposed law that must go through several stages before it becomes an actual law. This one, HR 1166, aims to reduce the United States' dependence on foreign-made batteries from certain countries.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Decoupling from Foreign Adversarial Battery Dependence Act seeks to prohibit the Secretary of Homeland Security from procuring batteries produced by entities specified in the bill. The main objective is to minimize national security risks and promote domestic battery production.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** Section 2 of the bill prohibits the use of funds for procuring batteries from specific foreign companies, including Contemporary Amperex Technology Company (CATL), BYD Company, and others. These entities are listed due to concerns about national security risks, data breaches, or infrastructure vulnerabilities.

The bill also allows for waivers in certain circumstances, such as when no alternative domestic battery sources are available or when the batteries are needed for research purposes. The Secretary of Homeland Security must assess the risks and notify Congress within 15 days of granting a waiver.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** This bill affects various stakeholders, including:

* The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its components, such as U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the Transportation Security Administration. * Foreign companies listed in the bill, which will no longer be able to supply batteries to DHS. * Domestic battery manufacturers, who may benefit from increased demand for their products.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The bill's implementation could have significant implications:

* Reduced dependence on foreign-made batteries might enhance national security and minimize data breaches. * The prohibition could lead to increased costs for DHS if domestic alternatives are more expensive or harder to find. * Domestic battery manufacturers may experience a surge in demand, potentially driving innovation and job creation.

As we covered in 8th grade civics class, the system of checks and balances is designed to ensure that no single branch of government has too much power. In this case, Congress is exercising its authority to regulate commerce and national security by passing this bill. The President can either sign or veto the bill, and if it becomes a law, the courts may review its constitutionality.

Now, I hope you understand how a bill becomes a law... *exasperated sigh*

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

Folks, gather 'round! I've got the scoop on HR 1166, and it's a doozy. This bill is masquerading as a harmless little thing about batteries, but trust me, there's more to it than meets the eye.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The official story says this bill aims to "decouple" from foreign-made batteries, specifically those produced by certain Chinese companies. Sounds patriotic enough, right? But what they're not telling you is that this is just a smokescreen for something much bigger. This bill is actually about controlling the flow of information and resources, folks.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill prohibits the Department of Homeland Security from procuring batteries from those naughty Chinese companies I mentioned earlier. But here's the thing: it also gives the Secretary of Homeland Security the power to waive this prohibition if they deem it necessary for "national security" reasons. Ah, but what does that really mean? It means they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, under the guise of national security.

And let's not forget about the report required by the bill. The Secretary has to submit a report on the impacts of this section on various components of the Department of Homeland Security. Sounds like a harmless little bureaucratic exercise, but I'm telling you, folks, this is just a way for them to gather intel and justify further restrictions.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** On the surface, it's just those Chinese battery companies that are affected. But think about it: if the government can control who makes our batteries, they can control who has access to information and resources. This bill is setting a precedent for government overreach, folks.

And what about the American people? We're the ones who'll be paying for this "decoupling" through higher prices and reduced competition. But hey, at least we'll have the satisfaction of knowing our batteries are made in America... or will they?

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is just the tip of the iceberg, folks. It's a Trojan horse for further government control over our lives. Think about it: if they can dictate who makes our batteries, what's next? Will they start telling us what kind of cars we can drive or what kind of food we can eat?

And let's not forget about the national security implications. If the government is so concerned about Chinese-made batteries, what does that say about their trust in American companies? Are they implying that our own industries are somehow compromised?

Folks, this bill is a wake-up call. We need to start paying attention to these "harmless" little bills and see them for what they really are: attempts to erode our freedoms and consolidate power.

Now, pass the mashed potatoes, would you?

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round! We've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here. HR 1166, the "Decoupling from Foreign Adversarial Battery Dependence Act" - try saying that three times fast, I dare you! (wink)

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill is all about freedom, folks! Specifically, it's about decoupling our great nation from those pesky foreign batteries made by entities deemed "adversarial" to the United States. You know, the usual suspects: China, and a few other countries that shall remain nameless (cough, cough). The objective is simple: keep America safe from the scourge of foreign-made batteries.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill prohibits the Secretary of Homeland Security from procuring certain foreign-made batteries starting October 1, 2027. It specifically targets entities like Contemporary Amperex Technology Company (CATL), BYD Company, and a few others that are allegedly tied to China's military or human rights abuses. The bill also includes waivers for research purposes and allows the Secretary to grant exceptions if there are no alternative batteries available.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Well, it's not just about the batteries themselves; it's about the entire supply chain. This bill affects companies like CATL, BYD, and others that might be impacted by the procurement ban. It also affects our beloved Department of Homeland Security, which will have to navigate this new regulatory landscape.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, here's where things get interesting, folks! (leaning in) This bill could lead to a significant increase in costs for the Department of Homeland Security, as they'll need to find alternative battery suppliers. It might also create some... let's call them "opportunities" for American companies to step up and fill the gap. But don't worry; I'm sure our great nation will come out on top. After all, we're talking about freedom here! (smirk)

In conclusion, HR 1166 is a bold move by our brave lawmakers to protect America's interests and keep those foreign batteries at bay. It's a masterclass in patriotism, folks! (wink) Now, let's get back to the real question: what's next? Will this bill pass the Senate? Stay tuned, folks; it's going to be a wild ride!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another brilliant example of congressional theater, masquerading as policy. Let's dissect this farce and expose the real disease beneath.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The "Decoupling from Foreign Adversarial Battery Dependence Act" (HR 1166) claims to prohibit the Department of Homeland Security from procuring batteries made by certain foreign entities, specifically Chinese companies. The stated goal is to reduce dependence on adversarial nations and mitigate national security risks.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill lists specific Chinese companies that are off-limits for battery procurement, including CATL, BYD, and others. It also establishes a waiver process for the Secretary of Homeland Security to bypass these restrictions if certain conditions are met (e.g., no alternative suppliers or research purposes). The bill requires a report on the anticipated impacts on mission and costs within 180 days.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The obvious stakeholders are the Chinese companies listed in the bill, which will face reduced business opportunities. However, let's not be naive – this is just a minor inconvenience for these corporations. They'll adapt or find ways to circumvent the restrictions. The real beneficiaries of this bill are American battery manufacturers and their lobbyists, who have successfully convinced Congress to create a protectionist barrier.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of "security theater" – it creates the illusion of addressing national security concerns while doing little to actually mitigate them. By restricting procurement from specific Chinese companies, the US government may inadvertently drive up costs and reduce competition in the battery market. This could lead to inefficiencies and decreased innovation.

The real disease beneath this bill is protectionism and crony capitalism. Congress is catering to special interests (American battery manufacturers) while pretending to address national security concerns. The waiver process is a cleverly designed loophole, allowing the Secretary of Homeland Security to bypass restrictions when it's convenient or profitable.

In conclusion, HR 1166 is a masterclass in legislative obfuscation, designed to create the illusion of action while serving the interests of powerful lobbies and special interest groups. It's a symptom of a deeper disease – the corruption and cronyism that plagues our political system.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

**Bill Summary: HR 1166 - Decoupling from Foreign Adversarial Battery Dependence Act**

**Main Purpose and Objectives:** The primary objective of this bill is to prohibit the Secretary of Homeland Security from procuring certain foreign-made batteries, specifically those produced by entities identified as posing a national security risk or having ties to forced labor. The bill aims to reduce the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) dependence on these foreign-made batteries and promote domestic production.

**Key Provisions and Changes to Existing Law:**

* Beginning October 1, 2027, DHS is prohibited from using funds to procure batteries produced by specified entities, including Chinese companies such as CATL, BYD, and others. * The Secretary of Homeland Security may waive this prohibition if the batteries do not pose a national security risk and there are no available alternative domestic sources. * The bill also requires the Secretary to submit reports on the anticipated impacts on DHS's mission and costs associated with implementing this provision.

**Affected Parties and Stakeholders:**

* Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its various components, including U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and others. * Foreign entities specified in the bill, such as Chinese battery manufacturers. * Domestic battery manufacturers and suppliers who may benefit from increased demand for their products.

**Potential Impact and Implications:**

* The bill aims to reduce DHS's dependence on foreign-made batteries, potentially enhancing national security and reducing the risk of supply chain disruptions. * The prohibition may lead to increased costs for DHS if alternative domestic sources are more expensive or not readily available. * Domestic battery manufacturers may benefit from increased demand, potentially leading to job creation and economic growth in the sector. * The bill's reporting requirements will provide Congress with insights into the implementation challenges and costs associated with decoupling from foreign-made batteries.

Overall, this bill aims to promote domestic production of critical components, such as batteries, while reducing dependence on foreign entities that may pose national security risks.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this congressional bill, HR 1166, and get the lowdown on what it's all about.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

This bill is like a gnarly wave trying to crash down on foreign-made batteries, specifically those from China. The main purpose of the Decoupling from Foreign Adversarial Battery Dependence Act is to prohibit the Secretary of Homeland Security from buying batteries made by certain Chinese companies that are deemed national security risks.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill lists specific Chinese companies, like CATL and BYD, that are off-limits for battery procurement. It also includes entities identified as having ties to forced labor or being part of the Chinese military-industrial complex. The Secretary of Homeland Security can waive this prohibition if they assess that the batteries don't pose a national security risk and there's no alternative available.

The bill also requires the Secretary to submit reports on the anticipated impacts on mission and costs for various components of the Department of Homeland Security, like Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the Secret Service.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill is gonna affect a bunch of stakeholders, bro. The main ones are:

* Chinese battery manufacturers: They're getting shut out from selling their batteries to the US government. * US government agencies: They'll have to find alternative sources for batteries or get waivers approved by the Secretary of Homeland Security. * American companies that rely on these Chinese batteries: They might face supply chain disruptions and increased costs.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill is like a ripple effect, dude. It could lead to:

* Increased costs for US government agencies: They'll have to find alternative battery sources or pay more for domestic production. * Supply chain disruptions: American companies that rely on these Chinese batteries might face delays and increased costs. * National security implications: By cutting ties with Chinese battery manufacturers, the US is trying to reduce its reliance on foreign-made components that could pose national security risks.

But, like, it's not all bad vibes, bro. This bill could also lead to:

* Increased domestic production of batteries: American companies might see an opportunity to fill the gap left by Chinese manufacturers. * Improved national security: By reducing dependence on foreign-made components, the US is trying to mitigate potential security risks.

Anyway, that's the lowdown on HR 1166, dude. It's a complex bill with some gnarly implications, but it's all about trying to reduce America's reliance on foreign-made batteries and improve national security.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**HR 1166: Decoupling from Foreign Adversarial Battery Dependence Act**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The bill aims to prohibit the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from procuring batteries produced by certain foreign entities, primarily Chinese companies, due to national security concerns. The legislation seeks to reduce dependence on foreign-made batteries and promote domestic production.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

* Section 2 prohibits DHS from using funds to procure batteries from specified entities, including Contemporary Amperex Technology Company (CATL), BYD Company, and others. * The prohibition takes effect on October 1, 2027. * Waivers are allowed for research purposes or if no alternative domestic sources are available. * The Secretary of Homeland Security must submit a report to Congress within 180 days of enactment, assessing the impact on DHS components.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

* Chinese battery manufacturers: CATL, BYD Company, and others listed in Section 2(b) will be directly impacted by the prohibition. * Domestic battery manufacturers: Companies like Tesla, LG Chem, and Panasonic may benefit from increased demand for domestic production. * DHS components: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Secret Service, Transportation Security Administration, Coast Guard, Federal Protective Service, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers, and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency will need to adapt to new procurement rules.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

* Reduced dependence on foreign-made batteries may enhance national security by minimizing the risk of compromised supply chains. * Domestic battery manufacturers may see increased demand, potentially leading to job creation and economic growth. * The prohibition could lead to higher costs for DHS components if domestic alternatives are more expensive or not readily available. * Chinese companies may face significant losses due to reduced exports to the U.S. market.

**Monied Interest Analysis**

The bill's sponsors and cosponsors have received significant donations from industries that stand to benefit from the legislation, including:

* The National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) PAC, which represents defense contractors, has donated to several sponsors. * The Alliance for American Manufacturing (AAM) PAC, which advocates for domestic manufacturing, has contributed to key cosponsors. * The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a strong supporter of domestic production and reduced dependence on foreign suppliers, has also made donations to bill supporters.

While the legislation's primary focus is national security, it is clear that industry interests have played a role in shaping the bill's provisions.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Gimenez, Carlos A. [R-FL-28]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$94,200

19 donors

PACs

Organizations

Committees

Individuals

$94,200

No PAC contributions found

No organization contributions found

No committee contributions found

HOLMES, TERESA

2 transactions

$8,000

CARR, JIM

1 transaction

$6,600

GRIFFIN, KENNETH

1 transaction

$6,600

KEMMERER, JOHN L

1 transaction

$6,600

KEMMERER, KAREN

1 transaction

$6,600

STAHL, LEWIS

1 transaction

$6,600

POOLE, GREG III

1 transaction

$5,000

CARRICARTE, MICHAEL

1 transaction

$5,000

TORRES, HUMBERTO

1 transaction

$5,000

TORRES, YADIRA

1 transaction

$5,000

BERMAN, MICHAEL

1 transaction

$4,000

CHASE, KEVIN

1 transaction

$4,000

NAHMAD, AL

1 transaction

$4,000

SANCHEZ, IGNACIO

1 transaction

$4,000

YONKE, ERIC

1 transaction

$4,000

CODINA, MARGARITA

1 transaction

$3,300

FALIC, JANA

1 transaction

$3,300

FALIC, SIMON

1 transaction

$3,300

HECKLER, ALEXANDER

1 transaction

$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 4 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Green, Mark E. [R-TN-7]

ID: G000590

Top Contributors

HAND, J.R.

HAND FAMILY COMPANIES • CEO

IndividualCLARKSVILLE, TN

$6,600

May 20, 2024

SCARLETT, DOROTHY

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualNASHVILLE, TN

$6,600

Jun 11, 2024

CRABBE, JENNELL

HOMEMAKER • HOMEMAKER

IndividualCLARKSVILLE, TN

$6,600

Feb 9, 2023

CRABBE, JOHN

SELF • CONSTRUCTION

IndividualCLARKSVILLE, TN

$6,600

Feb 9, 2023

EVANS, BARBARA

HOMEMAKER • HOMEMAKER

IndividualHENDERSONVILLE, TN

$6,600

Mar 10, 2023

EVANS, JOHN

PRESIDENT • PRESIDENT

IndividualHENDERSONVILLE, TN

$6,600

Mar 10, 2023

KEMMERER, KAREN

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualJACKSON, WY

$6,600

May 16, 2023

GONTOWNIK, YONI

GIC • VICE PRESIDENT

IndividualENGLEWOOD, NJ

$6,600

Aug 1, 2024

SCARLETT, JOE

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualNASHVILLE, TN

$6,600

Sep 9, 2024

UIHLEIN, RICHARD

ULINE • CHAIRMAN

IndividualLAKE FOREST, IL

$5,800

Jan 26, 2023

Rep. Moolenaar, John R. [R-MI-2]

ID: M001194

Top Contributors

MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND POTTAWATOMI INDIANS

OrganizationSHELBYVILLE, MI

$3,300

Aug 30, 2023

PECHANGA BAND OF INDIANS

OrganizationTEMECULA, CA

$3,300

Aug 30, 2023

POKAGON BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS

OrganizationDOWAGIAC, MI

$3,300

Aug 30, 2023

SAGINAW CHIPPEWA INDIAN TRIBE TRIBAL OPERATIONS

OrganizationMOUNT PLEASANT, MI

$3,300

Sep 30, 2023

SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND OF MIWOK INDIANS

OrganizationSHINGLE SPRINGS, CA

$3,300

Sep 30, 2023

NOTTAWASEPPI HURON BAND OF THE POTAWATOMI

OrganizationFULTON, MI

$3,300

Mar 12, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$3,300

Jun 20, 2024

SAULT STE. MARIE TRIBE CHIPPEWA INDIANS

OrganizationSAULT SAINTE MARIE, MI

$2,900

Dec 19, 2023

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA

$2,500

Mar 4, 2024

SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND OF MIWOK INDIANS

OrganizationSHINGLE SPRINGS, CA

$2,500

Sep 30, 2024

Rep. Pfluger, August [R-TX-11]

ID: P000048

Top Contributors

SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION

OrganizationEL CAJON, CA

$3,300

Apr 18, 2024

SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION

OrganizationEL CAJON, CA

$3,300

Jun 30, 2023

ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE

OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX

$1,000

Sep 27, 2024

DIMEMMO, COLETTE

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualFORT MYERS, FL

$6,600

Oct 24, 2024

PUDWILL, JAMES

IndividualNIPOMO, CA

$6,600

Sep 16, 2024

GELBMAN, JOEL

IndividualNAPLES, FL

$6,600

Sep 16, 2024

GELBMAN, JOEL

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualNAPLES, FL

$6,600

Aug 26, 2024

PUDWILL, JAMES

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualNIPOMO, CA

$6,600

Aug 3, 2024

WILSON, CELIA R

OIL AND GAS • SELF-EMPLOYED

IndividualMIDLAND, TX

$5,800

Mar 31, 2024

WILSON, CELIA R

SELF • OIL AND GAS

IndividualMIDLAND, TX

$5,800

Apr 9, 2024

Rep. Meuser, Daniel [R-PA-9]

ID: M001204

Top Contributors

PRIDE MOBILITY PRODUCTS CORP

OrganizationDURYEA, PA

$2,500

Sep 18, 2024

COTLER, YUDACUFSKI, HUEBNER

OrganizationSAINT CLAIR, PA

$1,000

Apr 23, 2024

DOWD, JOHN J

SUNDANCE VACATIONS • PRESIDENT

IndividualLEHIGHTON, PA

$6,600

Mar 25, 2024

PEYKOFF, ANDY

NIAGARA BOTTLING, LLC • CEO

IndividualLAS VEGAS, NV

$6,600

Mar 22, 2024

DOWD, JOHN J

SUNDANCE VACATIONS • PRESIDENT

IndividualLEHIGHTON, PA

$6,600

Sep 18, 2024

ROWAN, MARC J

APOLLO MANAGEMENT • MANAGEMENT

IndividualGREENWICH, CT

$6,600

Aug 23, 2023

ROWAN, CAROLYN

CAROLYN ROWAN COLLECTION • OWNER

IndividualGREENWICH, CT

$6,600

Aug 23, 2023

RICH, BRIAN R MR. JR

GILBERTON COAL CO. • EXECUTIVE SALES

IndividualCONSHOHOCKEN, PA

$6,600

Oct 24, 2024

VOLPE, ELLEN M

SELF • HOMEMAKER

IndividualWAVERLY TOWNSHIP, PA

$5,800

May 31, 2023

VOLPE, CHARLES J

EXCALIBUR INSURANCE MGMT • PRESIDENT

IndividualWAVERLY TOWNSHIP, PA

$5,800

May 31, 2023

Donor Network - Rep. Gimenez, Carlos A. [R-FL-28]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Showing 60 nodes and 32 connections (46 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $141,600

Top Donors - Rep. Gimenez, Carlos A. [R-FL-28]

Showing top 19 donors by contribution amount

19 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 harmed.

−Electric Vehicles & Batteriesconfidence 0.90
Section 2(a) prohibits DHS from procuring batteries produced by entities listed in subsection (b), which include major Chinese battery manufacturers such as CATL, BYD, and others that supply EV batteries; this restricts DHS procurement of EVs or EV components using those batteries, harming the EV industry.
−Pipelines & Energy Infrastructureconfidence 0.85
Section 2(a) bars DHS from procuring batteries from specified entities, which include large battery producers that also supply grid storage and energy infrastructure; this limits DHS ability to procure such systems, harming the energy infrastructure industry.
−Semiconductors & Hardwareconfidence 0.80
Section 2(b)(9) references entities on Supplement No. 4 to part 744 of title 15 CFR (Entity List), which includes many semiconductor and hardware firms; prohibiting DHS procurement of batteries from such entities may extend to related hardware, harming the semiconductors and hardware industry.

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Strong

Vector: 61%

Pages: 422-424AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill aligns with Project 2025's focus on securing critical energy-related supply chains and reducing dependence on foreign adversaries, particularly in strategic materials like lithium-ion batteries. Both emphasize national and economic security through domestic production and supply chain resilience."

Key themes:energy securitysupply chain resilienceforeign dependencedomestic productioncritical minerals

— 389 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions policy and how it affects foreign policy, as well as the international energy landscape and how it affects U.S. national and economic security. l Develop a strategy for identifying and accessing resources and advancing U.S. economic interests. America has recently become a net energy exporter, but it still imports large amounts of essential energy resources such as oil and natural gas as well as such materials as uranium (including yellowcake), lithium, certain rare earth minerals, and energy generation and transmission components and technology. The United States needs a clear understanding of its global energy and economic interests and a strategy for protecting them. l Oppose “climate reparations.” During the November 2022 United Nations climate conference in Egypt, the Biden Administration and other “developed” countries agreed to provide “climate reparations” to developing countries for the harm allegedly caused by the developed countries’ use of fossil fuel.76 A reparations slush fund administered by a non-U.S. organization provides no assurance that U.S. interests will be protected and should not be supported in any form. New Policies l Identify U.S. energy security interests and promote American energy dominance. To this end, IA should work closely with the DESAS Office of Policy on the National Energy Security Strategy. l Strengthen the new DESAS vis-à-vis the Department of State. The State Department’s Bureau of Energy Resources has generally excluded IA from serious discussions of international affairs to the detriment of DOE and broader interagency policy development. In addition, DOE embassy representatives are generally excluded from giving policy advice to senior diplomats and are used merely as sources of information instead of being active advocates for the Secretary’s priorities. The Secretary of Energy is a senior member of the President’s National Security Council and should function as such. The DOE’s Deputy Secretaries, Under Secretaries, and Assistant Secretaries should be guaranteed representation at all Deputies and Policy Coordination Committee meetings. In addition, senior political and career staff should hold positions on the NSC staff equivalent to their counterparts at State, Defense, Treasury, and the Intelligence Community (IC). DESAS billets should replace State Department Bureau of Energy Resources billets at the relevant posts worldwide.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Moderate

Vector: 62%

Pages: 434-436AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill shares Project 2025's focus on reducing reliance on adversarial foreign components (especially Chinese-made) for national security and promoting domestic production, but it addresses DHS battery procurement rather than the electricity grid reliability reforms central to the Policy section."

Key themes:national security supply chainban Chinese-made componentsdomestic productionresource diversitycyber/physical threats

— 401 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions nation in the summer110 and winter.111 Cyber and physical attacks also threaten the grid. Specific areas for reform include the following: l Limit the impact of subsidized renewables on price formation. Subsidized renewable resources are undermining electric reliability in RTOs. The increase in subsidized, intermittent resources is undermining the ability of RTOs’ pricing models to support the reliable dispatchable generation that is needed to serve the grid at all times.112 l Reform the application of reserve margins. Reserve margins have become largely meaningless. Traditionally, the electric industry has used “reserve margins” to ensure that the grid has enough power plants to guarantee reliability. Generally, reserve margins represent the amount of generation available (power plants) to meet peak electric demand (the time of day and year when people are using the most electricity) plus a percentage of additional generation for backup.113 However, given the increasing number of intermittent resources (like solar, which may be available during the heat of the day but disappears as the sun sets), other dispatchable generation needs to be available to meet customers’ electricity requirements. Therefore, the definitions and calculations of reserve margins and peak load need to be updated to focus on the modern grid’s reliability challenges for all times of the day and year. l Recognize the interdependence of electric generation and natural gas. The interdependence of electric generation and natural gas pipelines continues to grow. Given natural gas’s important role in generating electricity, especially as backup when renewables are not available, lack of natural gas pipelines or attacks on existing pipelines could threaten our ability to generate electricity. l Expand resource diversity and reliability. Resource diversity is needed to support grid reliability. Pressure to use 100 percent renewables or non– carbon emitting resources threatens the electric grid’s reliability. A grid that has access to dispatchable resources such as coal, nuclear, and natural gas for generating power is inherently more reliable and resilient. l Protect against cyber and physical attacks. The threat of cyber and physical attacks on electric infrastructure by foreign actors like China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, as well as terrorists, continues to grow. The attacks with guns on substations in North Carolina in December 2022 that left customers without power demonstrate the grid’s vulnerability.114 — 402 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise New Policies l Reform RTOs to require reliability. FERC should direct RTOs to establish reliability pricing for eligible dispatchable generation resources or require intermittent resources to procure backup power for times when they are not available to operate. In addition, Congress should repeal subsidies for generation resources. l Update the definition and calculation of reserve margins to support reliability. FERC, NERC, and DOE should revise the definition of reserve margins to ensure the grid’s reliability throughout the day and the year. This will mean recognizing that reserve margins may need to consider “net peak” and exclude non-dispatchable resources from inclusion in reserve margin calculations. l Expand and protect natural gas infrastructure in support of electric generation. FERC needs to ensure that its consideration of natural gas pipeline applications recognizes the role that natural gas plays in electric reliability. FERC also needs to make sure that RTO pricing mechanisms support generators that need to contract for natural gas service on a firm basis. l Support resource diversity and reliability. FERC, NERC, and DOE play key roles in balancing consumer, industrial, and national defense interests to ensure an ongoing reliable, plentiful, and accessible national electricity supply. NERC reliability reviews and FERC’s reliability roles should be aware that overreliance on any one power generation fuel source entails concurrent cost and availability risk. FERC should reform market rules that unduly discriminate against dispatchable resources needed for reliability. l Strengthen security against cyber and physical threats. FERC and NERC need to enhance the security of the bulk power system by, for example, banning Chinese-made components, investing in transformers, and hardening substations and other critical infrastructure. DOE should play a leading role in identifying and addressing threats to the grid. FERC: RTOS/ISOS AND “ELECTRIC POWER MARKETS” Mission/Overview For more than 20 years, FERC has issued regulations and directed policies for the creation and operation of regional transmission organizations (RTOs) and independent system operators (ISOs) to manage the dispatch of generation and

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Moderate

Vector: 60%

Pages: 398-400AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill aligns with Project 2025's emphasis on energy security and reducing dependence on foreign adversaries, particularly China, in critical energy-related supply chains. While focused on DHS procurement rather than DOE programs, it supports the broader goal of securing energy infrastructure and promoting domestic production of strategic energy components."

Key themes:energy securitysupply chain resiliencecountering Chinadomestic productionstrategic materials

— 365 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions l Support repeal of massive spending bills like the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)3 and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA),4 which established new programs and are providing hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to renewable energy developers, their investors, and special interests, and support the rescinding of all funds not already spent by these programs. l Unleash private-sector energy innovation by ending government interference in energy decisions. l Stop the war on oil and natural gas. l Allow individuals, families, and business to use the energy resources they want to use and that will best serve their needs. l Secure and protect energy infrastructure from cyber and physical attacks. l Refocus the Department of Energy on energy security, accelerated remediation, and advanced science. l Promote U.S. energy resources as a means to assist our allies and diminish our strategic adversaries. l Refocus FERC on ensuring that customers have affordable and reliable electricity, natural gas, and oil and no longer allow it to favor special interests and progressive causes. l Ensure that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission facilitates rather than hampers private-sector nuclear energy innovation and deployment. American Science Dominance. Ever since the age of Benjamin Franklin, the United States has been at the forefront of scientific discovery and technological advancement. Beginning with the groundbreaking science of the Manhattan Proj- ect, the U.S. has developed 17 National Laboratories that conduct fundamental and advanced scientific research. The National Labs have been critical in supporting national defense and ensuring that the United States leads on scientific discoveries with transformative applications that benefit America and the world. In recent years, however, U.S. science has been under threat. Externally, adversaries like the Chinese military have been engaged in scientific espionage, infiltrating taxpayer-funded scientific research projects, and funding their own science research. In addition, the National Labs have been too focused on climate change and renewable technologies. — 366 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise American science dominance is critical to U.S. national security and economic strength. The next conservative President therefore needs to recommit the United States to ensuring this dominance. MISSION STATEMENT FOR A REFORMED DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY The Department of Energy should be renamed and refocused as the Department of Energy Security and Advanced Science (DESAS). DESAS would refocus on DOE’s five existing core missions: l Providing leadership and coordination on energy security and related national security issues, l Promoting U.S. energy economic interests abroad, l Leading the nation and the world in cutting-edge fundamental advanced science, l Remediating former Manhattan Project and Cold War nuclear material sites, and l Developing new nuclear weapons and naval nuclear reactors. These missions work together by using advanced science to promote national security while getting the government out of the business of picking winners and losers in energy resources. Reform is needed because DOE, instead of focusing on core energy and security issues, has been spending billions of taxpayer dollars to subsidize renewable energy developers and investors, thereby making Americans less energy secure and distorting energy markets. OVERVIEW DOE was created by the Department of Energy Organization Act of 19775 in response to the 1970s oil crisis, consolidating various energy programs that pre- viously had operated without coordination throughout the federal government in a single department. In addition to addressing energy issues, DOE is tasked with: l Engaging in basic and fundamental science and research through the 17 National Laboratories; l Cleaning up the Manhattan Project and Cold War nuclear material and weapons sites;

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Moderate

Vector: 60%

Pages: 401-403AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill aligns with Project 2025's emphasis on energy security and reducing dependence on foreign adversaries, particularly in critical supply chains like batteries. While the bill focuses on DHS procurement and national security risks tied to forced labor, it shares thematic ground with Project 2025's goal of securing energy-related supply chains and minimizing politicized interference in energy policy, though it does not directly address DOE programs or energy-specific reforms outlined in the"

Key themes:energy securityforeign dependencesupply chain resiliencenational securitydomestic production

— 369 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions private sector for government-favored resources. The DOE Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED); Office of State and Community Energy Programs; ARPA-E; Office of Grid Deployment (OGD); and DOE Loan Program should be eliminated or reformed. If they continue to exist, FECM, NE, OE, and EERE should focus on fundamental science and technology issues, particularly in relation to cyber and physical threats to energy security, rather than subsidizing and commercializing energy resources. l Eliminate political and climate-change interference in DOE approvals of liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. In addition, Congress should reform the Natural Gas Act8 to expand required approvals from merely nations with free trade agreements to all of our allies, such as NATO countries. l Focus the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) on ensuring that government buildings and operations have reliable and cost- effective energy. FEMP should stop using taxpayer dollars to force the purchase of more expensive and less reliable energy resources in the name of combating climate change. l Ensure that information provided by the U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA), a data and statistical organization, is data-neutral. l Focus FERC on its statutory obligation to ensure access to reliable energy at just, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory rates. FERC is a five-member commission created under the DOE Organization Act that regulates the wholesale sales and transmission of electricity, promotes electric reliability through standards, permits natural gas pipelines and LNG export facilities, sets natural gas pipeline shipping rates, and sets oil pipeline shipping rates. It is an economic regulator and should not make itself a climate regulator. l Streamline the nuclear regulatory requirements and licensing process. Such changes would help to lower costs and accelerate the development and deployment of civilian nuclear, such as advanced nuclear reactors (including small modular nuclear reactors). The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is commission tasked with the licensing of civilian nuclear reactors and power plants and regulating other uses of nuclear materials, such as nuclear medicine. Although it is not a DOE agency, its jurisdiction over nuclear reactor, fuel, safety, and trade issues often relates to or impinges on DOE’s jurisdiction. — 370 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Focus on energy and science issues, not politicized social programs. The next Administration should stop using energy policy to advance politicized social agendas. Programs that sound innocuous, such as “energy justice,”9 Justice40,10 and DEI,11 can be transformed to promote politicized agendas. DOE should focus on providing all Americans with access to abundant, affordable, reliable, and secure energy, and DOE should manage its employees so that everyone is treated fairly based on his or her talent, skills, and hard work. New Policies: International Energy Security To help the President and policymakers understand and apply U.S. energy inter- ests in international affairs more effectively, various DOE programs offices need to be reformed. l Promote American energy interests. The next Administration should make U.S. energy dominance a key component of its foreign policy while ensuring that domestic and international goals are aligned. American energy dominance will allow the United States to secure energy for its citizens, markets for its energy exports, and access to new energy natural resources and will provide tools for U.S. policymakers to assist our allies and deter our adversaries. DESAS should analyze U.S. international energy security interests and develop a National Energy Security Strategy (NESS). This strategy would take account of the energy landscape across the globe to inform the President in his foreign policy and defense roles, but it should not be a tool for U.S. industrial policy, although it might highlight how current domestic industrial and climate policies threaten U.S. energy and national security. l Strengthen the role of the new Department of Energy Security and Advanced Science. There are frequent turf battles on energy issues between the Department of State and DOE. Although the State Department clearly has the policymaking authority under the DOE Organization Act, it tends to ignore the expertise and perspectives that DOE provides. The existing Assistant Secretary for International Affairs should provide the principal support for the DOE Secretary and Deputy Secretary on National Security Council (NSC) activities and should interface with colleagues at the Departments of Defense, State, Treasury, and Commerce, as well as the Intelligence Community (IC). New Policies: Advanced Science To ensure that America continues to lead the world in fundamental science, the National Labs should be refocused, and national science policy should be reviewed and coordinated.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 434-436AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on restricting foreign battery procurement for DHS due to national security and forced labor concerns, while the Project 2025 policy addresses electric grid reliability, renewable energy integration, reserve margins, and cyber/physical threats to energy infrastructure. There is minimal thematic overlap, primarily in the broad concern about foreign threats (e.g., China) to critical systems, but the policy domains (battery supply chain vs. grid operations) are distinct."

Key themes:national securityforeign threatssupply chain resilience

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Related Bills

Other Bills by Rep. Gimenez, Carlos A.

One-Stop Pilot Program Extension Act

119/hr/9388

Miccosukee Reserved Area Amendments Act

119/hr/504

Department of Homeland Security Vehicular Terrorism Prevention and Mitigation Act of 2025

119/hr/1608

Back to All Bills