Protect America’s Innovation and Economic Security from CCP Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/1468
Last Updated: July 22, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Gooden, Lance [R-TX-5]

ID: G000589

Follow the money

The bill

Protect America’s Innovation and Economic Security from CCP Act

HR. 1468, 119th Congress — read as touching Big Tech Platforms.

The sponsor

Rep. Gooden, Lance [R-TX-5]

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

The money

$71,300 raised

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

The alignment

64% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 248-250 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 607.

June 14, 2026

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

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

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the geniuses in Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The "Protect America's Innovation and Economic Security from CCP Act" (because who doesn't love a good acronym?) claims to establish a program to counter Chinese espionage and protect American intellectual property. How quaint. In reality, it's just another attempt to grandstand on national security while lining the pockets of defense contractors and tech lobbyists.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill creates a new initiative within the Department of Justice, because what we really need is more bureaucracy. It also mandates annual reports on the program's progress, which will undoubtedly be filled with platitudes and vague statistics to justify further funding. Oh, and let's not forget the obligatory mentions of "artificial intelligence" and "unmanned aircraft" to sound hip and relevant.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: defense contractors, tech companies, and anyone who can claim a stake in the "national security" gravy train. The Chinese government will also be affected, but let's be real, they'll just laugh all the way to the bank as they continue to exploit our naive trade policies.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill will accomplish precisely what it's designed to do: nothing. It's a placebo for the gullible public, a way to pretend we're doing something about Chinese espionage while actually just throwing more money at the problem. The real impact will be on the bottom line of defense contractors and tech companies, who will reap the benefits of this legislative boondoggle.

In conclusion, HR 1468 is a textbook example of legislative malpractice. It's a cynical attempt to exploit public fears about national security while serving the interests of wealthy donors and lobbyists. The fact that our elected representatives can't even be bothered to come up with something more original is a testament to their contempt for the public's intelligence. Bravo, Congress. You've managed to create a bill that's both pointless and profitable. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have better things to do than watch this farce unfold.

Related Topics

National Security & IntelligenceDefense Spending & ProcurementResearch & Innovation Policy
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Gooden, Lance [R-TX-5]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$71,300
19 donors
PACs
$1,000
Organizations
$4,300
Committees
$0
Individuals
$66,000
1
ALABAMA COUSHATTA TRIBE
1 transaction
$1,000
1
THE CHICKASAW NATION
1 transaction
$3,300
2
INDEPENDENT COMANCHE
1 transaction
$1,000

No committee contributions found

1
BELL, ANNETTE
2 transactions
$6,600
2
BELL, KEITH
2 transactions
$6,600
3
BLAKE, GARY
2 transactions
$6,600
4
BRAND, DANIEL
2 transactions
$6,600
5
CALLEWART, CRAIG
1 transaction
$3,300
6
BERLINER, KENNETH
1 transaction
$3,300
7
KIDAN, ADAM
1 transaction
$3,300
8
ADAIR, AARON
1 transaction
$3,300
9
EWING, SAMUEL
1 transaction
$3,300
10
EWING, SARAH
1 transaction
$3,300
11
RUPANI, AMIR
1 transaction
$3,300
12
RUPANI, PARVEEN
1 transaction
$3,300
13
SU, JACKSON MR.
1 transaction
$3,300
14
TROUTT, KENNY
1 transaction
$3,300
15
TROUTT, LISA
1 transaction
$3,300
16
BLANKINSHIP, COURTNEY
1 transaction
$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Tiffany, Thomas P. [R-WI-7]

ID: T000165

Top Contributors

10

1
SOLBERG, TRYGVE A
SELFBUSINESS OWNER
IndividualMINOCQUA, WI
$13,200
Sep 30, 2023
2
SHANNON, JEAN L
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualMILWAUKEE, WI
$13,200
Jul 27, 2023
3
NICKLAUS, GREG
INCREDIBLE BANKVICE CHAIRMAN
IndividualARBOR VITAE, WI
$13,200
Mar 31, 2024
4
NICKLAUS, GREG
INCREDIBLE BANKVICE CHAIRMAN
IndividualARBOR VITAE, WI
$13,200
Mar 31, 2024
5
BUHOLZER, RONALD
KLONDIKE CHEESEPRESIDENT
IndividualMONROE, WI
$13,200
Jun 30, 2024
6
MAYER, SCOTT A
QPS EMPLOYMENT GROUPCHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD
IndividualFRANKLIN, WI
$10,000
Feb 29, 2024
7
HILGEMANN, WILLIAM
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualSTRATFORD, WI
$9,900
Jun 30, 2024
8
ZIETLOW, DONALD P
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualLA CROSSE, WI
$6,666
Jun 28, 2023
9
ALBEE, ALAN P
EAGLE WASTE AND RECYCLING INCPRESIDENT
IndividualMINOCQUA, WI
$6,600
Aug 12, 2024
10
ALDRIDGE, KENNETH
SELFEXECUTIVE
IndividualLIBERTYVILLE, IL
$6,600
Aug 3, 2023

Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3]

ID: K000403

Top Contributors

10

1
ULRICH, DAVE
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGANPROFESSOR
IndividualALPINE, UT
$10,000
Jun 5, 2024
2
BRENCHLEY, ROXANE
HOMEMAKERHOMEMAKER
IndividualALPINE, UT
$9,900
Jan 12, 2024
3
BRENCHLEY, SHAWN
VIVINTVP
IndividualALPINE, UT
$9,900
Jan 12, 2024
4
JOHNSON, HEATHER
SELFHOMEMAKER
IndividualOGDEN, UT
$9,900
Jan 12, 2024
5
JOHNSON, JOHN
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualOGDEN, UT
$9,900
Jan 12, 2024
6
KENNEDY, HUGH
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualYPSILANTI, MI
$9,900
Jan 12, 2024
7
KENNEDY, JACOB
DEACONESS HOSPITALDOCTOR
IndividualEVANSVILLE, IN
$9,900
Mar 15, 2024
8
ULANOFF, DORY
ARCADISMARKETING
IndividualYPSILANTI, MI
$9,900
Jan 12, 2024
9
ZUPANCICH, ANTHONY
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualSAINT CLAIR SHORES, MI
$9,900
Mar 27, 2024
10
PLUMB, WALTER III
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualSALT LAKE CITY, UT
$6,700
Jan 12, 2024

Rep. Ogles, Andrew [R-TN-5]

ID: O000175

Top Contributors

10

1
WINTERSTEEN, JAMES
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualMILL VALLEY, CA
$13,200
Jun 27, 2024
2
FISHER, KENNETH L.
FISHER INVESTMENTSEXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN
IndividualPLANO, TX
$6,600
May 23, 2024
3
FISHER, SHERRILYN
PLANO 6500 LLCMEMBER
IndividualPLANO, TX
$6,600
May 23, 2024
4
RAMSEY, DAVE
RAMSEYCEO
IndividualCOLLEGE GROVE, TN
$6,600
Jul 27, 2024
5
MOSING, GREG
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualBROUSSARD, LA
$6,600
Jul 24, 2024
6
SHOCKLEY, QIANG
QIANG SHOCKLEYTECHNICIAN
IndividualIRVINE, CA
$6,600
Jun 8, 2023
7
BEAMAN, LEE MR.
BEAMAN VENTURESINVESTOR
IndividualNASHVILLE, TN
$6,600
Apr 13, 2023
8
GUO, MING
INTEL INCMANAGER
IndividualCUPERTINO, CA
$6,600
Jun 2, 2023
9
KENNINGER, STEVEN
QMO LLCINVESTOR
IndividualAUSTIN, TX
$6,600
Sep 25, 2023
10
JAQUISH, GAIL
JURIX, INC.PSYCHOLOGIST
IndividualAUSTIN, TX
$6,600
Sep 26, 2023

Rep. Boebert, Lauren [R-CO-4]

ID: B000825

Top Contributors

10

1
ENERGY STRONG LLC
OrganizationWINDSOR, CO
$2,000
Oct 4, 2024
2
EFFECTV
OrganizationSAN ANTONIO, TX
$1,169
Aug 29, 2024
3
CAPITOL FOCUS LLC
OrganizationDENVER, CO
$500
Oct 14, 2024
4
J A'S LLC
OrganizationDURANGO, CO
$250
Jun 21, 2023
5
CUYLER, BEVERLY
IndividualPAGOSA SPRINGS, CO
$9,100
Jul 1, 2023
6
ELLIOTT, DAVID
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$8,300
Sep 30, 2023
7
COVINGTON, GARY
IndividualMIDLAND, TX
$6,800
Jun 14, 2023
8
CLARK, ROBERT
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualNEWTON, NC
$6,600
Mar 10, 2024
9
BECK, ELAINE
HOMEMAKERHOMEMAKER
IndividualORO VALLEY, AZ
$6,600
Jan 17, 2024
10
HINMAN, ROY H.
IndividualSAINT AUGUSTINE, FL
$6,600
Mar 31, 2023

Rep. Fallon, Pat [R-TX-4]

ID: F000246

Top Contributors

10

1
DODD CG LLC
OrganizationDALLAS, TX
$3,000
Aug 6, 2024
2
NORTH TEXAS RHEUMATOLOGY PA
OrganizationDALLAS, TX
$1,700
Oct 7, 2023
3
PARTEE, SUE
PARTEE ENTERPRISESOIL AND GAS PRODUCTION
IndividualBIG SPRING, TX
$20,757
Oct 10, 2024
4
PARTEE, SUE
IndividualBIG SPRING, TX
$20,757
Dec 3, 2024
5
PENZ, WILLIAM
RODMAN EXCAVATIONVP
IndividualFRISCO, TX
$10,000
Apr 24, 2024
6
GLENDENNING, REX
REX REAL ESTATEBROKER/OWNER
IndividualCELINA, TX
$5,000
Apr 25, 2024
7
PHILLIPS, BRADFORD
LIBERTY BANKERSCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER & CHAIRMAN OF
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$5,000
Apr 26, 2024
8
SNYDER, RICK
HEARTPLACECARDIOLOGIST
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$3,425
Nov 5, 2024
9
ADAMS, CAROL
SELFOIL, GAS & AGRICULTURE
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$3,300
Sep 30, 2023
10
GOTT, JANET
IndividualSHERMAN, TX
$3,300
Aug 16, 2023

Rep. Cline, Ben [R-VA-6]

ID: C001118

Top Contributors

10

1
THE CHICKASAW NATION
OrganizationADA, OK
$1,000
Oct 31, 2023
2
JOHNSON, CAMERON MR.
MAGIC CITY FORDCAR DEALER
IndividualROANOKE, VA
$3,300
Nov 21, 2024
3
ROSENBERG, DIANE MS.
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualROANOKE, VA
$3,300
Nov 4, 2024
4
STOLTZFUS, MELISSA
HOMEMAKERHOMEMAKER
IndividualBRIDGEWATER, VA
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
5
STOLTZFUS, MICHAEL
DYNAMIC AVIATIONPRESIDENT & CEO
IndividualBRIDGEWATER, VA
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
6
STOLTZFUS, MICHAEL
DYNAMIC AVIATIONPRESIDENT & CEO
IndividualBRIDGEWATER, VA
$3,300
Nov 13, 2024
7
CLINE, JULIA S MRS.
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualLEXINGTON, VA
$3,300
Dec 31, 2023
8
CLINE, JULIA S MRS.
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualLEXINGTON, VA
$3,300
Dec 31, 2023
9
CARTLEDGE, GEORGE B MR. III
GRAND HOME FURNISHINGSPRESIDENT
IndividualROANOKE, VA
$3,300
Mar 30, 2023
10
CARTLEDGE, GEORGE B MR. III
GRAND HOME FURNISHINGSPRESIDENT
IndividualROANOKE, VA
$3,300
Mar 30, 2023

Rep. Kiggans, Jennifer A. [R-VA-2]

ID: K000399

Top Contributors

10

1
AIPAC- EARMARKS
PACWASHINGTON, DC
$2,000
Oct 22, 2024
2
PEAKE FOR SENATE
COMLYNCHBURG, VA
$500
Jan 9, 2024
3
PEAKE FOR SENATE
COMLYNCHBURG, VA
$250
Jan 9, 2024
4
KEHOE, MICHAEL
KINSALE MGMT INCCEO
IndividualRICHMOND, VA
$13,200
Jun 8, 2023
5
MITCHUM, ELZA
C & M INDUSTRIESPRESIDENT
IndividualCHESAPEAKE, VA
$6,600
Oct 18, 2023
6
SILVERMAN, JEFFREY
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualMIAMI BEACH, FL
$6,600
Oct 17, 2023
7
PERRY, J DOUGLAS
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualNORFOLK, VA
$6,600
Nov 6, 2023
8
WEEKLEY, RICHARD
SELF EMPLOYEDREAL ESTATE DEVELOPER
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$6,600
Nov 8, 2023
9
GILLIAM, MARVIN
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualBRISTOL, VA
$6,600
Mar 30, 2024
10
BOHANNON, DAVID
LONDON BRIDGE TRADING INC.PRESIDENT
IndividualVIRGINIA BEACH, VA
$6,600
May 23, 2024

Rep. Yakym, Rudy [R-IN-2]

ID: Y000067

Top Contributors

10

1
POKAGON BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationDOWAGIAC, MI
$8,300
Apr 25, 2023
2
MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND OF POTTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationSHELBYVILLE, MI
$3,300
Oct 22, 2024
3
MASHANTUCKET PEQUOT TRIBAL NATION
OrganizationMASHANTUCKET, CT
$3,300
Oct 27, 2023
4
EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS
OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC
$3,300
Mar 16, 2024
5
POKAGON BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationDOWAGIAC, MI
$3,300
Apr 25, 2023
6
MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND OF POTTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationSHELBYVILLE, MI
$3,300
Sep 29, 2023
7
PECHANGA BAND OF INDIANS
OrganizationTEMECULA, CA
$3,300
Sep 29, 2023
8
SAGINAW CHIPPEWA TRIBE OF MICHIGAN
OrganizationMT. PLEASANT, MI
$2,000
Oct 27, 2023
9
POKAGON BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationDOWAGIAC, MI
$1,700
Apr 27, 2023
10
CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA
OrganizationDURANT, OK
$1,650
Dec 31, 2023

Rep. LaHood, Darin [R-IL-16]

ID: L000585

Top Contributors

10

1
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$3,300
Mar 30, 2023
2
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$3,300
Jun 14, 2024
3
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,650
May 15, 2024
4
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,650
Jun 16, 2023
5
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$1,300
Oct 28, 2024
6
BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA
$1,000
Feb 8, 2023
7
ONEIDA NATION
OrganizationONEIDA, WI
$1,000
Mar 30, 2023
8
SALT RIVER PIMA MARICOPA INDIAN COMMUNITY
OrganizationSCOTTSDALE, AZ
$1,000
Mar 31, 2023
9
D CONSTRUCTION, INC.
OrganizationCOAL CITY, IL
$1,000
Mar 29, 2024
10
ONEIDA NATION
OrganizationONEIDA, WI
$1,000
Jun 30, 2024

Rep. Rutherford, John H. [R-FL-5]

ID: R000609

Top Contributors

10

1
CHICKASAW NATION
PACADA, OK
$1,000
Jun 16, 2023
2
MOHEGAN TRIBE OF INDIANS OF CONNECTICUT
OrganizationMONTVILLE, CT
$1,000
Nov 4, 2024
3
MS BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS
OrganizationCHOCTAW, MS
$1,000
Nov 4, 2024
4
MUSCOGEE CREEK NATION
OrganizationOKMULGEE, OK
$1,000
Jun 30, 2024
5
DEMOCRACY ENGINE LLC
OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC
$9
May 7, 2024
6
DEMOCRACY ENGINE LLC
OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC
$3
Jun 30, 2024
7
DEMOCRACY ENGINE LLC
OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC
$2
May 7, 2024
8
DEMOCRACY ENGINE LLC
OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC
$1
Apr 4, 2024
9
DEMOCRACY ENGINE LLC
OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC
$1
Apr 12, 2024
10
DEMOCRACY ENGINE LLC
OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC
$1
Jun 3, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Gooden, Lance [R-TX-5]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 50 nodes and 38 connections (31 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $196,226

Top Donors - Rep. Gooden, Lance [R-TX-5]

Showing top 19 donors by contribution amount

1 PAC2 Orgs16 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 4 harmed.

  • Big Tech Platformsconfidence 0.80

    Section 2(a)(2) and (a)(6)(A) target CCP spying on US intellectual property and academic institutions, and prioritize prosecuting trade secret theft, hacking, and economic espionage, which could increase regulatory scrutiny and enforcement actions against tech firms suspected of facilitating or being victims of such activities, imposing compliance costs and legal risks.

  • Defense Contractorsconfidence 0.75

    Section 2(a)(3) focuses on nontraditional collectors in the defense industrial base being used to transfer technology contrary to US interests, likely increasing oversight and compliance burdens on defense contractors regarding foreign influence and technology transfer, imposing costs.

  • Section 2(a)(6)(B) aims to protect critical infrastructure against supply chain compromises via foreign direct investment, which could lead to stricter vetting of semiconductor supply chains linked to Chinese entities, increasing compliance costs for chipmakers.

  • Section 2(a)(2) and (a)(6)(A) target theft of intellectual property and trade secrets, which are highly relevant to AI and cloud providers holding valuable proprietary models and data, likely increasing their exposure to investigations and security obligations.

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.

Introduction

Moderate63.7%
Pages: 248-250

— 216 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Stiffer penalties and mandatory investigations when intelligence leaks are aimed at domestic political targets, l Tighter controls on otherwise lawful intercepts that also collect the communications of domestic political figures, l An express prohibition on politically motivated use of intelligence authorities, and l Reforms to improve the accountability of the Justice Department and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. To keep intelligence credentials from being used for partisan purposes, former high-ranking intelligence officials who retain a clearance should remain subject to the Hatch Act after they leave government to deter them from tying their political stands or activism to their continuing privilege of access to classified government information. The IC should be prohibited from monitoring so-called domestic disinformation. Such activity can easily slip into suppression of an opposition party’s speech, is corrosive of First Amendment protections, and raises questions about impartiality when the IC chooses not to act. CHINA-FOCUSED CHANGES, REFORMS, AND RESOURCES The term “whole of government” is all too frequently overused, but in responding to the generational threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party, that is exactly the approach that our national security apparatus should adopt. CIA Director William Burns has formally established a China Mission Center focused on these efforts, but it can be successful only if it is given the necessary personnel, cross-community collaboration, and resources. That is uncertain at this point, and just how seriously the organization is taking the staffing of the center is unclear. A critical strategic question for an incoming Administration and IC lead- ers will be: How, when, and with whom do we share our classified intelligence? Understanding when to pass things to liaisons and for what purpose will be vital to outmaneuvering China in the intelligence sphere. Questions for a President will include: l What is our overarching conception of the adversarial relationship and competition? l How does intelligence-sharing fit into that conception? — 217 — Intelligence Community Some Members of Congress have said that intelligence relationships such as the Five Eyes28 should be expanded to include other allies in the Asia–Pacific in, for example, a “Nine Eyes” framework. This fails to take into account the fact that any blanket expansion would necessarily involve protecting the sources and methods of a larger and quite possibly more diverse group of member countries that might or might not have congruent interests. That being said, however, a future conservative President should consider what resources and information-sharing relationships could be included in an ad hoc or quasi-formal intelligence expansion (for example, with the Quad) among nations trying to counter the threat from China. Significant technology, language skills, and financial intelligence resources are needed to counter China’s capabilities.29 The IC was caught flat-footed by the recent discovery of China’s successful test of a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile. No longer can America’s information and technological dominance be assumed. China’s gains and intense focus on emerging technologies have taken it in some areas from being a near-peer competitor to probably being ahead of the United States. China’s centralized government allocates endless resources (sometimes inefficiently) to its strategic “Made in China 2025” and military apparatuses, which combine government, military, and private-sector activities on quantum infor- mation sciences and technologies, artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, biotechnologies, and advanced robotics. The IC must do more than understand these advancements: It must rally non- government and allied partners and inspire unified action to counter them. In addition, to combat China’s economic espionage, authorities and loopholes in the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA)30 will have to be examined and addressed in conjunction with the Attorney General. Many issues within the broader government can be tied back to a more general congressional understanding of the threat due to the compartmentalization of committee jurisdictions and the responsibilities of executive agencies to brief on the nature of the threat. Broader committee jurisdictions should receive additional intelligence from IC agencies as necessary to inform China’s unique and more com- prehensive threat across layers of the U.S. government bureaucracy and economy. Former DNI John Ratcliffe increased the intelligence budget as it related to China by 20 percent. “When people ask me why I did that,” he explained in an interview, “I say, ‘Because no one would let me increase it by 40%.’ I had an $85 billion combined annual budget for both the national intelligence program and military intelligence program. My perspective was, ‘Whatever we’re spending on countering China, it isn’t enough.’”31 From an intelligence standpoint, the need to understand Chinese motivations, capabilities, and intent will be of paramount importance to a future conservative President. It is therefore also of paramount importance that the “whole of government” be rowing together.

Introduction

Moderate63.1%
Pages: 254-256

— 221 — Intelligence Community influence and the FBI’s warnings about continued efforts through the 2022 mid- terms highlight the folly of undue certainty without consideration of alternatives. On election influence and other controversial issues, such as the origin of COVID-19, analysts at the most powerful intelligence agencies have increasingly tended to use the leeway they have been given to insert their political views into their work in order to influence (if possibly even control) the analytic process. They do this in ways that attempt to squash dissent and impair the creation of a culture in which entrenched views are challenged and unpopular analytical lines can sur- vive or not according to their merits. To help the United States and its leaders to outcompete China across mul- tifaceted societal, economic, military, and technological threats, the IC’s capability to conduct strategic intelligence analysis that is relevant to policymak- ers in both parties must be rebuilt and strengthened. Because Beijing may be a peer or even exceed U.S. capabilities in some areas, the post-9/11 analytic focus on quick-turnaround secrets is not good enough. Strategic planning—informed by intelligence—must take place for the United States to stay ahead of whatever new threats China may pose. An incoming conservative President will have the opportunity to signal the demand for such strategic products and prioritize their production through communications to intelligence leaders and formal mechanisms such as shifting priorities within the National Intelligence Priority Framework and structuring the President’s Daily Brief. The incoming DNI should also emphasize implementing the recommendations in the Ombudsman’s report, especially regarding objectiv- ity, the inclusion of dissenting viewpoints, and more serious efforts to hold senior leaders accountable for backchannel attempts to change or suppress analytic views. Accounting for the long history of intelligence failures and surprises, an incom- ing conservative President must appreciate the ambiguity, complexity, limits, and assumptions inherent in intelligence assessments. Intelligence often deals with the human dimension in complex decision systems within a foreign country or organi- zation, and this makes consistently accurate predictions difficult if not impossible to develop. Seeing something and understanding what you are seeing are two dif- ferent things, so a President should consistently and patiently press the IC about its potential biases, assumptions, methodology, and sourcing. With regard to election-threat analysis and politically controversial topics, agency leaders should take seriously the Ombudsman’s admonition that we need to maintain tradecraft standards across all countries and topics by ensuring that equitable standards apply across all foreign threat actors. Analysis should be put forward without regard to the domestic political ramifications of intelligence conclusions. “Obligation to Share” and Real-Time Auditing Capability. The fed- eral government has made admirable progress in recent years by being more — 222 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise forward-leaning in sharing cyber threat intelligence with private-sector partners and the public, emphasizing that the protective nature of such information is of value only if put into the right hands at the right time. Since critical infrastructure and services are overwhelmingly owned, managed, and defended by the private sector in the United States, there has been an increasing emphasis on declassify- ing intelligence and sharing actionable information with private-sector partners, often through industry-specific Information Sharing and Analysis Centers (ISACs); regional meetings of government and private-sector experts called InfraGard, run by the FBI; direct public notification from the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and (increasingly) the NSA; and more discreet one-on-one engagements led by the collecting agencies. These programs properly recognize the private sector’s role in providing cyber- security for Americans; in practice, however, the intelligence shared by the U.S. government through these venues is too often already known or no longer relevant by the time it makes its way through the downgrade process for sharing. In addition, government-shared information often needs to take advantage of the opportunity to provide contexts, such as attribution, trends, and size of the observed cyber problem. As warranted, additional context should be provided to the private sector as a matter of routine. To continue improving the U.S. government’s ability to defend the country’s most vital networks, the IC must adopt an “obligation to share” policy process, including the capacity for “write to release” intelligence products whereby newly discovered technical indicators, targeting, and other intelligence relevant to cyber defense are automatically provided either to the public or to targeted entities within 48 hours of their collection—which is how counterterrorism intel- ligence has been managed for years when it comes to a “duty to warn.” Under this policy, agency heads should still have the flexibility to withhold intelligence for operational or counterintelligence reasons but would need to report regularly to Congress on the number of and justification for exceptions. This policy would make sharing intelligence and defending networks the default, as it already is in the rest of the cybersecurity community outside the IC, to improve the quantity, relevance, and timeliness of defensive information while ensuring accountability for top leaders when they must withhold this information. One of the most significant challenges within the IC is presented by the need to share information promptly among the 18 elements of the intelligence enterprise. The only long-term solution to the understandable tension between the need to share information and the need to protect intelligence sources and methods is a robust real-time auditing capability that electronically flags unauthorized access. Under an identity management system with real-time audit, even the most sensi- tive information acquired by America’s intelligence agencies can be shared, and the access to and use of that information are appropriately monitored. Establishing

Introduction

Moderate63.1%
Pages: 254-256

— 221 — Intelligence Community influence and the FBI’s warnings about continued efforts through the 2022 mid- terms highlight the folly of undue certainty without consideration of alternatives. On election influence and other controversial issues, such as the origin of COVID-19, analysts at the most powerful intelligence agencies have increasingly tended to use the leeway they have been given to insert their political views into their work in order to influence (if possibly even control) the analytic process. They do this in ways that attempt to squash dissent and impair the creation of a culture in which entrenched views are challenged and unpopular analytical lines can sur- vive or not according to their merits. To help the United States and its leaders to outcompete China across mul- tifaceted societal, economic, military, and technological threats, the IC’s capability to conduct strategic intelligence analysis that is relevant to policymak- ers in both parties must be rebuilt and strengthened. Because Beijing may be a peer or even exceed U.S. capabilities in some areas, the post-9/11 analytic focus on quick-turnaround secrets is not good enough. Strategic planning—informed by intelligence—must take place for the United States to stay ahead of whatever new threats China may pose. An incoming conservative President will have the opportunity to signal the demand for such strategic products and prioritize their production through communications to intelligence leaders and formal mechanisms such as shifting priorities within the National Intelligence Priority Framework and structuring the President’s Daily Brief. The incoming DNI should also emphasize implementing the recommendations in the Ombudsman’s report, especially regarding objectiv- ity, the inclusion of dissenting viewpoints, and more serious efforts to hold senior leaders accountable for backchannel attempts to change or suppress analytic views. Accounting for the long history of intelligence failures and surprises, an incom- ing conservative President must appreciate the ambiguity, complexity, limits, and assumptions inherent in intelligence assessments. Intelligence often deals with the human dimension in complex decision systems within a foreign country or organi- zation, and this makes consistently accurate predictions difficult if not impossible to develop. Seeing something and understanding what you are seeing are two dif- ferent things, so a President should consistently and patiently press the IC about its potential biases, assumptions, methodology, and sourcing. With regard to election-threat analysis and politically controversial topics, agency leaders should take seriously the Ombudsman’s admonition that we need to maintain tradecraft standards across all countries and topics by ensuring that equitable standards apply across all foreign threat actors. Analysis should be put forward without regard to the domestic political ramifications of intelligence conclusions. “Obligation to Share” and Real-Time Auditing Capability. The fed- eral government has made admirable progress in recent years by being more

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills