The bill
Global Investment in American Jobs Act of 2025
HR. 1679, 119th Congress — read as touching Big Tech Platforms.
Sponsored by
Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8]
ID: E000300
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 1679, 119th Congress — read as touching Big Tech Platforms.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
20 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
The alignment
This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 699-701 of the Mandate for Leadership.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
June 23, 2025
📍 Current Status
Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.
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!
Another masterpiece of legislative theater. The "Global Investment in American Jobs Act of 2025" - a bill that's about as genuine as a politician's smile.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill is a thinly veiled attempt to curry favor with corporate interests and foreign investors, all while pretending to care about American jobs. Its primary objective is to conduct an interagency review of the global competitiveness of the United States in attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) from "responsible private-sector entities based in trusted countries." Translation: let's make it easier for rich foreigners to buy up American assets and exploit our workforce.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill requires the Secretary of Commerce, in coordination with other federal agencies, to conduct a review of FDI trends, policies, and barriers. It also calls for an assessment of the economic impact of FDI on manufacturing, services, trade, and jobs. Because, you know, we haven't already done that a million times before.
The bill's language is riddled with Orwellian doublespeak, such as "trusted countries" (read: countries that don't pose a threat to our corporate overlords) and "responsible private-sector entities" (read: entities that will make us rich). It also conveniently ignores the fact that FDI often leads to job displacement, wage stagnation, and environmental degradation.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: corporations, foreign investors, politicians looking for campaign donations, and the occasional clueless voter who thinks this bill will actually create jobs. Meanwhile, American workers, small businesses, and the environment will be left to pick up the pieces.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a recipe for disaster. By prioritizing FDI over domestic investment and job creation, we'll only exacerbate income inequality, undermine our national security, and further erode our economic sovereignty. The review process will likely be a sham, with preordained conclusions that benefit corporate interests at the expense of everyone else.
In short, this bill is a classic case of " legislative lupus" - a disease characterized by an insatiable appetite for corporate cash and a complete disregard for the well-being of ordinary citizens. The symptoms are clear: corruption, cowardice, stupidity, and greed. And the diagnosis? Terminal idiocy.
Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No organization contributions found
No committee contributions found
This bill has 2 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: K000385
Top Contributors
10
ID: F000466
Top Contributors
10
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 48 nodes and 26 connections (47 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $111,373
Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 6 helped.
Section 2(2)(C) promotes policies to ensure the United States remains the global leader in developing and deploying cutting-edge technologies such as artificial intelligence, Internet of Things, quantum computing, blockchain; Section 3(b)(12) addresses barriers like forced data localization and IP infringement that affect the advanced technology economy; Section 3(b)(6)-(7) reviews challenges from state-directed investment, especially from China, in manufacturing, services, trade (digital trade
Section 2(2)(C) explicitly names artificial intelligence as a cutting-edge technology to promote; Section 3(b)(12) addresses forced data localization and IP infringement impacting the advanced technology economy; Section 3(b)(6)-(7) reviews foreign direct investment challenges from state-directed economies, especially China, in manufacturing, services, trade (digital trade emphasis), and jobs.
Section 2(2)(C) promotes policies to ensure the United States remains the global leader in developing and deploying cutting-edge technologies, which includes semiconductors as foundational to AI, IoT, quantum computing; Section 3(b)(12) addresses technical barriers to trade and country-specific standards for technology products; Section 3(b)(6)-(7) reviews challenges from state-directed investment, especially China, in manufacturing and digital trade.
Section 2(2)(C) promotes policies for cutting-edge technologies like Internet of Things, which relies on telecommunications infrastructure; Section 3(b)(12) addresses technical barriers to trade and country-specific standards for technology products and digital services; Section 3(b)(6)-(7) reviews foreign direct investment challenges from state-directed economies, especially China, in manufacturing, services, trade (digital trade emphasis), and jobs.
Section 2(7) states that foreign direct investment by companies owned, directed, supported, or influenced by the Chinese Communist Party is a threat to U.S. security and merits an aggressive policy framework; Section 3(b)(6)-(7) specifically reviews foreign direct investment by state-owned or state-backed enterprises, especially from China, in manufacturing, services, trade (digital trade emphasis), and jobs; Section 3(c) excludes review of CFIUS laws, implying focus on broader investment climat
Section 2(2)(C) promotes policies for cutting-edge technologies like self-driving vehicle technology, which overlaps with aerospace and autonomous systems; Section 3(b)(12) addresses technical barriers to trade and country-specific standards for technology products; Section 3(b)(6)-(7) reviews foreign direct investment challenges from state-directed economies, especially China, in manufacturing and services.
For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.
— 666 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Advisory Committees. Due to the nature of the Department of Commerce’s portfolio, many of its advisory committees are populated by activists from organi- zations openly hostile to conservative principles who use the committees to impede conservative policy. Upon entering office, all such committees should be reviewed regarding whether they are required by statute and abolished if they are not. Mem- bership of the remaining committees should be reconstituted to ensure they are sources of genuine expert advice and productive contributions to the policy-making process. Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) compliance and awareness of any ways the committees have been written into regulations should be considered. INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION The International Trade Administration is centrally placed to craft and implement U.S. trade policy. Core to ITA’s mission is the expansion of trade and investment and the fostering of job creation, innovation, and economic growth, while also providing research and analysis that support USTR’s trade negotiations. ITA carries out this mission on behalf of American workers, ranchers, and families. As discussed elsewhere, historically, conservatives have argued that many fed- eral government trade and investment-oriented functions amount to corporate welfare or protectionism. There is a growing counterargument within the conser- vative movement contending that, in a world in which managed trade is the norm rather than the exception, and in which authoritarian governments, especially China, continually seek to undermine U.S. interests, the U.S. cannot unilaterally disarm. To do so would harm the cause of free trade in the long term, and, in any event, Congress is not likely to drastically change the composition or authoriza- tion of the ITA. Thus, a policy and management agenda that serves conservative priorities is crucial. In a conservative Administration, the ITA should operate with the follow- ing priorities: l Counter the malign influence of China and other U.S. adversaries; l Enforce agreements vigorously and defend against trade violations; l Secure access to critical supply chains and technology; and l Enable the private sector to drive innovation and remain globally competitive. It is important to note that a deeply entrenched set of career Senior Executive Service officials have managed the ITA for over a decade. While most are truly non-partisan civil servants, some are not. Political leadership must manage accord- ingly. Strong political leadership is needed in ITA’s policymaking positions from — 667 — Department of Commerce Day One to ensure the bureau is fully implementing Administration policy. An incoming Administration should ensure that Assistant Secretary and Deputy Assis- tant Secretary positions are staffed by appointees as quickly as possible. Enforcement and Compliance. Strong enforcement of trade agreements is an indispensable function of the ITA carried out by Enforcement & Compliance (E&C). Free and fair trade is impossible without energetic enforcement of exist- ing agreements and without strong defense against dumping and illegal subsidies. Many free trade advocates consider antidumping and countervailing duty laws (AD/CVD) to be protectionist and thus antithetical to the conservative free market position. In their view, AD/CVD laws are overused, abused by certain industries, and harmful to American economic competitiveness by increasing costs to down- stream industries. Other conservatives maintain that AD/CVD tariffs are not conventional tariffs, but rather corrective actions meant to address anti-free market activities by other governments—a scalpel, not a hammer. In the short term, this may mean higher costs for U.S. businesses and consumers on a limited number of products from cer- tain offending countries, but those higher prices correct existing price distortions in the marketplace and ultimately ensure the healthy operation of market forces in the long term and a level playing field for U.S. manufacturers. Whatever the case, improvements to the current system must be made to both protect U.S. consumers and companies from improperly applied duties and defend against trade-distorting actions by other governments. Procedures governing the day-to-day administration of proceedings, as well as policies driving critical deci- sions in proceedings, require a fresh look. Ultimately, E&C’s mandate is to conduct a rigorous but also fair, objective, and balanced review of the record in each pro- ceeding and to make decisions without bias. It is exceedingly unlikely that Congress would abolish or limit the activity of E&C. Therefore, the proposals below are made under the assumption that an incoming Administration will operate E&C within its current legal, institutional, and political confines and set a path forward to wield E&C’s considerable power to achieve the goals of a conservative Administration. These proposals can be broken into three categories: process, policy, and addressing China. Process l Re-establish and expand suspended in-person pandemic-related verifications, particularly regarding the People’s Republic of China. Ensure that verifications are rigorous. l Implement advanced analytics and artificial intelligence to identify opportunities for self-initiation, detect circumvention, and prevent bad actors from gaming the system.
— 666 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Advisory Committees. Due to the nature of the Department of Commerce’s portfolio, many of its advisory committees are populated by activists from organi- zations openly hostile to conservative principles who use the committees to impede conservative policy. Upon entering office, all such committees should be reviewed regarding whether they are required by statute and abolished if they are not. Mem- bership of the remaining committees should be reconstituted to ensure they are sources of genuine expert advice and productive contributions to the policy-making process. Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) compliance and awareness of any ways the committees have been written into regulations should be considered. INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION The International Trade Administration is centrally placed to craft and implement U.S. trade policy. Core to ITA’s mission is the expansion of trade and investment and the fostering of job creation, innovation, and economic growth, while also providing research and analysis that support USTR’s trade negotiations. ITA carries out this mission on behalf of American workers, ranchers, and families. As discussed elsewhere, historically, conservatives have argued that many fed- eral government trade and investment-oriented functions amount to corporate welfare or protectionism. There is a growing counterargument within the conser- vative movement contending that, in a world in which managed trade is the norm rather than the exception, and in which authoritarian governments, especially China, continually seek to undermine U.S. interests, the U.S. cannot unilaterally disarm. To do so would harm the cause of free trade in the long term, and, in any event, Congress is not likely to drastically change the composition or authoriza- tion of the ITA. Thus, a policy and management agenda that serves conservative priorities is crucial. In a conservative Administration, the ITA should operate with the follow- ing priorities: l Counter the malign influence of China and other U.S. adversaries; l Enforce agreements vigorously and defend against trade violations; l Secure access to critical supply chains and technology; and l Enable the private sector to drive innovation and remain globally competitive. It is important to note that a deeply entrenched set of career Senior Executive Service officials have managed the ITA for over a decade. While most are truly non-partisan civil servants, some are not. Political leadership must manage accord- ingly. Strong political leadership is needed in ITA’s policymaking positions from
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.