Electric Supply Chain Act
Download PDFSponsored by
Rep. Latta, Robert E. [R-OH-5]
ID: L000566
Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
December 11, 2025
Introduced
π 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
π 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 119th Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?
HR 3638, the Electric Supply Chain Act, is a bill that claims to address the vulnerabilities in our electricity supply chain. How noble. But, as always, let's look beyond the PR spin and examine the actual symptoms.
**New Regulations:** The bill creates new regulations requiring the Secretary of Energy to prepare periodic assessments on the supply chain for generating and transmitting electricity. Wow, what a unique idea β more reports! Because that's exactly what our energy sector needs β more bureaucratic red tape.
**Affected Industries and Sectors:** This bill affects the entire energy sector, from generation to transmission to distribution. But let's be real; it's not like these industries are going to be significantly impacted by this bill. The real beneficiaries will be the consultants, lawyers, and lobbyists who'll make a killing off of "helping" companies navigate these new regulations.
**Compliance Requirements and Timelines:** The Secretary must submit reports within one year of enactment and periodically thereafter. Oh, I can already see the excitement building among energy executives as they scramble to comply with this onerous requirement.
**Enforcement Mechanisms and Penalties:** There are no explicit enforcement mechanisms or penalties mentioned in the bill. How convenient. It's almost as if our esteemed lawmakers want to create a toothless tiger that'll only serve to further enrich their campaign donors.
**Economic and Operational Impacts:** The economic impact of this bill will be negligible, except for the aforementioned consultants and lobbyists who'll reap the benefits. Operationally, it'll just add more bureaucratic hurdles for energy companies to jump through, increasing costs and decreasing efficiency.
Now, let's take a look at the real disease beneath this legislative theater:
**Diagnosis:** This bill is suffering from a severe case of "Regulatory Capture-itis." The symptoms are clear: vague language, lack of enforcement mechanisms, and a focus on creating more reports rather than actual solutions. It's a classic case of politicians pandering to their donors while pretending to address a pressing issue.
**Treatment:** The treatment for this disease is simple: transparency and accountability. But don't hold your breath; our lawmakers are too busy lining their pockets with campaign donations from the very industries they're supposed to be regulating.
In conclusion, HR 3638 is just another example of legislative malpractice. It's a bill that claims to address a pressing issue but ultimately serves only to further enrich special interests and increase bureaucratic red tape. The real question is: who's behind this farce? Ah, let me take a look at the campaign finance records...
Related Topics
π° Campaign Finance Network
Rep. Latta, Robert E. [R-OH-5]
Congress 119 β’ 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance
This bill has 2 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
Rep. Dunn, Neal P. [R-FL-2]
ID: D000628
Top Contributors
10
Rep. Wittman, Robert J. [R-VA-1]
ID: W000804
Top Contributors
10
Donor Network - Rep. Latta, Robert E. [R-OH-5]
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 30 nodes and 33 connections
Total contributions: $89,812
Top Donors - Rep. Latta, Robert E. [R-OH-5]
Showing top 22 donors by contribution amount
Project 2025 Policy Matches
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. Higher similarity scores indicate stronger thematic connections.
Introduction
β 365 β 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.
Introduction
β 365 β 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. β 366 β 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 DOEβs 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;
Introduction
β 380 β Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Budget EERE was funded at slightly more than $2.8 billion in FY 2021, and DOE requested slightly more than $4.0 billion for FY 2023.47 Congress needs to rescind the appropriated monies that EERE has not spent and begin fresh with new appropriations. GRID DEPLOYMENT OFFICE (GDO) Mission/Overview The Grid Deployment Office was established to implement parts of the Infra- structure Investment and Jobs Act. Pursuant to the IIJA, GDO administers funds appropriated by Congress to support transmission expansion and low/zero carbon resources. In addition, GDO is developing studies of the electric grid to address congestion, enhance reliability and resilience, and promote βcleanβ energy.48 Needed Reforms l End grid planning and focus instead on reliability. FERC and NERC have the primary responsibility for addressing reliability, states have the primary authority to site and permit transmission lines, and regional transmission organizations assist in planning regional transmission needs for parts of the country, but Congress granted some grid planning and siting authority to FERC and DOE through the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and IIJA, as well as grid funding through the Inflation Reduction Act. Instead of focusing on grid expansion for the benefit of renewable resources or supporting low/carbon generation, GDO should be incorporated into the reformed Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response, which would work to enhance the gridβs reliability and resilience. To the extent that they remain in effect, the funding programs that GDO oversees and administers should emphasize grid reliability, not renewables expansion. l Consider whether to defund the civil nuclear tax credit program and hydroelectric power efficiency and production incentives established in the IIJA and administered through GDO. If subsidies for renewable resources are not repealed, it may be necessary to continue subsidies for nuclear and hydro to ensure grid reliability. New Policies l Eliminate GDO and assign necessary activities to the reformed CESER. It appears that GDOβs current purpose is to promote the integration of low/zero carbon resources onto the grid by supporting subsidies for such resources and building new transmission facilities at
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.