STRIDE Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/6058
Last Updated: July 16, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]

ID: H001058

Follow the money

The bill

STRIDE Act

HR. 6058, 119th Congress — read as touching Semiconductors & Hardware.

The sponsor

Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]

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

The money

$323,650 raised

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

The alignment

62% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 816-818 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 44 - 0.

April 21, 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 esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The STRIDE Act (because who doesn't love a good acronym?) claims to promote "multilateral semiconductor technology supply chain coordination" and prevent China from dominating the industry. How noble. In reality, it's just another attempt to justify protectionist policies under the guise of national security.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill creates a framework for coordinating with allied nations to restrict exports of critical semiconductor technologies to countries deemed "adversarial" (read: China). It also expands existing export control authorities, because who needs due process when you can just label someone an "enemy"? The Secretary of State gets to play judge, jury, and executioner in determining which countries are cooperating sufficiently.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: semiconductor companies, their lobbyists, and the politicians they've bought. Oh, and let's not forget the Chinese Communist Party, because who doesn't love a good villain? The bill also claims to protect "United States-origin technology and intellectual property," but we all know that's just code for "we want to maintain our grip on the global tech industry."

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of "security theater." It creates a false sense of urgency around China's supposed plans for world domination, while in reality, it's just another attempt to prop up American tech companies and their lobbying efforts. The real impact will be on smaller countries and companies that can't afford to play the export control game, effectively shutting them out of the global market.

In short, this bill is a masterclass in legislative doublespeak. It's a thinly veiled attempt to justify protectionism, while pretending to care about national security. I give it two thumbs down, or rather, two middle fingers up.

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

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$323,650
24 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$8,550
Committees
$0
Individuals
$315,100

No PAC contributions found

1
POKAGON BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS
1 transaction
$3,300
2
THALOP LLC
2 transactions
$2,000
3
BARREL DOG, LLC
1 transaction
$1,000
4
NOAH HOMES LLC
1 transaction
$1,000
5
B&B DAIRY
2 transactions
$1,000
6
STRAIGHT LINE RED ANGUS
1 transaction
$250

No committee contributions found

1
VAN ANDEL, AMY
1 transaction
$75,000
2
VAN ANDEL, STEPHEN
1 transaction
$75,000
3
HAWORTH, RICHARD G
1 transaction
$47,900
4
SCHWARZMAN, CHRISTINE H.
1 transaction
$11,600
5
SCHWARZMAN, STEPHEN A
1 transaction
$11,600
6
HAWORTH, MATT R
1 transaction
$11,600
7
QUINTILIAN, JOSEPH
1 transaction
$11,600
8
HIBMA, DANIEL
2 transactions
$11,600
9
SHINELDECKER, SHAR
2 transactions
$10,200
10
KLINSKY, STEVEN B.
1 transaction
$6,600
11
DIPRISCO, GREGORY
1 transaction
$6,600
12
PAYNE, ROBERT
1 transaction
$5,800
13
BAKER, JEFFREY
1 transaction
$5,000
14
CARMICHAEL, CATHRYN B
1 transaction
$5,000
15
PETERS, JAMES
1 transaction
$5,000
16
LANTING, ARLYN
1 transaction
$5,000
17
LANTING, MARCIA
1 transaction
$5,000
18
WORKMAN, JOHN
1 transaction
$5,000

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

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

Del. Moylan, James C. [R-GU-At Large]

ID: M001219

Top Contributors

10

1
EYE OF THE TIGER PAC
PACARLINGTON, VA
$5,000
Sep 20, 2024
2
JOHNSON FOR LOUISIANA
CCMMETARIE, LA
$2,000
Oct 18, 2024
3
ROBERT J. TORRES TRUST
OrganizationTAMUNING, GU
$250
Feb 19, 2024
4
MOYLAN, JUDITH A.
MOYLAN'S INSURANCEPRESIDENT
IndividualBARRIGADA HEIGHTS, GU
$3,300
Oct 21, 2024
5
ANDERSON, KIM FELL
SECURITY TITLEVICE PRESIDENT
IndividualTAMUNING, GU
$3,300
Sep 20, 2024
6
HABECK, TERRY W
AVIATION CONCEPTS INC.CEO
IndividualBARRIGADA, GU
$3,300
Aug 20, 2024
7
YSRAEL, MICHAEL
YTANO TA PARTNERSCEO
IndividualTUMON, GU
$3,300
Aug 20, 2024
8
YSRAEL, THERESA
Y TANO TA PARTNERSVICE PRESIDENT
IndividualTAMUNING, GU
$3,300
Aug 20, 2024
9
FLORES, PHILIP J.
BANK PACIFICPRESIDENT
IndividualHAGATNA, GU
$3,000
Jun 13, 2024
10
SGRO, ANTHONY P
PARADISE FITNESSPRESIDENT
IndividualHAGATNA, GU
$3,000
Jun 20, 2024

Rep. Crenshaw, Dan [R-TX-2]

ID: C001120

Top Contributors

10

1
CHEVRON
OrganizationSAN RAMON, CA
$5,000
Sep 4, 2024
2
COMPLETE EMERGENCY CARE HOLDING LLC
OrganizationSOUTHLAKE, TX
$3,500
Mar 11, 2024
3
SANDLIAN REALTY
OrganizationWICHITA, KS
$1,000
Feb 7, 2024
4
ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE
OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX
$1,000
Sep 30, 2024
5
RUSSELL W H KRIDEL MD PA
OrganizationHOUSTON, TX
$250
Feb 28, 2023
6
JONES RANCH LLC
OrganizationCORPUS CHRISTI, TX
$250
Mar 13, 2024
7
MAFRIGE, DAVID
SELFCOMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$9,900
Jun 21, 2023
8
MAFRIGE, DAVID
SELFCOMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$9,900
Jun 21, 2023
9
ODEN, KEITH
CAMDEN PROPERTY TRUSTEXECUTIVE VICE CHAIRMAN
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$9,900
Jun 27, 2023
10
ODEN, KEITH
CAMDEN PROPERTY TRUSTEXECUTIVE VICE CHAIRMAN
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$9,900
Jun 27, 2023

Rep. Lawler, Michael [R-NY-17]

ID: L000599

Top Contributors

10

1
MURTAGH, COSSU, VENDITTI & CASTRO-BLANCO, LLP
OrganizationWHITE PLAINS, NY
$1,000
Feb 24, 2024
2
BATMASIAN, JAMES
INVESTMENTS LIMITEDOWNER
IndividualBOCA RATON, FL
$6,600
Sep 27, 2023
3
BATMASIAN, JAMES
IndividualBOCA RATON, FL
$6,600
Sep 29, 2023
4
AUSTIN, ROBERT
UNAKA CO., INC.BUSINESSMAN
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$6,600
Jul 18, 2024
5
SILVERMAN, JEFFREY
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualSURFSIDE, FL
$6,534
Feb 15, 2024
6
SILVERMAN, JEFFREY
IndividualSURFSIDE, FL
$6,534
Feb 22, 2024
7
SCALA, MARY ELLEN
RETIREDRETIRED
IndividualPORT CHESTER, NY
$5,300
Aug 27, 2023
8
DEUTSCH, SHMULEY
SELFPRESIDENT
IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY
$3,900
Jun 24, 2024
9
DEUTSCH, SHMULEY
IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY
$3,900
Jun 25, 2024
10
PERLMUTTER, RAFUEL
GOLDEN TASTECEO
IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY
$3,400
Jun 24, 2024

Rep. Shreve, Jefferson [R-IN-6]

ID: S001229

Top Contributors

10

1
SASSO, APRIL
HOMEMAKERHOMEMAKER
IndividualCARMEL, IN
$6,600
Oct 30, 2024
2
PONDER, JACQUELINE
BOWMAN FAMILY HOLDINGSLAWYER
IndividualGREENWOOD, IN
$3,437
Oct 29, 2024
3
KING, CHRISTOPHER M.
RUNNEBOHM CONSTRUCTION, INC.OWNER
IndividualSHELBYVILLE, IN
$3,300
Jun 7, 2024
4
CALDWELL, JORDAN
CALDWELL'S INC.EXECUTIVE
IndividualSHELBYVILLE, IN
$3,300
Oct 20, 2024
5
DOPPELT, BRIAN
BAINBRIDGE COMPANIESEXECUTIVE
IndividualBOCA RATON, FL
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
6
KING, KYLIE A.
HOMEMAKERHOMEMAKER
IndividualSHELBYVILLE, IN
$3,300
Oct 20, 2024
7
SASSO, RICK C.
INDIANA SPINE GROUPPHYSICIAN
IndividualCARMEL, IN
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
8
SCHUMACHER, AMY MAE
THE HERITAGE GROUPCEO
IndividualCARMEL, IN
$3,300
Oct 22, 2024
9
MCALLISTER, CHRIS
TARBERT PROPERTIES LPPARTNER
IndividualINDIANAPOLIS, IN
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
10
ZINK, JAMES C.
ZINK DISTRIBUTINGCHAIRMAN / CEO
IndividualINDIANAPOLIS, IN
$3,300
Nov 2, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 61 nodes and 40 connections (47 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $367,937

Top Donors - Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]

Showing top 24 donors by contribution amount

6 Orgs18 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 1 helped.

  • Section 4(a)-(e) directs the Secretary of State to coordinate with allied nations to protect semiconductor technology supply chains, expand export controls, and enhance trusted supplier networks, directly benefiting semiconductor manufacturers and equipment suppliers.

Project 2025 Policy Matches

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

Introduction

Moderate61.9%
Pages: 816-818

— 783 — Trade tariffs.17 A conservative Administration might do well to look at such a tax as part of its trade agenda. CHALLENGE #2: COMMUNIST CHINA’S ECONOMIC AGGRESSION AND QUEST FOR WORLD DOMINATION18 Among all of its bilateral trade relationships, America’s relationship with Com- munist China is the most fraught with difficulty. The problem is not just that the relentlessly mercantilist and protectionist trade policies that China has pursued ever since its accession to the WTO in 2001 have led to chronic, massive, and ever-expanding trade deficits. Communist China’s economic aggression in the traditional trade policy space is further facilitated by equally aggressive industrial policies and technology transfer–forcing policies that are designed to shift the world’s manufacturing and supply chains to Communist Chinese soil. The Chinese Communist Party’s policy goal is to propel the Chinese economy, but its broader goal is to strengthen Communist China’s defense industrial base and associated warfighting capabilities. That China unabashedly seeks to supplant America as the world’s dominant economic and military power is not in dispute. Rather, it is a prominent feature of Communist Chinese dictator Xi Jinping’s rhet- oric. Xi has promised that the deed will be done by 2049, the 100-year anniversary of the Communist takeover of the Mainland.19 In light of Communist China’s broader geopolitical and military agenda, the American President who takes office in January 2025 must view the U.S.–China trade relationship and associated policy reforms within the context of the broader existential threat posed by Communist China. The question is whether that next President should seek to decouple economically and financially from Communist China as America’s first best response to China’s unrelenting aggression or con- tinue efforts to negotiate with an authoritarian country and brutal dictatorship with a well-established reputation for failing to abide by any agreements it enters. Institutionalized Aggression. Table 5 depicts more than 50 types of policy aggression institutionalized by the CCP across six different categories of such aggression. Viewed as whole, the extent of Communist China’s aggression is breathtaking. At the trade policy level, Communist China relies heavily on a wide range of mercantilist and protectionist tools to protect its own markets and unfairly exploit foreign markets. These instruments of Communist Chinese trade aggression include high tariffs and nontariff barriers, currency manipulation, a heavy reli- ance on sweatshop labor and pollution havens, the dumping of unfairly subsidized exports, and widespread counterfeiting and piracy: Communist China is the world’s largest source of counterfeit and pirated products. In addition, Communist Chinese enterprises benefit from preferential policies that have burdened world markets with subsidized overcapacity. The resultant glut

Introduction

Moderate61.9%
Pages: 816-818

— 783 — Trade tariffs.17 A conservative Administration might do well to look at such a tax as part of its trade agenda. CHALLENGE #2: COMMUNIST CHINA’S ECONOMIC AGGRESSION AND QUEST FOR WORLD DOMINATION18 Among all of its bilateral trade relationships, America’s relationship with Com- munist China is the most fraught with difficulty. The problem is not just that the relentlessly mercantilist and protectionist trade policies that China has pursued ever since its accession to the WTO in 2001 have led to chronic, massive, and ever-expanding trade deficits. Communist China’s economic aggression in the traditional trade policy space is further facilitated by equally aggressive industrial policies and technology transfer–forcing policies that are designed to shift the world’s manufacturing and supply chains to Communist Chinese soil. The Chinese Communist Party’s policy goal is to propel the Chinese economy, but its broader goal is to strengthen Communist China’s defense industrial base and associated warfighting capabilities. That China unabashedly seeks to supplant America as the world’s dominant economic and military power is not in dispute. Rather, it is a prominent feature of Communist Chinese dictator Xi Jinping’s rhet- oric. Xi has promised that the deed will be done by 2049, the 100-year anniversary of the Communist takeover of the Mainland.19 In light of Communist China’s broader geopolitical and military agenda, the American President who takes office in January 2025 must view the U.S.–China trade relationship and associated policy reforms within the context of the broader existential threat posed by Communist China. The question is whether that next President should seek to decouple economically and financially from Communist China as America’s first best response to China’s unrelenting aggression or con- tinue efforts to negotiate with an authoritarian country and brutal dictatorship with a well-established reputation for failing to abide by any agreements it enters. Institutionalized Aggression. Table 5 depicts more than 50 types of policy aggression institutionalized by the CCP across six different categories of such aggression. Viewed as whole, the extent of Communist China’s aggression is breathtaking. At the trade policy level, Communist China relies heavily on a wide range of mercantilist and protectionist tools to protect its own markets and unfairly exploit foreign markets. These instruments of Communist Chinese trade aggression include high tariffs and nontariff barriers, currency manipulation, a heavy reli- ance on sweatshop labor and pollution havens, the dumping of unfairly subsidized exports, and widespread counterfeiting and piracy: Communist China is the world’s largest source of counterfeit and pirated products. In addition, Communist Chinese enterprises benefit from preferential policies that have burdened world markets with subsidized overcapacity. The resultant glut — 784 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise of Communist Chinese exports in turn depresses world prices and pushes foreign rivals out of the global market—steel is a major example.20 Industrial policy tools that further reinforce Communist China’s mercantilist and protectionist trade policies include numerous direct and indirect subsidies to boost exports and the consolidation of heavily subsidized state-owned enterprises into “national champi- ons” that can compete with foreign companies in both domestic and global markets. Communist China also uses a predatory “debt trap” model of economic develop- ment aid that proffers substantial financing to developing countries in exchange for their willingness to mortgage their natural resources and allow Communist China access to their markets. The practical effect of this debt trap model is to give Com- munist China a competitive edge internationally that stems from its preferential access to relatively lower-cost commodities needed in the manufacturing process. These commodities range from bauxite, copper, and nickel to rarer commodities such as beryllium, titanium, and rare earth minerals. As a complement to this debt trap gambit and to exploit its commanding share of a wide range of critical raw materials that are essential to the global supply chain and production of high-technology and high-value-added products, Com- munist China strategically uses protectionist export restraints, including export quotas and export duties. These export restraints thereby restrict access to raw materials such as rare earth, tungsten, and molybdenum that are essential in the high-technology production space. The result is to drive up world prices and thereby put pressure on American and other foreign downstream producers to move their operations, technologies, and jobs to Communist China. American industries that have been affected by Communist China’s export restraints range from steel, chemicals, and electric cars to wind turbines, lasers, semiconductors, and refrigerants. Technology-Forcing Policies. Table 6, extracted from the White House Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy’s report on Communist China’s economic aggression,21 provides a summary of the various policies the Chinese Communist Party uses to force the transfer of the West’s technologies to Communist Chinese soil. Formally, Communist Chinese industrial policy seeks to promote the “diges- tion, absorption, and re-innovation” of technologies and intellectual property (IP) from around the world.22 As noted in Table 6, this policy is carried out, for example, through state-spon- sored IP theft—coercive and intrusive regulatory gambits to force technology transfer, typically in exchange for limited access to the Chinese market. Commu- nist China’s looting of American technology is further enhanced by “information harvesting” conducted by Communist Chinese nationals who infiltrate U.S. uni- versities, national laboratories, and other centers of innovation. Strategic sectors targeted by Communist Chinese economic espionage have included electronics, telecommunications, robotics, data services, pharmaceuticals, mobile phone

Introduction

Moderate61.8%
Pages: 798-800

— 765 — 26 TRADE THE CASE FOR FAIR TRADE Peter Navarro For decades the world has struggled with a shifting maze of punitive tariffs, export subsidies, quotas, dollar-locked currencies, and the like. Many of these import-inhibiting and export-encouraging devices have long been employed by major exporting countries trying to amass ever larger [trade] surpluses. Warren Buffett, CEO, Berkshire Hathaway1 The Chinese government is implementing a comprehensive, long-term industrial strategy to ensure its global dominance…. Beijing’s ultimate goal is for domestic companies to replace foreign companies as designers and manufacturers of key technology and products first at home, then abroad. U.S.–China Economic and Security Review Commission2 The United States of America is the world’s dominant superpower and remains the world’s arsenal of democracy. To maintain that global positioning—and thereby best protect the homeland and our own democratic institutions—it is critical that the United States strengthen its manufacturing and defense industrial base at the same time that it increases the reliability and resilience of its globally dispersed — 766 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise supply chains. That will necessarily require the onshoring of a significant portion of production currently offshored by American multinational corporations. Trade policy can and must play an essential role in an American manufacturing and defense industrial base renaissance. However, several major challenges in the international trading environment are pushing America in the opposite direction. The first challenge is rooted in MFN: the “most favored nation” rule of the World Trade Organization (WTO). According to the MFN rule, WTO members must apply the lowest tariffs that they apply to the products of any one country to the products of every other country.3 However, WTO members can charge higher tariffs if they apply these nonreciprocal tariffs to all countries. The practical result has been the systematic exploitation of American farmers, ranchers, manufacturers, and workers through higher tariffs institutionalized by MFN. In turn, this unfair and nonreciprocal trade has resulted in chronic U.S. trade deficits with much of the rest of the world. This systemic trade imbalance serves as a brake and bridle on both GDP growth and real wages in the American economy while encumbering the U.S. with significant foreign debt. The second challenge is part of the broader existential threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in its quest for global dominance. That chal- lenge is rooted in the CCP’s continued economic aggression, which begins with mercantilist and protectionist trade policy tools such as tariffs, nontariff barriers, dumping, counterfeiting and piracy, and currency manipulation. However, Com- munist China’s economic aggression also extends to an intricate set of industrial policies and technology transfer–forcing policies that have dramatically skewed the international trading arena. Both the unfair, unbalanced, and nonreciprocal trade institutionalized by the WTO and Communist China’s economic aggression are weakening America’s man- ufacturing and defense industrial base even as the fragility of globally dispersed supply chains has been brought into sharp relief by the COVID-19 pandemic with its associated lockdowns and other disruptions and by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Russian revanchism, in particular, has demonstrated once again how bad actors on the world stage can use trade policy (for example, export restraints on natural gas) as a weapon of war. LAYING THE TRADE DEFICIT PREDICATE The great football coach Bill Parcells once said, “You are what your record says you are.” America’s record on trade—specifically American’s chronic and ever-ex- panding trade deficit—says that America is the globe’s biggest trade loser and a victim of unfair, unbalanced, and nonreciprocal trade. During the first year of the Biden Administration, the overall U.S. trade defi- cit, including goods and services, soared by 29 percent, from $654 billion in 2020 to $845 billion in 2021.4 Over the same time period, imports of consumer goods,

Showing 3 of 4 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