Ro Khanna (D-CA)
Protecting Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing as Critical Infrastructure Act
A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See all 3 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill is known as the Protecting Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing as Critical Infrastructure Act. It amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to give the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) specific duties regarding the protection of biotechnology and biomanufacturing infrastructure. The legislation directs CISA to provide technical assistance, perform analyses, and engage with owners and operators in this field. It also requires assessments and a comprehensive national plan that includes biotechnology and biomanufacturing. Additionally, the bill mandates that the Director of CISA submit a work plan, an implementation report, and a report on emerging biotechnology to specific congressional committees.
Yes· 3 of 8
- Scored +5
Does this better protect the country from computer attacks?
The legislation tasks CISA with protecting biotechnology and biomanufacturing infrastructure, enhancing cybersecurity and physical security coordination.
- Scored +3
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The legislation mandates work plans, implementation reports, and updates submitted to congressional committees, increasing accountability.
- Scored +3
Would business owners be better off under this?
Biotechnology and biomanufacturing business owners benefit from specialized CISA technical assistance and structured security coordination.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 2(a) amends Section 2202(c)(5) of the Homeland Security Act to designate agency staff to provide analyses, expertise, and technical assistance for critical infrastructure with no designated Sector-Specific Agency, which includes biotechnology and biomanufacturing infrastructure. This could benefit the industry by providing specialized government support to keep these systems secure.
-
Section 2(a) amends Section 2202(e)(1)(B) to require that security assessments for infrastructure without a designated Sector-Specific Agency be carried out in coordination with existing groups like BIO-ISAC, H-ISAC, and industry member associations. This is a positive step because it relies on collaboration with groups already working within these fields.
-
Section 2(b) requires the Director of CISA to submit a clear work plan, an implementation report, and a report on emerging biotechnology to Congress within specific timelines. Holding officials accountable through mandatory reporting ensures that Congress can track progress on protecting this vital infrastructure.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Based strictly on the provided text, there are no specific negative impacts, burdens, or consequences explicitly identified for individuals or groups of people in the United States.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The legislation mandates work plans, implementation reports, and updates submitted to congressional committees, increasing accountability. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill assigns specific infrastructure protection and reporting responsibilities to the federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this better protect the country from computer attacks? — The legislation tasks CISA with protecting biotechnology and biomanufacturing infrastructure, enhancing cybersecurity and physical security coordination.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Biotechnology and biomanufacturing business owners benefit from specialized CISA technical assistance and structured security coordination. Would students be better off under this? — Students and researchers in biotechnology fields benefit from a more secure and supported industrial and academic infrastructure.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The bill provides CISA technical assistance, analyses, and coordination to help secure biotechnology and biomanufacturing infrastructure.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into scientific research? — Improving the security and infrastructure support for biotechnology and biomanufacturing aids the broader scientific and research community.
- Healthcare
- Does this put more money into medical research? — By designating biotechnology and biomanufacturing as critical infrastructure and securing it, the bill indirectly supports the research environment.
- 11/9/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/24/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Stephanie BiceRepublican · Oklahoma
April McClain DelaneyDemocrat · Maryland
Scott PetersDemocrat · California