A Republican bill with 3 Democratic cosponsors · See all 16 cosponsors
Last activity — Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
In the other chamber's committee
Passed one chamber and has been handed to a committee in the other.
The committee decides whether it goes any further, and most bills that reach a committee never leave it. A committee that simply does nothing kills a bill without anyone ever voting against it, so no news from here is usually the news.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed House voice vote
- In Senate committee
The House by voice vote (members called out yes or no together): no member's position on it was recorded.
What this bill would do
The Strategic Ports Reporting Act directs the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense to monitor the People's Republic of China's efforts to control strategic ports. It requires the creation of a global map of domestic and foreign ports important to U.S. military, diplomatic, or economic interests. The Act mandates a comprehensive study on how Chinese control of these ports could harm U.S. national security and economic interests. This study must examine the activities of various actors and the impact of Chinese maritime logistics products. Additionally, the government must develop strategies to ensure open access and security for these ports. A full report containing these findings and suggested strategies must be submitted to Congress within one year.
Yes· 3 of 6
- Scored +5
Does this better protect the country from computer attacks?
The bill addresses potential cyber threats posed by PRC control of strategic ports.
- Scored +4
Does this strengthen ties with allied countries?
Securing ports benefits the security interests of U.S. allies and partners.
- Scored +4
Does this make trade with other countries easier?
Ensuring open access to strategic ports protects international maritime trade stability.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection of National Security and Economic Interests: The bill aims to identify how control of strategic ports by the PRC could harm the national security or economic interests of the United States and its partners (Section 3(a)(6)).
-
Ensuring Open Access to Infrastructure: The study seeks to identify measures the U.S. Government can take to ensure open access and security for strategic ports (Section 3(a)(7)).
-
Providing Economic Alternatives: The Act directs the development of a strategy to offer alternatives to PRC investments or stakes in strategic ports (Section 3(a)(7)).
-
Securing Trusted Investment: The bill calls for a strategy to secure trusted investment and ownership of strategic ports and maritime infrastructure (Section 3(c)(2)(F)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Increased Costs for Infrastructure Changes: The required report must assess the costs to replace products owned by the Government of the PRC or entities headquartered in the PRC that are used in connection with strategic ports (Section 3(c)(2)(F)(iv)).
-
Potential National Security Threats: The bill notes that investments or activities by the PRC could pose national security threats to United States diplomatic and defense personnel and facilities via cyber threats or espionage (Section 3(c)(2)(H)).
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.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this better protect the country from computer attacks? — The bill addresses potential cyber threats posed by PRC control of strategic ports. Does this strengthen ties with allied countries? — Securing ports benefits the security interests of U.S. allies and partners. Does this make trade with other countries easier? — Ensuring open access to strategic ports protects international maritime trade stability.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill requires mapping and reporting to provide transparency on foreign control of ports. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands federal monitoring and strategy-making regarding strategic ports.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — The act seeks to protect economic interests by ensuring open access to strategic ports.
- 5/22/2025
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
- Considered as unfinished business.
- 5/19/2025
- At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Huizenga objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was considered as withdrawn.
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1701.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2116-2119; text: CR H2116-2117)
- Mr. Huizenga moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 4/30/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/28/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/9/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/25/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 3/11/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/10/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/6/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/5/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 3/3/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/27/2025
- Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Jake AuchinclossDemocrat · Massachusetts
Mike BostRepublican · Illinois
James BairdRepublican · Indiana
Nicholas BegichRepublican · Alaska
Ken CalvertRepublican · California
Mark GreenRepublican · Tennessee
Michael LawlerRepublican · New York
Michael McCaulRepublican · Texas
Barry MooreRepublican · Alabama
James MoylanRepublican · Guam
Johnny OlszewskiDemocrat · Maryland
Aumua Amata RadewagenRepublican · American Samoa
Maria SalazarRepublican · Florida
Greg StantonDemocrat · Arizona
Jefferson ShreveRepublican · Indiana
Robert WittmanRepublican · Virginia