Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA)
Critical Infrastructure Manufacturing Feasibility Act
A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Became Public Law No: 119-127.
Became law
Passed both chambers and was signed by the President, or became law without a signature.
Nothing more in Congress: it is law. When it takes effect depends on the dates written into it — some parts start at once, others a year or more later.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed House voice vote
- Passed Senate unanimous consent
- To President
- Became Law
No one's position on it was recorded: the House by voice vote (members called out yes or no together), and the Senate by unanimous consent (no one objected, so there was no vote).
What this bill would do
This bill is known as the Critical Infrastructure Manufacturing Feasibility Act. It directs the Secretary of Commerce to conduct a study on the feasibility of manufacturing products for critical infrastructure sectors within the United States. The Secretary has one year after the enactment of the Act to complete this study. Additionally, the Secretary must submit a report containing the study results and recommendations to Congress within 18 months. This report must also be made available to the public on the Department of Commerce website. Lastly, the bill clarifies that the Secretary of Commerce does not have the authority to force anyone to provide information for this study.
Yes· 3 of 8
- Scored +2
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
The bill specifically analyzes manufacturing feasibility in rural areas.
- Scored +2
Is this likely to create jobs?
The study investigates the potential for domestic job creation in manufacturing sectors.
- Scored +2
Does this invest in rural communities?
The bill specifically directs a study on the feasibility of manufacturing in rural areas.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 2(a)(2)(A) requires the study to analyze effects on jobs, employment rates, and labor conditions in the United States, which could help lawmakers understand how to improve work opportunities for the people.
-
Section 2(a)(4) analyzes the feasibility and impediments of manufacturing products in a rural area, an industrial park, or an industrial park in a rural area, which may highlight opportunities to bring work and economic focus to these specific locations.
-
Section 2(b)(2) requires the Secretary to make the report available to the public on the website of the Department of Commerce, ensuring that everyday citizens can access the findings and hold elected officials accountable for what is done with the information.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Based on the provided text, there are no specific sections or provisions that explicitly cause negative consequences or burdens 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.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The bill specifically analyzes manufacturing feasibility in rural areas. Would business owners be better off under this? — Potential increases in manufacturing could create new business opportunities. Would union members be better off under this? — The study examines effects on jobs and labor conditions, which may benefit workers.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — The study investigates the potential for domestic job creation in manufacturing sectors. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Identifying domestic manufacturing opportunities may foster long-term economic growth.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — The bill specifically directs a study on the feasibility of manufacturing in rural areas.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill requires the report to be made available to the public.
- Healthcare
- Does this make the country readier for the next outbreak? — Strengthening critical infrastructure manufacturing can improve national resilience against future disruptions.
- Public Law (10/21/2026)
The text as it became law
- Enrolled Bill
The final version, on its way to the President
- 10/20/2026
- Signed by President.
- Became Public Law No: 119-127.
- 10/14/2026
- Presented to President.
- 9/24/2026
- Message on Senate action sent to the House.
- 9/23/2026
- Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation discharged by Unanimous Consent.
- Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S4892)
- Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S4892)
- 4/29/2025
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
- 4/28/2025
- 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. (text: CR H1651)
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1651)
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1721.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1651-1652)
- Mr. Bilirakis moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
- 4/24/2025
- Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 119-76.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 53.
- 3/11/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/4/2025
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
- 2/27/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- 1 Cosponsor 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.
Erin HouchinRepublican · Indiana
Kim SchrierDemocrat · Washington