A Republican bill with 2 Democratic cosponsors · See all 6 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 ARMOR Act aims to modify provisions regarding defense trade and cooperation between the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom. It seeks to expand the expedited review of export licenses to include various transfers, reexports, and brokering activities occurring within or between those nations and Canada. The bill also clarifies that certain congressional notification requirements will not apply to specific exemptions. Additionally, it mandates a review of the "Excluded Technologies List" by the Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense. Finally, it requires the President to submit annual reports on the use of the expedited review process.
Yes
- Scored +5
Does this strengthen ties with allied countries?
The bill strengthens defense cooperation and trade logistics among the US, UK, Australia, and Canada.
- Scored +4
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill mandates annual reports on the use of the expedited review process to Congress.
- Scored +3
Does this make trade with other countries easier?
The bill streamlines the export/import process for defense articles among allied nations.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill reduces congressional notification requirements for certain defense transfers.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased efficiency in defense operations: The bill seeks to address inefficiencies in defense repair, maintenance, and sustainment among Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States (Section 2).
-
Expanded expedited licensing: The expansion of the expedited review process to include transfers, reexports, temporary imports, and brokering activities could streamline how defense articles and services are moved within the specified territories (Section 3(a)(1)).
-
Regular oversight of technology lists: The requirement for the Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense to review the "Excluded Technologies List" ensures that only items required for national security remain subject to continued licensing review (Section 3(c)(1)).
-
Increased transparency through reporting: The President is required to submit annual reports for 15 years detailing the progress of the expedited review process, the number of licenses issued, and the applicants and items involved (Section 3(a)(2)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Reduction in congressional oversight: The bill amends the Arms Export Control Act so that congressional notification requirements for certain exports or transfers will not apply (Section 3(b)).
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 strengthen ties with allied countries? — The bill strengthens defense cooperation and trade logistics among the US, UK, Australia, and Canada. Does this make trade with other countries easier? — The bill streamlines the export/import process for defense articles among allied nations.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill mandates annual reports on the use of the expedited review process to Congress. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill reduces congressional notification requirements for certain defense transfers.
- 9/3/2025
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
- 9/2/2025
- 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 H3736-3737)
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H3736-3737)
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4233.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3736-3738)
- Mr. Baumgartner moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
- 7/22/2025
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 48 - 2.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/16/2025
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- 6/27/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Gabe AmoDemocrat · Rhode Island
Michael BaumgartnerRepublican · Washington
Madeleine DeanDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Michael LawlerRepublican · New York
Aumua Amata RadewagenRepublican · American Samoa
Ryan ZinkeRepublican · Montana