Rules Committee · May 7, 2025
H.Amdt. 17: Its purpose is not yet published.
Adopted
With no one objecting, no names recorded
August Pfluger (R-TX)
DHS Restrictions on Confucius Institutes and Chinese Entities of Concern Act
H.R. 881 · House bill Education
A Republican bill with 5 Republican cosponsors · See all 5 cosponsors
Last activity — Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
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 266–153
- In Senate committee
What this bill would do
This Act, titled the "DHS Restrictions on Confucius Institutes and Chinese Entities of Concern Act," establishes funding restrictions for higher education institutions. It targets schools that maintain relationships with Confucius Institutes, the Thousand Talents Program, or specific "Chinese entities of concern." Under this law, such institutions would become ineligible for Department of Homeland Security funds unless they terminate these relationships. The Secretary of Homeland Security has the authority to issue limited, one-year waivers for institutions that maintain robust safeguards. The Act also requires regular reporting and provides for technical assistance to help schools comply.
Yes
- Scored +5
Does this better protect the country from computer attacks?
The bill requires institutions to implement safeguards to detect and deter unauthorized access to sensitive research and data.
- Scored +4
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The act mandates regular reports to Congress regarding the implementation of these funding restrictions.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Does this put more money into scientific research?
The threat of losing federal funding due to specific international relationships may reduce the available resources for research at affected institutions.
- Scored -2
Does this reduce what student borrowers owe or repay?
By threatening the loss of DHS funding to universities, the bill could indirectly impact the financial stability of institutions that serve students.
- Scored -2
Would students be better off under this?
The potential loss of federal funding to higher education institutions could negatively impact the resources available to students.
What Congress actually voted on
One recorded vote has been taken on this bill.
- The House: the vote on whether to pass the bill This is the real decision in this chamber. Passing here sends the bill to the other chamber, which must pass it too before it can go to the President. Passed 266 yes · 153 no
05/07/2025 · Roll call 120 · recorded as “On Passage”
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection of sensitive research and data: The bill encourages institutions to maintain safeguards to detect and deter unauthorized access to sensitive research, data, or federally funded development activities (Section 2(c)(1)).
-
National security oversight: The Act provides a mechanism for the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Director of National Intelligence to evaluate whether specific relationships are in the national security interests of the United States or present a risk (Section 2(c)(1)).
-
Compliance support: The Secretary of Homeland Security is tasked with providing outreach and technical assistance to help institutions comply with the requirements of the Act (Section 2(d)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Loss of federal funding: Institutions of higher education that maintain relationships with Confucius Institutes, the Thousand Talents Program, or defined "Chinese entities of concern" will be ineligible to receive funds from the Department of Homeland Security (Section 2(b)).
-
Financial risk for schools with specific partnerships: Schools that have entered into contracts, agreements, or received gifts/donations from these entities face the loss of DHS funding unless they terminate those relationships (Section 2(a)(4) and Section 2(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.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into scientific research? — The threat of losing federal funding due to specific international relationships may reduce the available resources for research at affected institutions. Does this reduce what student borrowers owe or repay? — By threatening the loss of DHS funding to universities, the bill could indirectly impact the financial stability of institutions that serve students.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this better protect the country from computer attacks? — The bill requires institutions to implement safeguards to detect and deter unauthorized access to sensitive research and data.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The act mandates regular reports to Congress regarding the implementation of these funding restrictions.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would students be better off under this? — The potential loss of federal funding to higher education institutions could negatively impact the resources available to students.
- 5/8/2025
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- 5/7/2025
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 266 - 153 (Roll no. 120). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H1891)
- On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 266 - 153 (Roll no. 120). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H1891)
- Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1895-1896)
- POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate of H.R. 881, the Chair put the question on passage of the bill and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Pfluger demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
- The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 881.
- Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 276 and H.R. 881. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 276 and H.R. 881 under a closed rule with one hour of debate and one motion to recommit on each bill.
- Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 377. (consideration: CR H1891-1894)
- 5/6/2025
- Rule H. Res. 377 passed House.
- 5/5/2025
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 119-87.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 62.
- Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 377 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 276 and H.R. 881. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 276 and H.R. 881 under a closed rule with one hour of debate and one motion to recommit on each bill.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/9/2025
- Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence Discharged
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended).
- 3/6/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 1/31/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
- Referred to the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.
- 3 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.
Gabe EvansRepublican · Colorado
Andrew GarbarinoRepublican · New York
John JoyceRepublican · Pennsylvania
Morgan LuttrellRepublican · Texas
Dale StrongRepublican · Alabama