Various Measures

Quorum being present, committee on foreign affairs will come to order. I would ask everybody to rise, join me in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. You wanna help with it once it's done? The guy did that.

Or that.

Can I keep the binder?

Yes, you may. I'd asked earlier if there was a unanimous consent to when we go to vote, if we could just be like, Can you just use c that you say once and then you roll into whatever vote? But anyway. Cuz we're not going up to you. No, I think there's only two votes left. And back.

Uh. I'm skipping it. We're we're gonna be in block. We had thought about, let's have our staffs talk about it, Yeah. we had thought about where a possible unblock. And what? I don't know what my staff came up with, but that's a conversation too. Really? So. I mean. It's your fourth staff.

Yeah.

Yeah. I haven't talked to them very much.

I'm sure they will. I'm happy to hear it.

Yeah.

They didn't.

Money of five or

Committing his meeting today for consideration of twenty three measures. The chair announces that any requests for recorded votes may be rolled and may recess the committee at any point without objection. So ordered. Pursuant to house rules, I request that members have the opportunity to submit views for any committee report that may be produced on any of today's measures. Without objection, so ordered.

Thank you. And this is called.

Pursuant to notice, I now call up H R eight two zero two to amend the Export Control Reform Act of two thousand and eighteen provide for a ten year statute of limitations for export control violations the bill was circulated in advance and the

H R eight two zero two, to amend the Export Control Reform Act of two thousand eighteen to provide for a ten year statute of limitations for export control violations.

Without objection, the first reading is dispensed with and the bill is considered read and open to amendment at any point. And I recognize myself for a couple of minutes. Export control cases can take years to detect, investigate and prosecute. and export control violators are counting on the clock running out before we can catch them. We've seen that case again and again. Currently, export control violations have a five year statute of limitations, but in the words of Assistant Secretary of Commerce, David Peters, we need to extend it for ten for ten years. Congress has already recognized this problem, just not for BIS. For example, IEPA already has a ten year long statute of limitations. So while the Treasury has ten years to pursue sanctions

I wanna offer a few opening remarks. Uh, I appreciate the tempo of markups and many of the bills before us today to address generally critical issues. But I also just have to address that the American people will notice what isn't here. They wake up every morning to news about Trump's war with Iran, higher oil prices, the reality that we don't know why the president launched this disastrous war of choice, or what the plan is to end it. They are watching to see whether this Congress serves as a check on executive power, as the Constitution requires, or serves We've had this debate on the floor because I have forced it there. But it should be happening with the administration in this committee. A committee serious about its responsibilities would have Secretaries Rubio and Hegsath or Mister Kushner or Mister Witkoff at the witness table. We also be marking up legislation addressing the president's decision to waive restrictions on Russia and Iranian oil sales, a decision that is directly fueling the war On today's mark-up, the answer to why we are here is straightforward. The Trump administration has systematically undermined our export control regime, a regime that exists to protect American national security. The president's use of export controls, a national security tool, as tariff bargaining chips against China has already backfired with China retaliating with rare earth restrictions. The Commerce Department's Bureau of In of Industry and Security, BIS, announced new tech expert controls on China last September, only to suspend them a month later. Then in December, the Trump administration reversed Biden administration's controls on selling H two hundred chips to China. Since then, the administration has approved multiple licenses for such sales, doing direct damage to the United States' national security and our ability to lead in the AI race. The record is unambiguous. This administration has weaponized suspended and reversed export controls with nothing to show for it strategically the very fact we are holding this mark up is in admission that the trump administration has completely dropped the ball on export controls my colleagues may not say it but the bills we are marking up do bis is in disarray career experts have been pushed out or have left leaving critical vacancies licenses are delayed for months without any justification or communication to US exporters. BIS has stopped operating technical advisory committees and no longer conducts outreach to educate industry to bolster compliance. This represents direct damage to American competitiveness and enforcement capacity. I would note that stakeholders across industry have raised significant concerns about several bills before us today, concerns that a proper hearing process would have surfaced in address. The Under Secretary of BIS should have testified before this committee, so that we could hear directly from him to inform our legislation. We were supposed to have a hearing on China with Assistant Secretary of State, Michael de Sombre, next week, but that hearing was cancelled a second time in as many months. This is not the way to conduct oversight, nor is it a way to legislate. And finally, on H R eighty-two O two, I support this measure, which amends the export control of form of twenty eighteen to establish a ten year statue of limitations for civil and criminal export control violations. As we saw in the recent Supermicro case, rampant smuggling is a real problem, and it could take years to detect, investigate, expose, and prosecute export controls. Therefore, extending the statue of limitations is necessary for more robust robust enforcement of our export controls and I yield back the balance of my time.

Great. Thank you, Mister Chairman, today I am speaking in support of my bill, H R eighty two O two, to amend the Export Control Reform Act of twenty eighteen, to provide for a ten year statute of limitations for export control violations. As bad actors developed increasingly,

Mm.

sophisticated tactics to evade US export controls, it's critical that our enforcement tools keep pace. Today, these violations often involve complex networks, shell companies, and long-running schemes that can take years to fully uncover. But under current law, investigators are working against a five-year clock that simply isn't long enough. In twenty twenty-four, Congress passed legislation to increase the statute of limitations for IEPA-based sanctions, violating However, the Export Control Reform Act was left out of that legislation, creating an inconsistency that my bill would fix. With bipartisan support, updates to the law reflect today's realities by extending the statute of limitations from five to ten years, for both civil enforcement actions and criminal indictments, giving law enforcement the time they need to investigate thoroughly and hold bad actors accountable. And importantly, as the chairman just noted, This is not just our view from Congress in a bipartisan fashion. A few months ago, the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement from the Trump administration came before Congress and made clear that the current five-year window is insufficient for these complex investigations. And he called on us to extend it to ten years. It's a practical, bipartisan, common sense step to strengthen enforcement, close a clear gap in the law, and better protect American national security. So I would encourage all of us to do so.

Any further discussion? Representative Castro.

Uh, thank you. I'm proud to join my colleague, Representative McKenzie, in introducing this bipartisan legislation to extend the statute of limitations on export controls export control violations from five to ten years. Our export control laws are some of the most important tools we have to keep sensitive American technology out of the hands of our adversaries. When those controls are violated, when bad actors route US technology through shell companies, front organizations, and third country intermediaries to circumvent the law, we need to be able to hold them accountable. The problem is that under current law, we only have five years to do that. And five years is simply not enough time in many of these cases. The the schemes that adversaries use to evade our export controls have grown dramatically more sophisticated, over the years. So we're not talking about straightforward violations that investigators can uncover, in a matter of months. We're about layered networks, falsified end-user certificates, and transactions designed from the beginning to be difficult to trace. By the time investigators have assembled the full picture of what happened the clock has often already run out. And that's not acceptable when the technology at stake could end up in Chinese military programs, in Iranian weapon systems, or in the hands of other adversaries who want to use it against us. This bill makes a simple targeted fix. It extends the statute of limitations for export control violations from five years to ten.

Any other members seek recognition? Seeing none. Being no further discussion of the bill, the committee will move to consideration of amendments. Does any member wish to offer an amendment? There being no further amendments, I move that the committee report H R eight two zero two, to the house with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye. All those opposed, signify by saying no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the motion is agreed to. Do you want a roll call vote? A roll call vote has been requested. Has been voluntold. Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will be postponed. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H R seven nine six two. The Export-Dispute-Resolution Act, the bill was circulated in advance and the clerk shall designate the bill.

H R seven nine six two. to amend the Export Control Reform Act of two thousand eighteen, relating to the review of the inter-agency dispute resolution process.

Without objection, the first reading is dispensed with and the bill is considered read and open to amendment at any point. I will recognize myself for a few minutes on the bill. This bill addresses how arm sales, how sales of critical US technology to arms embargoed countries will be treated by the US government. If we're not going to sell weapons to a country, we should think very seriously. about selling them a dual-use import for war. Currently, when agencies disagree over a license for the sale of technology to an arms-embargoed country, the Commerce Department can unilaterally resolve the dispute. Mister McCormick's bill mandates that deadlocked license decisions to countries under US arms embargo are put to a vote by the operating committee, requiring departments of commerce, departments of energy, department of state,

Yeah, I support this measure by Representative McCormick, who's previously passed the committee and the house. It codifies certain procedures for dispute resolutions at BIS, so that the departments of commerce, state, defense and energy

Is there any further discussion? There being no further discussion of the bill, the committee will move to consideration of amendments. Does any member wish to offer an amendment? There being no further amendments, I move that the committee report H R seven nine six two to the house with a favorable recommendation all those in favor signify by saying aye aye all

Aye.

those opposed signify by saying no in the opinion of the chair.

Request a roll call vote.

Mister Self has requested a roll call vote. Thank you, Mister Self. A roll call vote has been requested pursuant to the chair's previous announcement. This vote will be postponed. Pursuant to notice, and I'll call up HR eight one six nine, the Export Control Enforcement and Enhancement Act. The bill was circulated in advance and the clerk shall designate the bill.

H R eight one six nine, to amend the Export Control Reform Act of two thousand eighteen to provide for expedited consideration of proposals, for additions to, removals from, or other modifications, with respect to entities on the entity list, and for other purposes.

Without objection, the first reading is dispensed with and the bill is considered read and open to amendment at any point. And without obj- without objection, the MAST amendment, in the nature of a substitute, circulated in advance to members, shall be considered as read and will be treated as the original text for purposes of the amendment. And I will now recognize This bill from Representative Wagner is both common sense and obvious for us to consider today, as it would remove unnecessary barriers against considering entity list additions. Today, when an inter-agency proposes additions to the entity list, the Commerce Department can effectively veto the idea by not bringing the addition up for a vote. The bill solves that by adding a new thirty-day deadline for a vote to ensure that any entity list additions

I support this measure by Rep. Anne Wagner, as I did last Congress. It codifies in statute the necessary procedures to allow all four agencies affiliated with BIS to offer proposals for additions to the BIS entity list. We need

Do any other members seek recognition? Seeing none. The committee will move to consideration of amendments. Does any member wish to offer an amendment? There being no further amendments, I move that the committee report H R eight one six nine as amended to the house with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor,

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, signify by saying no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the motion is agreed to.

Mister Chairman, I ask for a roll call vote.

A roll call vote has been requested. Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will be postponed. Thank you. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H R four. H R four five zero five. The Export Controls Enforcement Act. The bill was circulated in advance and the clerk shall designate the bill.

H R four five zero five. To strengthen enforcement of United States export controls by increasing the number of export control officers of the Bureau of Industry and Security, of the Department of Commerce, who are stationed in foreign regions.

Without objection, the first reading is dispensed with and the bill is considered read and open to amendment at any point and without objection the Kamlager-Dove amendment, in the nature of a substitute, circulated to members in advance, shall be considered as read and will be treated as original text for purposes of the amendment. Recognize myself for a couple of moments.

Thank you.

This committee has often heard about how ill-equipped BIS is to fully enforce US export controls. It is almost laughable that BIS today has only eleven officers stationed worldwide tasking with uh tasked with enforcing all of our export controls. Southeast Asia is well known as a hub of smuggling US technology, especially AI chips to China. only has one export control officer. We've already seen some massive smuggling cases in the region, but I bet we'd uncover more if we had more export control officers stationed there. Representative Kamlager's dub, Bill addresses this issue by requiring BIS to have at least thirty export control officers. This bill benefits from bipartisan support, including from Representative Saizenga, Representative Shriv, who just recently uh has joined a new committee, and I urge all my colleagues to support this measure. Ranking Member Meeks.

Yeah, I support this measure, authori- authored by Representative Kamala Gurdwara, and I am a proud co-sponsor of this bill. Our export controls are only useful if we back them up with the proper enforcement. The Bureau of Industry and Security reviews nearly fifty thousand licenses a year, and in twenty twenty four it approved nearly five hundred billion dollars of export. Because countries like Russia and China are deliberately trying to evade our controls, it's critical that we have the ability to ensure that controlled us technology that is exported abroad goes only where it is supposed to for only approved uses. One of the main ways bis does that is through in-use checks by export control offices stationed abroad. Given the large quantity of controlled technology we must track, you'd think we'd have dozens of these agents traveling around the world doing regular in-use checks. In reality, bis only has only eleven such officers deployed abroad. This is insufficient, and a looming disaster given the increasing frequency and scope with which we now use export controls. This bill would increase the number of these officers abroad to thirty, making it much easier for them to cover the globe and bolster enforcement of our controls. This is an overdue and common sense measure. I urge all my colleagues to support it and I yield back.

Is there any further discussion? Representative Self.

Uh, Mister Chairman, there's there is no doubt that this is on the front lines of our hybrid uh war with China. Uh, however, this uh, we have been told uh in a hearing that the administration intends to increase this budget by a hundred million plus dollars. Uh, I recognize that we are thirty-nine trillion dollars in debt, and there is no offset to this bill. I'm gonna support this bill in committee, uh, and ask for a roll call vote, uh i believe that this is one of the areas that i may be unable to support on the floor because we cannot continue to spend money without finding an offset in a less noble program and i say again this is a noble program that i want to support uh but uh i i will reserve my vote on the floor thank you sir i yield back

thank you for voicing your founded concerns i appreciate it uh is there any further discussion representative kumlager dove

Thank you, Mister Chair and ranking member, for including my bill on mark-up today. For an agency that is charged with carrying out some of our most pressing national security priorities, BIS is not fully equipped to enforce the regulations it administers. To reiterate what has been said, uh, already, there are only eleven law enforcement agents who are assigned to conduct end-use checks abroad and identify, any diversion of controlled technologies. With the increase in appropriations that Congress approved for BIS in fiscal year twenty-six it is imperative that the administration use its new funding to boost the number of Export Control officers. My bill, the Export Controls Enforcement Act, would formally codify the Export Control Officer program and require BIS to hire at least thirty ECOs to be stationed overseas. This would ensure that BIS is better able to enforce its controls and safeguard our national security. I have to add that export control officers are only as effective as the support infrastructure around them their ability to regularly communicate with industry, to easily travel to conduct end-use checks, and to participate in the necessary training programs at FLET C, at FLET C. Yet we've heard that dysfunctionally leadership at BIS has led to challenges in executing all of this. I hope the administration sees this bipartisan legislation as a sign of support for the Export Control officers and of our expectation that the ECO program be managed effectively and efficiently. I'd like to thank Chair Huizinga, Ranking Member Meeks, and Representative Shree for co-leading this bill with me, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this important legislation here in committee, and hopefully find a way to support it on the floor. And with that, I yield back.

Is there any further discussion? Seeing none, the committee will move to consideration of amendments. Does any member wish to offer an amendment? There being no further amendments, I move that the committee report H R four five zero five as amended to the house, with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, aye.

Chairman, I ask for a roll call vote.

A roll call vote has been requested. Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will be postponed. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H R seven zero zero three, the BIS strength act. The bill was circulated in advance and the clerk shall designate the bill.

H R seven zero zero three, to authorize the Under Secretary

Without objection, the first reading is dispensed with and the bill is considered read and open to amendment at any point. Does any member seek recognition?

Thank you.

Recognize myself. Our export controls are only as strong as the people that craft the policy. Especially when it comes to emerging technologies like AI. Export controls on emerging technologies like AI, quantum, biotech require deep subject matter expertise to ensure we are not leaving loopholes for the Chinese Communist Party to exploit. It's why we've done a great deal of work on this committee, behind closed doors, classified briefings, uh, classified round tables, round tables in general, with so many members of industry to to learn about what they eat, sleep and breathe every single day. This act creates a special hiring authority to bring in up to twenty-five experts from outside the civil service for up to

Yes, I support this measure by Rep. Shriv, which gives hiring authority to BIS to hire up to twenty-five highly qualified experts.

Mm.

We all agree that BIS needs expertise. That said, I think it's quite ironic that we are giving BIS special authority to hire fresh expo- experts, when the trumpet BIS is still shredding expertise due to its politicization of export controls. BIS is one of the highest level of vacancies in the federal government. This is because agency leadership has pushed out or alienated subject matter experts in key countries and technologies raising alarm bells from the industry and national security experts. Yet, this committee has not had any oversight hearings or briefings on this topic with BIS. So, while I think Rep Shriv's bill is critical for the long-term health of BIS, this committee must do more to solve the underlying problems generating a crisis of expertise at BIS uh BIS today, which is this administration's own making. And I yield back.

Any further Any further discussion of the bill? Seeing none, the committee will move to consideration.

Chairman.

Oh. Representative Self, you seek recognition.

Um, yeah, Mister Chairman, in the analysis of this bill, uh the positions under uh this office have grown from four hundred and three to five hundred and eighty-five between thirteen and twenty-four. So I I will support this measure and ask for a roll call vote. But uh, we need to also be working with BIS to, for their analysis on their positions. Are they adding administration when we need actual front-line workers? Um, and I yield back.

It's a very good point you bring up, Representative Self, and uh, having had conversations with uh, Mister Kessler and others, uh, I know you wanna hear from them, but I would assure you. Uh, in those conversations, uh, which we've had in SCIF and other places, this has been of discussion. I know you've been to some of them. Um, but I'll make sure that you get more. Uh, any further discussion? Seeing none, committee will move to consideration of amendments. Does any member wish to offer an amendment? There being no further amendments, I move that the committee report H R seven zero zero three to the house with a favorable recommendation all those in favor signify by saying aye, aye, all those opposed signify by saying no. The opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the motion is agreed to.

Mister Chairman, I ask for a roll call vote.

A roll call vote has been requested pursuant to the Pursuant to notice, I now call up HR five eight five three to amend the Export Control Reform Act of two thousand and eighteen to increase the civil penalties that may be imposed under such act the bill was circulated in advance, and the clerk shall designate the bill.

HR five eight five three to amend the Export Contr- Control Reform Act of two thousand eighteen to increase the civil penalties that may be imposed under such act.

Without objection, the first reading is dispensed with and the bill is considered read and open to amendment at any point. Does the author seek recognition? Representative Self.

Uh, thank you, Mister Chairman. I rise in support of my bill, HR fifty eight fifty three, which would amend the Export Control Reform Act of twenty eighteen, to increase civil penalties for violations of export control rules. Far too often we have seen individuals and companies treat export controls as the cost of doing business. Currently, ECRA allows for civil penalties of twice the value of the transaction, or three hundred thousand dollars per transaction. While these monetary amplifiers may work when dealing with transaction of dollars as the primary violation, it makes less sense for export controls involving America's most sensitive technologies. These penalties are negligible relative to the value of these illicit transactions. Take for example, if an individual illegally sold a nuclear centrifuge to Iran, we can all agree that the harm to U S national security is significantly higher than the price tag of the nuclear centrifuge. Furthermore, ECRA's civil penalty ceiling has not been updated since the statute's enactment in twenty eighteen, eight years ago. The scale and sophistication of PRC export control evasion has grown dramatically since that date. Increasing the statutory maximums for civil penalties must better reflect the true national security stakes of for control violations and help deter violators. That is why my bill raises the bar for deterrence of these transactions. Specifically, this act would increase the civil penalty from two times the basis of the transaction to four times the basis of the transaction. May not sound like a lot, but it would also increase the base civil penalty from three hundred thousand to one point two million. These penalty increases would compound the risk for professional smugglers who are attempting to

Is there any further discussion? Ranking number meeks.

I support this measure. We were all shocked to see the scale and sophistication of the evasion

Ranking member yields back. recognize myself. Earlier this year, the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement, David Peters, came before this committee to talk about how the Trump administration is enforcing US export controls. His message was that deterrence is not strong enough against violators of our laws. Today, the statutory maximum civil penalty for violations of US export controls is only twice the value of the product. That's insulting. It's insultingly low. It isn't a deter- it's not preventing these crimes from taking place. Just earlier this year, the Trump administration unveiled perhaps the biggest export violations in US history. The founder of Supermicro worked to smuggle our advanced AI chips to China, directly, effectively turning a major corporation into a Chinese smuggling shell. These smugglers simply weren't deterred by the existing penalties. This bill will help the Trump administration's crackdown on these export control violations. I would r- it would raise the cost for violating controls by increasing the maximum civil penalty from two to four times the value of the transaction, forcing violators to feel a significant punishment. I want to thank Representative Self for his work on this bill, and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor. Is there any further discussion? There being no further discussion, we'll move to consideration of amendments. Does any member wish to offer an amendment? There being no further amendments, I move that the committee report H R five eight five three to the house with a favorable recommendation all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed signify by saying no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the motion is agreed to.

Chairman, I ask for a roll call vote.

A roll call vote has been requested. Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will be postponed. Thank you. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H R eight two eight eight, the strengthening export control.

H R eight two eight eight. To amend the Export Control Reform Act of two thousand eighteen, to provide assistance for compliance with that act.

Without objection, the first reading is dispensed with and the bill is considered read and open to amendment at any point and I will recognize myself for a statement. Some US export controls are remarkably complicated, especially those crafted during the Biden administration. This can lead to I support this. Thank you.

and I am proud to be a co-sponsor. There are thousands of small and medium sized American enterprises that export their world class products abroad and want to do so in compliance with US law. But they often do not have the budgets to hire large compliance teams of expert control of c- expert control experts. This is why in the Expert Control and Reform Act of twenty eighteen, Congress specifically directed BIS to report on its to provide exporters with compliance assistance, including specific actions to assist small and medium-sized businesses. It's also called on BIS to keep the public appropriately apprised of changes in policy regulations and procedures. BIS generally does this by hosting seminars, trainings, outreach events, and conferences for American businesses. Yet the Trump administration has essentially ended such engagement. Based on the information on its own web site, BIS has not organized any trainings or seminars since the beginning of twenty twenty five. And as of this month, BIS has not scheduled a date for its annual update conference. BIS is only making its enforcement job harder when it avoids engaging industry to boost compliance. Because when American companies don't understand the rules, they're more likely to ship things to places and people they shouldn't. The bill aims to address this challenge by calling for

Do any other members seek recognition? Representative Self.

Yeah, I I will vote against this, uh, as the ranking member just indicated, the last conference was in March of twenty twenty five. So we are basically one year from that. Uh, this looks to me like congressional overreach, I think a letter from the chairman and the ranking member might accomplish this without having to put a law in place, and I yield back.

Representative yields back. Do any other members seek recognition? Representative Alma.

Thank you very much, Mister Chairman, and thank you, Ranking Member. I'm proud to speak in support of my bill, the Strengthening Export Controls Compliance Act. As our export controls grow more complex, businesses in my home state of Rhode Island and those across the country are struggling to keep up. Not because they don't want to comply, uh because the rules are harder to navigate. In the past, the Bureau of Industry and Security provided real support, including conferences, trainings, seminars, clear guidance, and advisory opinions. That outreach has fallen off under the Trump administration, leaving businesses without the tools they need to follow the rules, and comply with our ever-changing uh export uh r- rules. This hits small and medium-sized business the hardest. They don't have large compliance teams, or the resources to hire expensive counsel. And here's the bottom line, it's far more to help businesses comply on the front-end than to punish them on the back-end for getting it wrong. So this bipartisan bill, the strengthening Export Controls Compliance Act, would solve this problem. It requires BIS to engage with industry through annual conferences, conduct outreach w- when new rules are issued, and regularly report to Congress on how it's helping businesses navigate these requirements. Better guidance means better compliance. Better compliance strengthens our national security and lets BIS focus its its enforcement

Any further discussion? Seeing no further discussion,

Okay.

uh we'll move to consideration of amendments. Does any member wish to offer an amendment? There being no further amendments, I move that the committee report H R eight two t eight two eight eight to the house with a favorable recommendation all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed signify by saying no. Pending to the chair, the ayes have it, and the motion is agreed to.

Request. Mr. Chairman, I request recording.

A roll call vote has been requested pursuant to the chair's previous announcement.

Roll call roll call.

This vote will be postponed. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H R six three three one. The Adversaries Act. The bill was circulated in advance and the clerk shall designate the bill.

H R six three three one, to modify certain definitions under the Export Control Reform Act of two thousand eighteen. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States and Congress assembled. This act may be

Without objection, the first reading is dispensed with and the bill is considered read and open to amendment at any point. Without objection, the Miller Amendment, in the nature of a substitute, circulated to members in advance, shall be considered as read and will be treated as original text. for the purpose of the amendment. Any members seek recognition? Recognize myself? This bill will address one of the most egregious loopholes in US export controls today. Chinese military end users setting up subsidiaries in the US and gaining access to our technology. Huawei. Huawei is restricted from buying US technology for very good reason. But its subsidiary FutureWay, yes, you can't make that up, is greenlit to buy whatever technology it wants without US government review. FutureWay is even allowed to buy NVIDIA's Blackwell AI chips with no restrictions. It is legally treated the same as OpenAI, Google, Anthropic, or other great AI companies. Why? Because it is technically headquartered in the United States. All Huawei had to do is to get our to get our tech.

I support this measure and I wanna really thank uh Representative Miller and Chairman Mass uh for working with me on a bipartisan compromise on this bill. The Office of

Thank you. Representative yields back. Representative Miller.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, and thank you, Raking member, truly appreciate working on a compromise to move this forward for my bill, six three three one, or known as the adversaries act. The Export Control Reform Act applies to the export, re-export, and in-country transfer of products to foreign persons, not US-based firms owned by foreign persons. This means that Chinese companies can access US and allied technology by setting up subsidiaries within the United States. Companies with close ties to the Chinese Communist Party People's Liberation Army are exploiting this loophole to circumvent our export controls, and they've made that clear. For example, the Chinese chip-making and AI champion Huawei, as the chairman had just noted, has established a United States subsidiary, and he also noted as ridiculous as it is, known as FutureWay, that can acquire technology within the United States without being restricted from doing so by the Bureau Bureau of Industry and Security. This legislation will direct, under the secretary of BIS's known as BISS, Information and Communication Technology and Services, to conduct a thorough review of the effectiveness of our nation's export controls. Specifically, ICTS will be looking into what gaps in our export controls are being exploited by the US-based companies that are owed by foreign k- entities that we know are a real threat. Not only will this review shed light on this problem, but it will also identify other gaps that prevent us from blocking our adversaries from stealing our sensitive technology, and make recommendations for further congressional action. This is a common sense bill. Once again, I support the the support from the chairman and ranking member and this will truly help our national security. I urge its passage. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.

Thank you, Mr. Miller. They might as well call it FUA or something like that. Any other members seek recognition?

Uh.

Yes.

I

Ranking member, Representative Liu.

uh I move to strike last word. Uh, thank you, Chairman Mast and ranking member Meeks for holding this mark-up on a pack export control bills designed uh to make sure america stays ahead of our adversaries and peer competitors such as china and russia what i really wanna talk about is an alarming new development with regards to our peer adversaries such as china and russia that has been exposed by this unconstitutional war in iran and it is this in any prolonged conflict that united states has with our competitors and adversaries such as China and Russia, the United States will lose. And that is because we will run out of munitions. In this unconstitutional war in Iran, based on new media reporting, the United States has already expended fifty percent of our THAAD interceptor missiles, fifty percent of our Patriot missiles, and thirty percent of our Tomahawk missiles. And this is only about a month and a half. And so China and Russia are looking at this, knowing they can just stockpile up on drones and ballistic missiles, and every few months the United States will run out of munitions to defend against that. But it exposes a second fatal flaw, which is this is completely not sustainable. A Patriot missile costs between four and a four and a half million dollars. An Iranian drone costs about thirty to fifty thousand dollars. It's like shooting Ferraris at Frisbees. We cannot match this asymmetrical warfare, and we can never make enough of these defensive munitions. So, Iran has estimates of over eighty thousand drones, over a hundred thousand drones. The United States has a Patriot missile inventory of over ten thousand Patriot missiles made over forty years. We're never gonna be able to produce enough defensive munitions against these drones. And the third fatal flaw that this has shown, this unconstitutional war, is that even against a second rate military, we can't stop damage to our military bases and operating locations. I previously served in an activity of the United States military. We have an amazing air force, and one reason is we gain air superiority every time very quickly. That's what we did in Iran. We had air superiority very quickly. We have it right now. And despite that, we could not stop. Iranian drones and missiles hitting over twenty operating locations, including approximately thirteen United States bases. This is a second rate military, and our defensive countermeasures could not stop these attacks. And so China and Russia is looking at this and they know, for example, let's just talk about Indo-Pacific. China knows in any war in the Indo-Pacific, our military bases will be destroyed. Flat out. And if they're not destroyed, immediately, will they first rate military they're gonna be dealing with, they'll be destroyed over time cuz again, we run out of defensive missiles. So we need a brand new strategy, a brand new national security strategy and defensive strategy in the Indo-Pacific, in other areas, and I urge the chairman to have a hearing on that. What has this Iran war exposed in terms of these three fatal flaws? And how does this apply to our peer adversaries such as Russia and China who are looking at this war right now and realizing again at any prolonged conflict the united states is going to lose i yield back

do any other members seek recognition

yes i do chairman

uh representative eissa

listening to my colleague i'm gonna break one of my normal rules and respond directly i'm terribly sorry that you don't believe in america or that you believe the war is lost or that you can i'll finish

i served on act of dean

OK. I'm, I'm going to finish my discussion without being interrupted again. I have never heard something that upset me as much as what you just said. You said we lose, we've exposed, this is unconstitutional. First of all, the president's actions are fully constitutional. He's not the first, the second. He is the forty, I guess technically forty-third or forty-fourth president, uniquely different president. to determine that as Commander-in-Chief he can send his troops anywhere, anytime, and we can pay to get them back. So I'm, first of all, reject the whole concept you began, led, and went through, repeating the word unconstitutional. That may be good on MS now, but it's inappropriate here in the Congress, unless you in fact wanna walk over with me to judiciary and make the case that somehow it's unconstitutional which it isn't. As to losing, I'll take advantage of versus you because i went on active duty in united states army in nineteen seventy in nineteen seventy every plan we had had us run out of ammunition run out of ability in europe and fire nukes if we wanted to keep them from overwhelming us and driving us to the sea we have been in a situation time and time again in which large volumes of weapons mostly conventional and a willingness to to send hundreds or millions of people into machine guns could overwhelming us. We saw that in Korea, we saw it in many places. But I will tell you, America under this president is in fact building our capacity. In my own district, we have more than doubled the ability to make one five fives in a year. Howards are rounds, mister army. The fact is, we are b- building up. And what this president is doing, this administration is doing, that you seem to give He's used statutory and executive power to end,