HR-3542-119
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Sponsored by James Himes (D-CT)
What it does
This bill would amend the Defense Production Act of 1950 in two main ways. First, it would create a dedicated, Senate Executive Service-level Chairperson for the Defense Production Act (DPA) Committee, housed in the Department of Commerce and reporting directly to the Secretary of Commerce, with defined duties to coordinate agency use of DPA authorities. Second, it would require the Secretary of Commerce to establish a secure electronic database — the "DPA Registry" — cataloging every federal agency's use of DPA authorities, including why and how each authority was used, with tiered public and government access and quarterly updates from agencies.
Who benefits
Congress and congressional oversight staff, who would gain a structured record of how executive agencies use DPA powers. Journalists, researchers, and watchdog organizations, who would gain public access to a previously opaque area of federal activity. Defense contractors and private-sector companies subject to DPA orders, who could better anticipate and understand government actions. The Government Accountability Office (GAO), which is directed to assess the Committee's effectiveness within two years. Taxpayers broadly, through improved accountability over a broad set of executive authorities.
Who is hurt
Federal agencies that currently use DPA authorities with limited reporting requirements would face new administrative burdens, including quarterly data submissions. The executive branch broadly may see reduced flexibility in deploying DPA authorities quickly and quietly, particularly in sensitive national security contexts. Agency staff responsible for compliance would bear implementation workloads. Businesses whose DPA-related activities are entered into the registry — even with national security redactions — may face indirect competitive or reputational exposure.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the Defense Production Act grants sweeping executive powers — including the ability to direct private industry, allocate scarce materials, and compel production — yet currently lacks a centralized, accountable structure for tracking how those powers are used. They contend that recent administrations have invoked DPA authorities for purposes ranging from COVID-19 vaccine production to semiconductor supply chains to energy policy, often with little public visibility, and that the DPA Registry would bring basic transparency to a consequential and underused oversight gap.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that requiring detailed, quarterly public disclosures of DPA authority use could compromise national security by revealing sensitive procurement strategies, industrial mobilization plans, or supply chain vulnerabilities to adversaries. They contend that the bill's national security carve-out — allowing the Secretary of Commerce to limit access to "sensitive" information — is vague and may be insufficient to prevent inadvertent disclosure, while simultaneously creating bureaucratic overhead that could slow the executive branch's ability to respond rapidly to emergencies.