Overview
Title
To amended title 46, United States Code, to prohibit certain contracts for port operations and management, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The bill stops certain countries, like China and Russia, from running important ports in the U.S., so that the ports stay safe and secure.
Summary AI
H.R. 9585, titled the "Secure Our Ports Act of 2024," aims to amend title 46 of the United States Code to prevent certain foreign entities from entering into contracts for the operation, ownership, or leasing of facilities requiring an Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan. Specifically, it prohibits agreements with state-owned enterprises from China, Russia, North Korea, or Iran, as well as any foreign entities partially owned by these countries. This legislation intends to enhance the security of U.S. port operations by restricting foreign influence from potentially adversarial nations.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The proposed legislation, referred to as the "Secure Our Ports Act of 2024," aims to amend the United States Code, specifically title 46, to impose restrictions on the types of contracts that can be made for port operations and management. The bill primarily seeks to prohibit American port facilities, which are required to have security plans, from entering into any ownership, leasing, or operational agreements with companies owned by the governments of China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. Additionally, it disallows contracts with foreign entities that have any percentage of their ownership tied to these countries.
Summary of Significant Issues
The bill raises several issues that could impact its effectiveness and enforceability. One major concern is the lack of clarity regarding how the prohibitions in the legislation will be enforced or monitored, which could lead to compliance challenges. Furthermore, the terms "foreign entity" and "state-owned enterprise" are not explicitly defined in the text, potentially creating ambiguities that could be exploited. Another issue is that the prohibition is limited to state-owned enterprises from certain countries, possibly leaving loopholes for private entities or subsidiaries based in other nations. Additionally, the bill relies on definitions from another section of the law, requiring cross-referencing that might complicate understanding. Lastly, the absence of specified penalties for non-compliance and the lack of provisions for exceptions might undermine the bill’s effectiveness and flexibility.
Impact on the Public
The proposed legislation could have broad implications for national security and economic interests. By restricting contracts with certain foreign countries, the bill intends to reduce the risk of foreign influence and control over strategic port operations in the United States. This move is expected to enhance national security, as ports play a critical role in trade and defense logistics.
However, the bill might also lead to increased operational costs and disrupt existing agreements, which could impact the cost of goods and services for the public. The limited pool of eligible contractors for port management might affect competition, potentially leading to higher prices for port services that could be passed on to consumers.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Port Operators and Managers:
Companies managing U.S. port facilities are directly affected as they might need to sever existing contracts or avoid entering new agreements with certain foreign entities. This could introduce operational challenges and necessitate finding alternative partners, which could disrupt operations in the short term.
Foreign Enterprises:
State-owned companies from China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, as well as any related foreign entities, would lose the opportunity to participate in U.S. port operations. This exclusion could have economic implications for these entities and may prompt diplomatic or trade tensions.
Security Agencies and Policymakers:
For security agencies and policymakers, the bill represents a strengthened stance on national security, emphasizing the protection of critical infrastructure from foreign influence. However, the undefined enforcement mechanisms and potential loopholes may require further legislative refinement to achieve the desired security objectives effectively.
Legal and Compliance Professionals:
The ambiguity in the bill concerning definitions and enforcement might result in increased demand for legal and compliance experts. These professionals will need to navigate the complexities of the legislation and ensure that port operators comply with the new restrictions.
Overall, while the Secure Our Ports Act of 2024 aims to bolster national security, its practical implementation might face challenges due to several unresolved issues in the bill’s current form. Further clarification and strategic planning could enhance its effectiveness and minimize negative impacts on stakeholders.
Issues
Section 70015 lacks clarity on enforcement and monitoring mechanisms for the prohibition on certain contracts for port operations and management, which could lead to significant compliance issues and political concerns regarding national security and foreign influence.
Section 2 and Section 70015 do not define the terms 'foreign entity' and 'state-owned enterprise', especially in the context of paragraph (a)(2). This ambiguity might result in legal challenges or loopholes being exploited, impacting the effectiveness of the legislation.
The prohibition in Section 70015 applies only to state-owned enterprises from certain countries, potentially leaving loopholes for private entities or subsidiaries from those same countries or based in other nations. This raises concerns over the adequacy of the bill in preventing foreign control of strategic assets.
Section 70015 relies on definitions from Section 70101, which could complicate the understanding and execution of the bill. This requirement for cross-referencing might slow down implementation and lead to inefficiencies.
Section 2 does not specify penalties or consequences for non-compliance with the prohibition, which weakens the enforceability of the bill and could result in continued unauthorized contracts for port operations.
There is no provision for exceptions or waivers in Section 70015 for contracts that might be in the national interest or for security considerations. This could have financial and strategic implications, potentially hindering necessary operations or collaborations.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
This section provides the short title for the legislation, which can be referred to as the “Secure Our Ports Act of 2024”.
2. Prohibition on certain contracts for port operation and management Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section introduces a rule prohibiting American port facilities, which are required to have a security plan, from making ownership, leasing, or operation contracts with companies owned by China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, or any foreign entity partially owned by these countries. It also updates the legal code to include this new rule.
70015. Prohibition on certain contracts for port operation and management Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
An owner or operator of a port facility that requires a security plan is prohibited from entering into contracts for ownership, leasing, or operation of the facility with companies owned by the governments of China, Russia, North Korea, or Iran, or with foreign entities partially owned by these countries. The terms used in this section, like “Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan” and “facility,” follow the definitions from another part of the law.