H.R. 9318

H.R. 9318: To establish the National Security Commission on Quantum Computing.

Introduced Michael Lawler (R) HOUSE_BILL — 119th Congress
Plain English Summary

H.R. 9318 aims to create a National Security Commission on Quantum Computing. This commission would likely focus on assessing the implications of quantum computing for national security, providing recommendations on how the U.S. can leverage quantum technologies to enhance security, and addressing potential threats posed by advancements in quantum computing.

Positive Media Summary

Media outlets have praised the establishment of the National Security Commission on Quantum Computing as a proactive step in ensuring that the U.S. remains a leader in emerging technologies. Supporters argue that this commission will help guide policy decisions and investments in quantum computing, which could lead to significant advancements in national security and technological innovation.

Negative Media Summary

Critics have raised concerns about the creation of the National Security Commission on Quantum Computing, arguing that it may lead to excessive government oversight and bureaucracy in the tech sector. Some have also expressed skepticism about the commission's ability to effectively address the rapid pace of technological change, suggesting that it could hinder rather than help innovation.

Conflict of Interest Analysis Deep Analysis
2/10
Risk Level
Low
Total Donations
$0
PAC Percentage
0%
Policy Area
Science, Technology, Communications

The analysis of H.R. 9318, which aims to establish the National Security Commission on Quantum Computing, reveals no direct industry overlaps between the sponsor Michael Lawler's top donor industries and the bill's subject matter. The lobbying activity associated with this bill includes contributions from various sectors, such as pharmaceuticals and professional associations, but none of these directly relate to quantum computing or national security. The largest contributions come from Paratek Pharmaceuticals ($20,000) and Steelships, LLC ($45,000), but these do not indicate a conflict with the bill's objectives. Voters should be aware that while there is lobbying activity, the absence of direct industry ties suggests a low risk of conflicts of interest in this case.

Lobbying Activity — Who's Pushing?

Organizations that lobbied on issues related to this bill's policy area.

Client Lobbying Firm Amount
STEELSHIPS, LLC CONSCIENCE POINT CONSULTING, INC. $45,000
SAN PASQUAL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS THE FARLEY GROUP, INC. $30,000
PARATEK PHARMACEUTICALS PARATEK PHARMACEUTICALS $20,000
SAN JUAN SOUTHERN PAIUTE TRIBE THE FARLEY GROUP, INC. $15,000
CHURCH ALLIANCE K&L GATES, LLP $10,000
GIFDA RULON & WHITE GOVERNANCE STRATEGIES $10,000
ASSOCIATION FOR PROFESSIONALS IN INFECTION CONTROL AND EPIDEMIOLOGY ASSOCIATION FOR PROFESSIONALS IN INFECTION CONTROL AND EPIDEMIOLOGY undisclosed
PGA TOUR, INC. FGS GLOBAL (US) LLC (FKA FGH HOLDINGS LLC) undisclosed
RESPONSIVE GOV ACTION THE RABEN GROUP undisclosed
KERECIS INVARIANT LLC undisclosed
BINTI, INC. INVARIANT LLC undisclosed
VERTIV GROUP CORPORATION AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD undisclosed
TERRA-GEN, LLC AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD undisclosed
PHILIPS CONTINENTAL STRATEGY, LLC undisclosed
COLOSSAL BIOSCIENCES INC. MILLER STRATEGIES, LLC undisclosed

Source: Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) filings, 2026

TheBillRoom is free and independent. No ads, no subscriptions, no political funding. If this analysis was useful, reader support keeps it running.
Support Us