S. 4835

S. 4835: A bill to enhance the administration of export control licenses under the Export Control Reform Act of 2018, and for other purposes.

Introduced Kevin Cramer (R) SENATE_BILL — 119th Congress
Plain English Summary

S. 4835 aims to improve the process of issuing export control licenses as outlined in the Export Control Reform Act of 2018. This likely involves streamlining procedures, enhancing efficiency, and possibly updating regulations to better manage the export of sensitive technologies and goods.

Positive Media Summary

Supporters of S. 4835 have praised the bill for potentially strengthening national security by ensuring that sensitive technologies are adequately controlled and monitored. They argue that a more efficient licensing process will help U.S. companies compete globally while safeguarding critical technologies from falling into the wrong hands.

Negative Media Summary

Critics of S. 4835 have expressed concerns that enhancing export control license administration could lead to increased bureaucratic hurdles for businesses, potentially stifling innovation and trade. Some worry that the changes could disproportionately affect smaller companies that may lack the resources to navigate a more complex regulatory environment.

Conflict of Interest Analysis Deep Analysis
2/10
Risk Level
Low
Total Donations
$0
PAC Percentage
0%
Policy Area
Foreign Trade and International Finance

The analysis of bill S. 4835, which aims to enhance the administration of export control licenses, reveals no direct industry overlaps between the sponsor Kevin Cramer's top donor industries and the bill's subject matter. The lobbying activity in this area includes contributions from various organizations, such as the American College of Clinical Pharmacy, which donated $144,981, and Altria Client Services, which contributed $40,000. However, these contributions do not indicate a direct conflict with the export control focus of the bill. Since there are no overlapping interests, the risk of conflicts of interest appears minimal. Voters should be aware that while there are significant contributions in the broader policy area, they do not directly influence the specific legislation at hand.

Lobbying Activity — Who's Pushing?

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

Client Lobbying Firm Amount
AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACY AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACY $144,981
ALTRIA CLIENT SERVICES MCGUIREWOODS CONSULTING (A SUBSIDIARY OF MCGUIREWOODS LLP) $40,000
CROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION CROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION $40,000
GOTRIANGLE MCGUIREWOODS CONSULTING (A SUBSIDIARY OF MCGUIREWOODS LLP) $30,000
AFRICAN AMERICAN ALLIANCE OF CDFI CEOS MCGUIREWOODS CONSULTING (A SUBSIDIARY OF MCGUIREWOODS LLP) $20,000
BRISTOL MYERS SQUIBB ALEXANDER J. BECKLES, L.L.C. $20,000
CITY OF GLADEWATER, TEXAS LONE STAR CONSULTING, LLC $12,000
CITY OF CRANDALL, TEXAS LONE STAR CONSULTING, LLC $10,000
CITY OF JUSTIN, TEXAS LONE STAR CONSULTING, LLC $10,000
THE LIVINGSTON GROUP ON BEHALF OF INNOVATIVE VACCINE TECHNOLOGIES MAGILL ASSOCIATES, LLC undisclosed
OPPORTUNITIES INDUSTRIALIZATION CENTER OF AMERICA, INC. MCGUIREWOODS CONSULTING (A SUBSIDIARY OF MCGUIREWOODS LLP) undisclosed
LUMBEE TRIBE HOLDINGS, INC. MCGUIREWOODS CONSULTING (A SUBSIDIARY OF MCGUIREWOODS LLP) undisclosed
CITY OF CLEVELAND, TEXAS LONE STAR CONSULTING, LLC undisclosed
CITY OF RIO HONDO, TEXAS LONE STAR CONSULTING, LLC undisclosed
HOWARD COUNTY, TEXAS LONE STAR CONSULTING, LLC undisclosed

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

Sponsor's Top Donor Industries

Top industries funding Kevin Cramer, ranked by total contributions.

Health Professionals $480,000,000
Individuals: $480,000,000 PACs: $0
Retired $150,000,000
Individuals: $150,000,000 PACs: $0

Source: OpenSecrets.org (Center for Responsive Politics)

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