Congress fast-tracks undersea cables, strips states of environmental say
H.R. 3479 — SECURE American Telecommunications Act · Filed by Rudy Yakym (R-IN) · 3 cosponsors · Introduced May 19, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill creates a federal licensing system for submarine and cross-border terrestrial telecommunications cables, requiring FCC approval before construction and operation. It establishes cybersecurity and physical security standards, mandates 24-hour incident reporting to the FCC and CISA, streamlines permitting by exempting cables from most environmental reviews and state/local regulation, and significantly increases criminal penalties for damaging cables (up to 25 years imprisonment). It also directs the FCC to join the International Cable Protection Committee and requires the State Department to negotiate common security standards with allied nations.
Why we flagged it
The bill's primary functional effect is to streamline and accelerate submarine cable deployment by removing environmental review, state/local permitting, and most federal authorization requirements—a significant deregulatory move. The security framework (licensing, cybersecurity standards, incident reporting) is real but secondary to the permitting acceleration and preemption provisions.
What the text implies
- The categorical exclusion from NEPA review (section 4) means submarine cable projects avoid environmental impact assessments entirely, potentially affecting marine sanctuaries and coastal ecosystems without public comment periods.
- Preemption of state and local authority (section 4) strips coastal states of power to regulate cable placement on environmental grounds, centralizing control in the FCC and removing a traditional check on infrastructure projects.
- The 540-day 'deemed granted' provision (section 2.9) creates an automatic approval if the FCC misses the deadline, incentivizing applicants to delay or overwhelm the agency with applications.
- Exemption from Executive Order 13867 (section 3) removes an additional layer of interagency review for terrestrial cables crossing international borders, reducing security vetting.
- The bill does not explicitly require public disclosure of cable routes or landing locations, potentially allowing sensitive infrastructure to be deployed with minimal transparency.
Who it affects
Citizens benefit from stronger cybersecurity standards, faster cable deployment (which can improve broadband access), and protection against foreign adversaries controlling critical infrastructure. However, they lose environmental review rights and state/local oversight, and the bill's broad exemptions from environmental law and preemption of state authority may harm coastal communities and marine ecosystems without transparent public input.
Who stands to gain
- major telecommunications carriers (Verizon, Charter, Comcast, T-Mobile, Liberty Media)
- submarine cable operators and landing station owners
- data center operators
- international cable consortiums
Named in the bill
Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), Department of State, Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, Department of the Army / Army Corps of Engineers, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Marine Sanctuaries Act, International Cable Protection Committee, Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019, Federal Water Pollution Control Act (section 404), Communications Act of 1934 (section 214) — and 5 more
Where it stands
3 cosponsors: 3 Republicans.
- May 19, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- May 19, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Foreign Affairs and House Committee on Natural Resources · Congress.gov: “Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Transportation and…”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
2 lobbying clients named this bill on 4 disclosure filings across 3 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $190,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 3 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.
More lobbying clients named this bill than 41% of bills with at least one filing.
Rudy Yakym, the sponsor, reported $1,401,759 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- Nec Corporation of America — $170,000 on 2 filings
- Drug Policy Alliance — $20,000 on 2 filings
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 21, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the full bill text on Jul 2, 2026; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
Money — Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act filings whose specific-issue field names this bill for quarters ending Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. A filing's amount is reported whole beside the median number of bills a filing names; it is never divided across them. PAC receipts are FEC-reported contributions to the sponsor's candidate committee in the 2026 cycle.
As of — lobbying records through Jul 21, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-20.
“Congress fast-tracks undersea cables, strips states of environmental say” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr3479 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.