Federal venture fund exempts itself from public-comment rules.

What it does

This bill creates a federal investment fund managed by the Treasury Department to invest in U.S. companies developing critical technologies like biotechnology that strengthen national and economic security. The fund will make equity investments ($1–10 million per deal on average) in early-stage tech companies, with biotechnology designated as a priority area. A private managing entity selected through competitive bidding will handle day-to-day investment decisions, overseen by a supervisory board. The bill authorizes $975.5 million for investments in fiscal 2025 (including $300 million for biotech) plus administrative costs.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core function is establishing a federal venture fund to invest in critical technologies—a legitimate national-security tool. However, Section 7 exempts the Secretary's actions from the Administrative Procedure Act and Paperwork Reduction Act, removing standard procedural oversight and public-comment requirements. This deregulation carve-out is the bill's most consequential hidden feature.

What the text implies

• Section 7 exempts all Secretary actions from the Administrative Procedure Act, eliminating public notice-and-comment rulemaking and judicial review of fund decisions. This is a sweeping procedural immunity that applies to investment strategy, managing-entity selection, and portfolio decisions—normally subject to APA review.
• The managing entity is explicitly 'not a Federal agency' (Section 4(g)), which may shield it from FOIA requests, conflict-of-interest disclosures, and other transparency laws that bind government contractors. Citizens cannot easily access records of how their $975.5 million is being invested.
• The advisory board is exempt from the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Section 3(g)(6)), meaning its members' identities, conflicts of interest, and deliberations need not be disclosed to the public—despite advising on $975.5 million in public funds.
• The bill authorizes the Secretary to appoint 25 personnel without competitive civil-service rules and to set their pay up to the level of the Vice President (Section 5), creating a parallel hiring and compensation system outside normal federal pay scales.
• Section 3(e)(2) allows investments of 'any amount' with only a non-binding target of $1–10 million average, meaning the fund could concentrate capital in a single company or a handful of firms with minimal diversification requirement.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

The fund may generate public returns and accelerate critical technology development benefiting national security and economic competitiveness. However, the bill grants broad discretion to unelected officials and a private managing entity with minimal transparency requirements (exemption from Administrative Procedure Act and Paperwork Reduction Act), and the fund's actual financial performance and technology outcomes are uncertain. Citizens bear the upfront $975.5 million cost with no guarantee o

Who stands to gain

• venture capital firms selected as managing entity
• biotechnology companies (priority sector)
• early-stage technology companies in critical sectors
• private equity and venture capital advisors

Named in the bill

Department of the Treasury, Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of Commerce, National Science and Technology Council, Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, House Committee on Financial Services, Senate Committee on Finance, managing entity (to be selected), advisory board, supervisory board

Where it stands

6 cosponsors: 5 Democrats, 1 Republicans.

• Dec 3, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Dec 3, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Financial Services · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

1 lobbying clients named this bill on 1 disclosure filings across 1 quarter, Dec 2025 to Dec 2025. Those filings disclosed $50,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 1 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 0% of bills with at least one filing.

Pete Sessions, the sponsor, reported $561,450 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• The Good Food Institute — $50,000 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jan 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.