QuorumCivic. Hidden in plain sight Get the app
Bill intelligence

New CCP threat task force will gather and share intelligence across U.S. agencies.

S. 1625 — SHIELD Against CCP Act · Filed by John Cornyn (R-TX) · 3 cosponsors · Introduced May 6, 2025 · Referred to committee

65%
Transparency
Typical bill: 82%
18/100
Hidden-provision risk
Typical bill: 15/100
Homeland Security Coordination &…

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 requires the Department of Homeland Security to establish a working group within 180 days to assess and counter threats to the U.S. posed by the Chinese Communist Party across terrorism, cybersecurity, border security, ports, and transportation. The working group will examine DHS efforts, identify policy gaps, coordinate across agencies, share intelligence with state and local partners, and submit annual unclassified reports to Congress for seven years, with a sunset clause terminating the group after seven years.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core function is to establish an intra-agency working group tasked with assessing and countering CCP-related threats across multiple security domains. It is primarily a coordination and reporting mechanism, not a substantive policy change or appropriation, though it does authorize intelligence gathering and information sharing.

What the text implies

  • The bill authorizes the working group to 'gather' information from federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial partners and fusion centers, then 'disseminate' it back—creating a centralized intelligence hub on CCP-related threats with no explicit limits on data types, retention periods, or use restrictions beyond a general privacy compliance requirement.
  • The working group may accept 'detailees' from the intelligence community 'with or without reimbursement'—potentially allowing intelligence agencies to embed personnel in DHS without budget transparency or formal accountability chains.

The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.

Who stands to gain

cybersecurity firms (threat assessment, monitoring, R&D contracts); defense contractors (border/port security technology); intelligence and surveillance technology vendors

Correlative observation from public records — not evidence of coordination or wrongdoing, and not financial advice.
This page is the record as of today. The app tells you when it changes.
Quorum analysis of the full bill text · 119th Congress · public record