[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 8 (Monday, January 12, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H621-H623]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
REMOTE ACCESS SECURITY ACT
Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 2683) to provide for control of remote access of items under
the Export Control Reform Act of 2018, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 2683
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Remote Access Security
Act''.
SEC. 2. CONTROL OF REMOTE ACCESS OF ITEMS UNDER THE EXPORT
CONTROL REFORM ACT OF 2018.
The Export Control Reform Act of 2018 is amended as
follows:
(1) In section 1742 (50 U.S.C. 4801), by adding at the end
the following:
``(15) Remote access.--The term `remote access' means
access on a purposeful, knowing, reckless, or negligent basis
to an item subject to the jurisdiction of the United States
under this Act by a foreign person through a network
connection, including the internet or a cloud computing
service, from a location other than where the item is
physically located if the Secretary determines that the use
of the item could pose a serious risk to the national
security or foreign policy of the United States. Nothing in
this paragraph may be construed to lower the requisite mens
rea required to be proven for criminal liability under
section 1760.''.
(2) In section 1752 (50 U.S.C. 4811)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``or remote access of
such items'' after ``export of items''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ``or remote access
of such items'' after ``export of items''; and
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking
``and in-country transfer of items'' and inserting ``in-
country transfer, and remote access of items''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``or remote access''
after ``the release''.
(3) In section 1753 (50 U.S.C. 4812)--
(A) in subsection (a)--
(i) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(ii) in paragraph (2)(F), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) the remote access of items subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States by a foreign person.'';
(B) in subsection (b)--
(i) in paragraph (6), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(ii) in paragraph (7), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
``(8) regulate the remote access of items described in
subsection (a)(3).''; and
(C) in subsection (c)--
(i) by striking ``or in-country transfer'' each place it
appears and inserting ``in-country transfer, or remote
access''; and
(ii) by striking ``subsections (b)(1) or (b)(2)'' and
inserting ``subsections (b)(1), (b)(2), or (b)(8)''.
(4) In section 1754 (50 U.S.C. 4813)--
(A) in subsection (a)--
(i) in paragraph (3), by striking ``and in-country
transfers'' and inserting ``in-country transfers, and remote
access'';
(ii) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and in-country
transfers'' and inserting ``in-country transfers, and remote
access'';
(iii) in paragraph (5), by striking ``and in-country
transfers'' and inserting ``in-country transfers, and remote
access'';
(iv) in paragraph (6), by striking ``United States export
control'' and inserting ``United States control'';
(v) in paragraph (7), by striking ``export controls'' and
inserting ``controls'';
(vi) in paragraph (10), by striking ``or in-country
transferred'' and inserting ``in-country transferred or
accessed remotely'';
(vii) in paragraph (11), by adding at the end before the
semicolon the following: ``or remote access''; and
(viii) in paragraph (15), by adding at the end before ``;
and'' the following: ``or remotely access (including the
provision thereof)'';
(B) in subsection (b), by striking ``or in-country
transfer'' and inserting ``in-country transfer, or remote
access''; and
(C) in subsection (d)(1)(A), by striking ``or in-country
transfer'' and inserting ``in-country transfer, or remote
access (including the provision thereof)''.
(5) In section 1755 (50 U.S.C. 4814)--
(A) in subsection (b)(2)--
(i) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and in-country
transfers'' and inserting ``in-country transfers, and remote
access (including the provision thereof)''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``and in-country
transfers'' and inserting ``in-country transfers, and remote
access (including the provision thereof)''; and
(B) in subsection (c), by striking ``export controls'' and
inserting ``controls''.
(6) In section 1756 (50 U.S.C. 4815)--
(A) in subsection (a), in the matter preceding paragraph
(1), by striking ``and in-country transfer'' and inserting
``in-country transfer, and remote access''; and
(B) in subsection (b), by striking ``or in-country
transfer'' and inserting ``in-country transfer, or provide
remote access to''.
(7) In section 1757 (50 U.S.C. 4816)--
(A) in subsection (a), by striking ``or in-country
transfer'' and inserting ``in-country transfer, or remote
access''; and
(B) in subsection (c)(2), by striking ``export controls''
and inserting ``controls''.
(8) In section 1760 (50 U.S.C. 4819)--
(A) in subsection (a)(2)(F)--
(i) in clause (ii), by striking ``any export control
document or any report'' and inserting ``any document or
report''; and
(ii) in clause (iii), by striking ``or in-country
transfer'' and inserting ``in-country transfer, or remote
access'';
(B) in subsection (c)(1)(C), by striking ``or in-country
transfer'' and inserting ``in-country transfer, or remotely
access (including the provision thereof)''; and
(C) in subsection (e)(1)(A)--
(i) in clause (i), by striking ``or in-country transfer
outside the United States any item'' and inserting ``in-
country transfer outside the United States any item or
remotely access any item (or provide such access)''; and
(ii) in clause (ii), by striking ``or in-country transfer''
and inserting ``in-country transfer of items, or provide
remote access to items''.
(9) In section 1761 (50 U.S.C. 4820)--
(A) in subsection (a)(5), by striking ``or in-country
transferred'' and inserting ``in-country transferred, or
remotely accessed''; and
(B) in subsection (h)(1)(B), by striking ``or in-country
transfer'' and inserting ``in-country transfer of items, or
provide remote access to items''.
(10) In section 1767(b)(2)(A) (50 U.S.C. 4825(b)(2)(A)), by
striking ``and in-country transfer'' and inserting ``in-
country transfer, or remote access''.
SEC. 3. CONSULTATION WITH CONGRESS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Commerce shall ensure
that the appropriate congressional committees are kept fully
and
[[Page H622]]
currently informed of any anticipated promulgation of
regulations to control the remote access of items under the
Export Control Reform Act of 2018, as amended by section 2,
including ensuring such committees are informed, in a
classified setting as necessary, on--
(1) the national security risk that would be addressed by
the regulations;
(2) how the method of the regulations addresses the
national security risk; and
(3) how the regulations may impact the economy of the
United States.
(b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section may be
construed to require the approval of the appropriate
congressional committees as a condition precedent to the
exercise of an authority under the Export Control Reform Act
of 2018, as amended by section 2.
(c) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--In this
section, the term ``appropriate congressional committees''
means--
(1) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives; and
(2) the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of
the Senate.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Lawler) and the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Amo) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
General Leave
Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on this measure.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, the Remote Access
Security Act.
Mr. Speaker, export controls exist to limit critical technology
developed in the U.S. from falling into the hands of our adversaries.
Export controls are a major tool of the administration to protect
sensitive tech and bolster our own national security, and these rules
have never been more timely or important as China seeks to enhance
their chip and AI development.
Unfortunately, there is a major loophole in our export control
regime. As the laws and regulations are written, physical export
controls do not apply to remote access of items. This means that still
to this day, the CCP can access our tech through the cloud and utilize
it for their own malicious purposes. Our export controls are only as
strong as the weakest link, and right now, the CCP has a real tool to
sidestep these prohibitions. We need action now.
My bill defines ``remote access'' and adds remote access provisions
into existing law. It provides the Commerce Department with the
authority to regulate controlled items through the cloud and finally
close this loophole.
The Remote Access Security Act received unanimous support in the
House Committee on Foreign Affairs during markup, passing with a
bipartisan vote of 51-0.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Mast, as well as my bipartisan co-
leads, Speaker Johnson, and Leader Scalise for helping to move this
bill to the floor today.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this much-needed
and commonsense bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. AMO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2683, as amended.
I thank Representative Lawler for introducing the Remote Access
Security Act, as well as Chairman Mast and Ranking Member Meeks for
working together to get this through our committee.
President Joe Biden imposed unprecedented export controls on China
and Russia to restrict their access to critical U.S. technologies that
could enhance their military capabilities. We know these controls were
working because both nations have worked vigorously to try to
circumvent our restrictions.
Right now, our laws do not explicitly cover the remote access of
technologies via network connections, including the internet or cloud
computing services.
H.R. 2683 would close this gap by giving the Bureau of Industry and
Security statutory authority to control the remote access of items by
bad actors who aim to jeopardize our national security or foreign
policy interests.
While this bill passed the House last year, it is even more critical
today. President Biden took steps to prevent the remote access of U.S.
chips by our adversaries in his Artificial Intelligence Diffusion Rule.
That rule is not perfect, but President Trump rescinded it and failed
to replace it with any new policy framework.
Thanks to Donald Trump repealing the rule, there are currently no
clear or consistent safeguards in place to protect American chips from
being accessed remotely by our adversaries, and the safeguards are even
less clear once they are exported abroad.
For the sake of enriching himself and his billionaire friends, Trump
went further to undermine our national security by loosening President
Biden's export controls on advanced chip sales to build data centers in
Saudi Arabia and the UAE. He is auctioning off our chips to the highest
bidder without a care for the national security implications. Without
strong guardrails in place, this puts American IP and technology at
risk.
H.R. 2683 provides BIS with the authority to control remote access to
critical American technology and demands that the administration act to
protect our interests.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this
measure, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Huizenga), the chairman of the South and Central Asia
Subcommittee.
Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friend from New York
allowing me to speak on this. I rise in support of Mr. Lawler's bill,
the Remote Access Security Act.
Mr. Speaker, America is at a critical juncture in our technology
policy. Do we want to allow our adversaries to weaponize American
technology? Do we want them to dominate us militarily and economically
in the future? Do we want to create a dystopian world and make everyday
Americans subservient to the Chinese Communist Party and their
affiliates, or do we want to make a decisive stand to stop some of the
most advanced technologies from being used against us in every facet of
our lives?
Loopholes currently available in U.S. export control allow the CCP
and others to gain a competitive advantage over American companies,
especially when it comes to cloud services for technologies that would
otherwise not be accessible in physical form. In other words, and in
plain English, you can't buy it, so you shouldn't be able to rent it
either.
The Remote Access Security Act fixes this problem by giving the
administration--all administrations--the authority and flexibility to
restrict China's cloud-based access to our most advanced AI
technologies.
In November 2025, I convened a subcommittee hearing on export control
loopholes which leave American technology vulnerable, and this is where
we extensively discussed issues such as this one. H.R. 2683 was
reported favorably out of the House Foreign Affairs Committee by a vote
of 51-0. Mr. Speaker, we can't do better than unanimous, but that is
showing broad bipartisan agreement on this particular issue.
Today, Congress needs to uphold our responsibility to the American
people to close this loophole and stop the CCP and its affiliates from
leveraging our technologies for their own military modernization
efforts and pursuit of technological dominance. Keeping this coveted
technology out of the hands of the CCP and their affiliates will ensure
that Silicon Valley, not Xinjiang, remains the center of the AI
revolution.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan measure.
Mr. AMO. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Baumgartner), a cosponsor of this bill.
Mr. BAUMGARTNER. Mr. Speaker, I applaud Congressman Lawler for this
fine bill. We have heard about the loophole that exists, and I will
provide a few more details.
Mr. Speaker, this bill would allow the U.S. Government to extend
existing export controls to the remote access of controlled U.S.
technology
[[Page H623]]
through cloud infrastructure. Remote access is more than just the CCP.
Remote access is defined as access by foreign persons of concern,
specifically those from Russia, Iran, North Korea, and China, to also
include Hong Kong and Macau.
{time} 1510
Let me give you three examples of what we are talking about of high-
risk national security activities involving access to controlled
technologies such as advanced AI chips.
One example would be conducting surveillance to undermine human
rights through spyware location tracking or biometric identification.
That is not good stuff. We don't want the Chinese and our countries of
concern to be using the best American technology remotely to do that.
Nor do we want them to train AI models to enable weapons of mass
destruction, automated cyber attacks, or systems that evade human
oversight. Another final example would be accessing tools designed for
offensive cyber operations.
Under this bill, if a Chinese firm would like to rent access to a
cluster of advanced chips already subject to U.S. control in an
overseas data center, the Department of Commerce can require a license
if determined that remote access is a risk to U.S. national security.
Put simply, if the U.S. has the authority to prohibit the export of a
critical U.S. technology, then the remote access to that same
technology should also be subject to control.
As mentioned, this bill was unanimously supported in committee, and I
hope and expect unanimous support here on the House floor.
Mr. AMO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume for
the purpose of closing.
As technology evolves, so must our technology security policies. Our
export control regulations were written at a time when remote access of
controlled technologies was not an acute threat.
Today, as Russian and PRC entities find more and more creative ways
to evade our sanctions and export controls, we must update our
regulations to keep pace with their tactics.
By passing this bill, Congress can make it harder for problematic PRC
companies and military-aligned entities to obtain access to U.S.
technologies and exploit them to hurt U.S. national security. By
passing this bill, this body can send a clear message to Donald Trump
that he must do more to protect American technology and safeguard U.S.
national security.
Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me and support this bill,
and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for supporting this
bill in committee unanimously and certainly strongly encourage a
unanimous vote here on the floor.
We all recognize the threats we face around the globe and in
particular from China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, among many other bad
actors. Our export control laws are put in place for a reason, and it
is to protect sensitive technology from getting into the hands of bad
actors.
However, when our laws were established, they did not take into
account the ever-changing technology, and so it is imperative that we
as a Congress act with urgency to update our laws and ensure that
China, Russia, Iran, and others do not have access to sensitive
technology remotely. That is why this bill is imperative, and I
encourage all of my colleagues to vote in the affirmative.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Lawler) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 2683, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.
____________________