Loading bill breakdown…
Loading bill breakdown…
Sponsored by Rep. Frank D. Lucas (R-OK) · 20 active : 10 Republicans, 10 Democrats
Latest action: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Agricultural Risk Review Act of 2025
This bill makes changes to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), including by requiring CFIUS to determine whether a national security review is necessary for reportable agricultural land transactions that are referred by the Department of Agriculture (USDA). (CFIUS oversees the national security risks of certain foreign investment in the United States. CFIUS has the authority to review covered transactions, which include mergers, acquisitions, and takeovers that could result in foreign control of a U.S. business; certain investments in businesses involved in critical technologies, critical infrastructure, or sensitive personal data; and certain real estate transactions.)
Specifically, the bill directs CFIUS to, after receiving notification from USDA, determine (1) whether a reportable agricultural land transaction is a covered transaction, and (2) whether CFIUS should initiate a national security review or take another action with respect to the transaction.
Reportable
agricultural land transaction
means a transaction (1) that USDA has reason to believe is a covered transaction, based on information from or in cooperation with the intelligence community; (2) that involves the acquisition of an interest in agricultural land by a foreign person of China, North Korea, Russia, or Iran; and (3) with respect to which a foreign person is required to submit a report to USDA regarding their agricultural land transactions.
The bill also expands CFIUS to include the Secretary of Agriculture for covered transactions that involve agricultural land, agricultural biotechnology, or the agriculture industry (e.g., agricultural transportation, storage, and processing).
Each member’s recorded vote compared with their swing projection from before the vote. A member by voting against most of their own party.
Passed by voice vote or unanimous consent: no individual votes recorded.
Members fall into . 2 representatives don’t have enough data yet and are marked “insufficient data”. Non-voting delegates are not counted. The bill is not before the House right now; these scores show where members would stand.
Bars show each input from 0 to 100: ideology gap, scorecard gap, . is the seat’s partisan lean, and shows how much of the input data a score has.
Loading similar votes
These members have less than half of the model’s inputs, so their scores are not banded or ranked.
Ideology is each member’s score. The cluster low on the chart includes the bill’s 20 sponsor and cosponsors in the House: they have already committed, so they score as entrenched. 2 representatives without a DW-NOMINATE score or with insufficient data are not plotted.
Not applicable in the House. There is not enough similar voting history (weight 4.0 of 5.0 needed), so this input is left out of the score rather than counted as missing.
