A nasty surprise awaits first responders, farmers, researchers, and law enforcement if the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is passed in its current form. They may find the drones they rely on to save lives, run businesses, grow food, and gather data will become illegal virtually overnight.
As part of a greater effort to ban companies with Chinese ties, the legislation hits the drone market particularly hard. DJI, a China-based company founded in Hong Kong, produces drones without peer in the market, leaving customers with few options to replace their existing equipment – assuming they can afford to do so.
American companies use drone technology in firefighting, filmmaking, academic research, herbicide spraying, infrastructure inspection, and environmental monitoring. Drones deliver medical supplies to remote areas, monitor crops, survey land, and help market real estate.
In a clumsy attempt at protectionism, the House has inserted two provisions that will limit access to the best drones on the market. People and companies who have invested heavily in the technology will be hardest hit. But secondary effects on those they serve will not be insignificant.
The Drones for First Responders Act and the Countering CCP Drones Act are both nominally intended to protect national security under the assumption that data from Chinese-produced drones will be accessed by the CCP and used against Americans. DJI refutes those claims.
Before we ban the most popular drones on the market, we should establish the truth and base our policy decisions on facts. Given the size of the market and the impact such a ban would have on American consumers, this issue is too important to be tucked away in a larger bill. The public should be able to engage in a robust debate on a standalone bill.
In the bigger picture, banning companies with Chinese ties is not currently practical. The argument that ‘everything made in China poses a national security concern’ would lead to a ban on millions of products American consumers use daily. We risk doing irreversible harm to our economy. We would have to ban everything from iPhones to furniture, clothing to toys, and more consumer products than most Americans realize.
For DJI, ensuring the security of its drones is an issue the company says it has taken pains to address. DJI says it employs cybersecurity and data security practices that enable users to opt in or out of data storage. The products also reportedly offer a Local Data Mode which severs the connection between the flight app and the internet.
Are those arguments sufficient to assure lawmakers that the products are not being used for surveillance by the CCP? Let’s have that debate. Let’s analyze the claims and determine the truth before jeopardizing the advantages drone technology is currently providing in so many sectors of our economy.
DJI has a $116 billion economic impact on the American economy, enabling 450,000 jobs according to a 2023 estimate. Too much is at stake to rely on a knee-jerk policy response.
In a free market, we don’t summarily ban products because of who made them or where they originated – certainly not over undocumented claims. It is not the proper role of government to tell consumers what drones they can and cannot fly. If the concerns are legitimate, then lawmakers have an obligation to establish that fact.
But under the Countering CCP Drones Act the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is empowered to stop first responders, small businesses, and hobbyists alike from purchasing a DJI drone without regard to evidence. The law would prevent the company from getting new authorizations in the United States and will even rescind existing ones.
Congress should remove drone provisions from the NDAA. Lawmakers simply haven’t done the necessary due diligence to justify such a dramatic interference in the market. Allow us to engage in a larger debate in which we can establish facts and allow stakeholders to weigh in. This issue is too important to be buried in the fine print.
Jennifer Scott is a writer, consultant, and former House Congressional aide from West Jordan, Utah
Read Full Article »