Response to the Countering CCP Drone Act
The Countering CCP Drone Act, sponsored by Rep. Elise Stefanik (NY), recently passed the House and was attached to the NDAA bill. This act, if left unchanged, could have numerous negative consequences for public safety and industries such as agriculture, inspections, construction, mapping, insurance, the film industry, small businesses, and hobbyists. These industries rely on Chinese drones and/or their components as alternatives are more expensive and far behind technologically.
The language in the Countering CCP Drone Act is vague. While it seems to target DJI specifically, terms like “Chinese Drones” and “Chinese Components” are used interchangeably. This could affect agencies like mine that use Autel drones. While I don't think our current fleets would be rendered useless, the Act grants the FCC broad power to shut down drones and components made by these companies. Furthermore, DJI and Autel produce other essential equipment like microphones, camera equipment, and vehicle diagnostic computers, respectively. This bill will likely indirectly affect industries using those products.
Announced by Rep. Stefanik in May, the DFR Act imposes tariffs on Chinese drones and components. Aside from DJI, this will likely affect companies like Autel and Holystone as well as lesser known hobby drones. The revenue from these tariffs will fund grants to help first responders “afford” domestic drones like Skydio. I can buy THREE Autel EVO Max 4T or THREE DJI M30T drones for the cost of ONE Skydio X10. Brinc is charging in the neighborhood of $100k for two drones over the course of four years. A DJI Avata does the job of a Brinc drone for a fraction of the price. Grants are time consuming and can take months to process. Agencies should be able to simply call a rep or, dare I say, go on Amazon and order a drone. Lastly, the tariffs will also cause a price increase as these companies inevitably seek profit.
Joe Bartlett, Director of Federal Policy at Skydio, previously worked for Rep. Stefanik as her National Security Advisor. His LinkedIn profile reveals a clear connection, suggesting potential conflicts of interest. I think it's worth noting that Skydio has a direct link to the representative sponsoring these pieces of legislation. Skydio would effectively legislate their biggest competitor out of the domestic market with one bill and tariff the other Chinese competitors with the other. This allows them to become market dominant while keeping prices high because we would be using grant funds from the tariffs to pay for our future drones.
Police associations hold significant political power. Politicians often seek their support and endorsements to appeal to voters. Some politicians even support law enforcement based on their values and beliefs. I notified the New Hampshire Police Association about the potential impacts of this bill and the recently announced DFR Act. We've secured a meeting with one of our senator's senior counsel next week and are arranging discussions with our other senator's team. Don’t wait for someone else to act—mobilize your network and take initiative. If you're a member of the IACP, please consider your voice within this organization to apply influence on the federal government to alter this short-sighted legislation.
We must acknowledge that DJI’s data policies have been questionable. Although they denied data harvesting, they refused third-party penetration tests and audits in the past. Just before the Countering CCP Drone Act vote, they disabled the ability to download flight data from their drones. Ironically, the disabled flight data, combined with geofencing, has made DJI arguably the most restrictive and data secure drone manufacturer. This move should be leveraged to push for stricter data and privacy policies for all drone manufacturers.
Given that the Act is attached to the NDAA, it will likely pass in some form. Instead of a blanket ban on Chinese drones, as previously stated, we should advocate for stringent data and privacy policies across the board, foreign and domestic. I think I can speak for all of us in that we would like to see superior American-made drones that are reasonably affordable. Sadly, we haven't achieved parity. We should support initiatives that allow domestic drone manufacturers to enhance their R&D through grants and other funding. Incentives should be provided to startups and domestic companies to prevent them from partnering with or selling to foreign entities with state oversight, like China. These measures would promote innovation, ultimately saving more lives and improving our efficiency. Banning superior technology from our market will stifle innovation having the opposite effect.
Please consider requesting a meeting with your senators and/or their staff. Show them the drones you have and demonstrate their capabilities. Educate them on your real-world and practical experience.
I’ll get off my soapbox.
Thank you for reading and your consideration.
