Small unmanned aircraft systems; require state purchase and servicing of from American companies only.
The bill is expected to significantly impact state laws by ensuring that state agencies contribute to the growth of local manufacturing industries. By prioritizing domestic production over foreign suppliers, particularly those from the People's Republic of China, the bill aims to enhance national security and reduce reliance on foreign technology. This initiative may also boost job creation within the state and facilitate the development of a specialized workforce in the drone sector, aligning Mississippi's procurement policies with similar national efforts to bolster local industry.
Senate Bill 2853 mandates that all small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) purchased by the State of Mississippi and its agencies must be manufactured in the United States by American-owned companies. The bill specifies that these systems must also include collision avoidance technologies. This legislation establishes a strong preference for state procurement to favor domestic manufacturers and service providers, thereby promoting local economic development in the drone industry. Additionally, the bill requires that public agencies solicit at least one bid from Mississippi-based manufacturers for these systems.
General sentiment regarding SB 2853 appears to lean positively among proponents who argue that the bill not only protects national interests but also fosters local economic growth. However, some concerns have been raised about the implications for institutions of higher learning, which are exempt from certain provisions of the law when conducting research. Critics may find that the legislation could inadvertently limit options for state agencies and could affect the quality of resources available, especially if domestic options are limited.
Points of contention primarily revolve around the restrictions on purchasing from foreign manufacturers, particularly those in China. Critics argue that while the intention to bolster domestic production is valid, such restrictions may lead to reduced competition and, subsequently, higher costs or longer procurement times for state agencies. Others express concerns about the feasibility of exclusively sourcing from domestic manufacturers, particularly in advanced technological sectors where certain components might still need to be imported. The dialogue around these issues indicates a tension between national security interests and practical procurement considerations within the state.