Contrary to what the media would have us believe, the amusement park that is the United States presidential campaign is not the only show in town at the moment.
For the wheels of our legislative branch continue to whirl away—which can of course be a very counterproductive thing at times like this when the American people aren’t looking. For example, they’re currently making a big mistake in considering legislation to ban a popular and effective drone system made by a global outfit called DJI. Like many electronics and tech devices, DJI’s drones are made in China. And they work reliably, which is why they are quite popular with America’s first responders, small businesses and hobbyists. Hawks in the House and Senate are claiming that these commercial only—not military—drones pose a national security risk merely because of where they come from.
Now, I can get pretty twitchy when it comes to China. The government is shady, and generally up to no good. But this is not a government nor military issue. It’s about a global company finding itself roped into something it doesn’t deserve and our congressional geniuses trying to limit access to a drone that is popular on the American market for no good reason. These drones account for about 70 percent to 90 percent of the American commercial, local government and hobbyist market.
This is not supposed to be how we play. More facts:
A drone ban would disrupt first responders. According to the Wall Street Journal in a recent piece titled “Why First Responders Don’t Want the U.S. to Band Chinese Drones,” first responders have “proven crucial in DJI’s fight against a proposed ban from Congress—that could pass as early as this year—and would effectively outlaw new DJI sales in the U.S.” They continue: “throngs of loyal users, from mountain-rescue squads to police departments and farmers, have drummed up resistance, calling their elected officials, writing opinion columns and signing letters in support for Shenzhen-based DJI.”
Recommended
In addition to being popular with first responders, the company is privately run with no hint whatsoever of any risk to U.S. national security. DJI is a privately held company that was founded in 2006 by a Hong Kong University student called Frank Wang with built-in security protocols. According to a letter sent to Congress by DJI, Wang and the other founders own 97 percent of the company so there’s really not much room there for an argument that the Chinese government somehow owns and controls the company. The company was designed with privacy as a default. Usage data can be shared with DJI, but only if the user affirmatively and proactively approves such sharing. The idea floated by some that DJI might be slipping infrastructure information from the U.S. to the Chinese government is a bit much.
On that note, the same Members of Congress who are scared of data migrating to China from DJI’s drones might want to destroy their iPhones and computers because, as previously mentioned, a majority of the components and assembly for these communications devices are made and processed in China too. The duplicity is thick with politicians who want to virtue signal that they are tough on China when they walk around with bags and pockets full of Chinese-made products every day.
Sure, protectionist politicians could get rid of everything here in America that is made in China under the guise of national security—if of course they’re ready for a trade war that would harm both sides (no matter what Donald Trump says). Consumers now have access to about $551 billion (using 2022 statistics, according to the OEC) in Chinese made products, “including Broadcasting Equipment ($59.3B), Computers ($51.9B), and Office Machine Parts ($17.2B).” Cutting off trade would likely result in China shutting off imports from the United States that might include the main products exported in 2022, including “Soybeans ($18B), Integrated Circuits ($9.61B), and Crude Petroleum ($6.9B).” Protectionism is a losing proposition for the U.S. economy and consumers.
This fight is not about national security – it is about protectionism. You see, DJI drones are widely regarded as excellent and far superior to the American version. Instead of competing on the field of innovation and consumer choice, American drone makers have chosen to try to get their foreign competition banned using government power and scare tactics. And some politicians are falling for it. Period.
Like whom, you ask? Sens. Jon Tester (D-MT) and Rick Scott (R-FL) who are both in tight races for re-election. In June, Tester said “cheap Chinese drones are flooding the American market, costing American jobs and putting our privacy and national security at risk,” and added “my commonsense legislation will crack down on Chinese-made drones to bolster our national security, protect Americans’ privacy, and support U.S. manufacturers.” Tester's legislation, the misnamed “Countering CCP Drones Act,” would effectively ban DJI drones from getting Federal Communications Commission approval to operate.
Sen. Scott has joined Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) to introduce an expanded version titled the “Countering CCP Drones and Supporting Drones for Law Enforcement Act.” That bill effectively bans DJI drones while providing tax dollars that flow to American drone makers to produce the less effective American-made drones.
The irony should not be lost that American drone makers use Chinese-made parts to produce their drones. So yeah, if there was a ban on any drone made with Chinese parts, whether assembled in the U.S. or China, there wouldn’t be any (which would be fine, if you ask me—I kind of hate drones. But I digress).
Cronyism is alive and well alongside Sinophobia in D.C. to the detriment of consumers, as we currently stand distracted by shinier objects. Pay attention, please—it’s not just about drones.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member