Authorizing the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hconres/63

Last Updated: November 30, 2025

Authorizing the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast.

HCONRES. 63, 119th Congress.

The sponsor

Rep. Cline, Ben [R-VA-6]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$67,000 raised

21 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Health and Human Services" section, p. 533-535 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Invalid Date

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed Senate

🏛️

House Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

**Bill Analysis: HCONRES 63**

A trivial matter, really. This bill is a fleeting distraction from the real issues at hand – the ones that affect my bottom line.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The main purpose of this bill is to authorize the use of the Capitol rotunda for the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast on February 5, 2026. A feel-good event, no doubt, but one that holds little significance in the grand scheme of things.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill grants permission for the event to take place and allows for food and beverage service. It also delegates responsibility for preparations to the Architect of the Capitol. Hardly earth-shattering changes to existing law.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The primary stakeholders are the organizers of the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast, a group of lawmakers, and perhaps some special interest groups seeking to curry favor with them. My empire, however, remains unaffected by this bill.

**Potential Impact & Implications** From a financial perspective, this bill is a non-event. No significant costs or benefits are associated with it. The real implications lie in the symbolism – a nod to the influence of faith-based organizations on Capitol Hill. As someone who operates at the intersection of technology and politics, I find such displays of religiosity quaint but ultimately inconsequential.

In conclusion, HCONRES 63 is a minor bill that will not meaningfully impact my business interests or the broader landscape of American politics. It's a sideshow, a distraction from the real issues that demand attention – issues like deregulation, tax reform, and the privatization of public goods. Now, those are topics worthy of discussion.

**Recommendation** I neither support nor oppose this bill. Its passage will not affect my bottom line or influence my strategic decisions. If anything, it serves as a reminder of the inefficiencies inherent in democratic processes – a system that prioritizes symbolic gestures over meaningful policy reforms.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this bill, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a concurrent resolution is a type of legislative measure that requires the approval of both the House and Senate but does not require the President's signature. Remember when we learned about the different types of bills and resolutions?

The main purpose of HCONRES 63 is to authorize the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast on February 5, 2026. The objective is straightforward: allow a specific event to take place in a designated area.

Now, let's look at the key provisions. Section 1(a) authorizes the use of the rotunda for the prayer breakfast and includes permission for food and beverage service. This is not exactly rocket science, folks. We covered this type of language in middle school when we discussed how bills are written.

Section 1(b) outlines the preparations for the event, which will be carried out according to conditions set by the Architect of the Capitol. Again, basic stuff. You should have learned about the role of various government agencies and officials in implementing laws.

As for affected parties and stakeholders, this bill primarily concerns the organizers of the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast, as well as the Architect of the Capitol and other relevant staff members responsible for preparing the rotunda.

The potential impact of this bill is minimal, but it's still worth noting. By authorizing the use of the rotunda, Congress is essentially giving its blessing to an event that promotes a specific ideology or agenda. This might raise some eyebrows, especially considering the separation of church and state. However, as we discussed in class, the system of checks and balances is supposed to prevent any one branch of government from overstepping its authority.

Now, I know this bill seems like a minor issue, but it's still an example of how Congress operates. As I always said in class, understanding the legislative process is crucial for being an informed citizen. It's...disappointing that some people need to be reminded of these basics as adults.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

My fellow truth-seekers, gather 'round and behold the subtle machinations of our benevolent overlords! HCONRES 63 may seem like a harmless bill on the surface, but trust me, there's more to it than meets the eye.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** On its face, this bill authorizes the use of the Capitol rotunda for the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast. Sounds innocuous enough, right? But think about it – what better way to distract us from the real issues at hand than with a feel-good, faith-based event? It's a clever ruse to lull us into complacency while they slip in more insidious legislation.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** Section 1(a) grants permission for the event, including food and beverage service. Ah, but what kind of "food and beverages" will be served? Will it be a lavish spread, courtesy of our tax dollars? And who exactly is behind this "Congressional National Prayer Breakfast"? Is it just a coincidence that it's scheduled for February 5th, a date eerily close to the anniversary of the infamous Bohemian Grove gathering?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The Architect of the Capitol gets to dictate the conditions for physical preparations. Hmm... who is this mysterious figure, and what kind of "conditions" will they impose? Perhaps it's a clever way to sneak in some surveillance equipment or further restrict access to our nation's capital.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill may seem trivial, but mark my words – it's just the tip of the iceberg. By allowing this event to take place, we're setting a precedent for future "prayer breakfasts" and other faith-based gatherings that could be used as Trojan horses for more sinister agendas. Think about it: what if these events become regular occurrences, slowly chipping away at our separation of church and state? It's a slippery slope, my friends!

Now, I know what you're thinking – "Uncle, you're being paranoid again." But let me ask you this: have you ever stopped to consider the true purpose behind these seemingly innocuous bills? Wake up, sheeple! The truth is out there, hidden in plain sight.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, we've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here. HCONRES 63, the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast authorization act. (Sarcastic tone) Oh boy, I can barely contain my excitement.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill is all about... (dramatic pause) ...authorizing the use of the Capitol rotunda for a prayer breakfast. That's right, folks, our brave representatives are fighting for the freedom to pray in a fancy building. Because, you know, that's what America is all about – praying in style.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill authorizes the use of the Capitol rotunda on February 5, 2026, for this esteemed event. And, because no prayer breakfast is complete without some snacks, it also allows for food and beverage service. (Smirk) I mean, who doesn't love a good buffet with their morning prayers?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Well, the obvious beneficiaries of this bill are the attendees of the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast – a veritable Who's Who of Washington elites. (Wink) And by "elites," I mean our noble representatives and their friends who get to enjoy a nice breakfast on the taxpayers' dime.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, some might say this bill is just a harmless gesture of goodwill. But let me tell you, folks, this is about so much more than that. This is about the erosion of our freedoms – specifically, the freedom to pray in a fancy building without government interference. (Outrageous tone) I mean, what's next? Will they try to take away our right to pray at football games or something?

In all seriousness, this bill is a classic example of Congress doing what it does best: wasting time and taxpayer money on feel-good nonsense while the real issues facing America go unaddressed. But hey, who needs actual governance when you can have a prayer breakfast? (Sarcasm) God bless America, indeed.

That's all for tonight, folks. Tune in next time when we'll be analyzing another thrilling bill that will surely change the course of human history. Or not.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

(sigh) Oh joy, another thrilling episode of "Congressional Theater" for the masses. Let's dissect this farce.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** (rolls eyes) The main purpose of HCONRES 63 is to authorize the use of the Capitol rotunda for the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast. Wow, what a monumental task. I'm sure it took hours of intense deliberation to decide that, yes, they should have a prayer breakfast. And by "intense deliberation," I mean a few minutes of nodding off during a meeting.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** (sarcastic tone) Oh boy, this is where things get really exciting. The bill authorizes the use of the rotunda for the event and allows for food and beverage service. Because, clearly, the most pressing issue facing our nation is whether or not Congress can have a nice breakfast while praying.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** (disdainful tone) Let's see... who are the key stakeholders here? The Congressional National Prayer Breakfast Committee, of course! A group of self-righteous politicians and their sycophants who need to be seen as pious. And, naturally, the caterers who will provide the free food. Because what's a prayer breakfast without some taxpayer-funded eggs and bacon?

**Potential Impact & Implications:** (deadpan) This bill has far-reaching implications for the future of humanity. I mean, think about it: if Congress can't have a prayer breakfast in the rotunda, what's next? Will they not be able to pray at all? The very fabric of our society is at stake here.

Diagnosis: This bill is a classic case of "Legislative Narcissism," where politicians engage in self-aggrandizing behavior to boost their public image. Symptoms include excessive use of pomp and circumstance, empty rhetoric, and a complete disregard for actual governance.

Treatment: (shrugs) None needed. This bill will pass with flying colors, because who doesn't love a good prayer breakfast? The real disease here is the electorate's willingness to tolerate this kind of nonsense. Voters are like hypochondriacs, constantly seeking validation from their elected officials, even when it's just a bunch of empty calories.

Prognosis: (resigned) This bill will be signed into law, and we'll all be treated to another round of self-congratulatory back-patting from our esteemed leaders. Meanwhile, the actual problems facing this country will continue to fester, ignored by the very people who claim to represent us.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

**Bill Summary: HCONRES 63**

**Main Purpose and Objectives:** The main purpose of HCONRES 63 is to authorize the use of the rotunda of the United States Capitol for the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast on February 5, 2026. The resolution aims to facilitate this annual event, which brings together members of Congress, faith leaders, and other stakeholders to promote unity and spiritual reflection.

**Key Provisions and Changes to Existing Law:** The bill authorizes the use of the rotunda for the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast on a specific date (February 5, 2026) and allows for food and beverage service during the event. The resolution also requires physical preparations for the event to be carried out in accordance with conditions prescribed by the Architect of the Capitol.

**Affected Parties and Stakeholders:** The affected parties and stakeholders include:

* Members of Congress participating in the National Prayer Breakfast * Faith leaders and organizations involved in the event * The Architect of the Capitol, responsible for overseeing preparations and ensuring compliance with conditions * Congressional staff and support personnel assisting with event logistics * Visitors and attendees of the National Prayer Breakfast

**Potential Impact and Implications:** The passage of HCONRES 63 will have a limited but positive impact on the annual National Prayer Breakfast. By authorizing the use of the rotunda, the resolution ensures that this significant event can take place in a prominent location, fostering a sense of community and spiritual reflection among participants.

However, it is essential to note that this bill does not introduce any substantial changes to existing law or policy. The authorization provided by HCONRES 63 is specific to the 2026 National Prayer Breakfast and does not establish a precedent for future events.

Overall, HCONRES 63 is a routine resolution aimed at facilitating an annual event of significance to members of Congress and faith leaders. Its passage will have a minimal impact on broader policy or legislative issues.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this congressional bill, HCONRES 63, and get the lowdown on what it's all about.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This bill is like a wave that's all about giving the green light for the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast to go down in the rotunda of the Capitol. It's like, the ultimate spot for this event, you know? The main objective is to authorize the use of the rotunda on February 5, 2026, for this prayer breakfast.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill's got two key provisions that are worth mentioning, bro. First, it authorizes the use of the rotunda for the event, which includes serving food and beverages. That's right, they're gonna bring in some grub and drinks to fuel the prayer vibes. Second, it gives the Architect of the Capitol the power to set conditions for physical preparations, like setting up chairs or whatever.

Now, this bill doesn't really change any existing laws, but it does give a specific exception for this one event. It's like a special permit, dude.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The main stakeholders here are the organizers of the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast and the Architect of the Capitol. They're the ones who'll be working together to make sure everything goes smoothly. Also, members of Congress and their guests will be affected, since they'll be attending the event.

**Potential Impact & Implications** On one hand, this bill's all about promoting unity and spirituality among lawmakers, which is totally tubular, bro. It's a chance for them to come together and reflect on their values. On the other hand, some people might see it as a bit too cozy between church and state, you know? Like, what if someone doesn't want to pray or participate in the event?

But, let's be real, this bill's not gonna change the world or anything. It's just a small wave in the ocean of congressional business. Still, it's worth keeping an eye on, 'cause it shows how lawmakers are trying to navigate the tricky waters of faith and politics.

Anyway, that's HCONRES 63 in a nutshell, bro. Not exactly a thrilling bill, but it's got its own chill vibes going on.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**Bill Analysis: HCONRES 63 - Authorizing the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** HCONRES 63 is a concurrent resolution that authorizes the use of the United States Capitol rotunda for the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast on February 5, 2026. The bill's primary objective is to permit the event organizers to hold their annual gathering in the iconic Capitol building.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill contains two main provisions:

1. Authorization: Grants permission for the use of the rotunda on a specific date (February 5, 2026) for the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast. 2. Food and Beverage Service: Allows for the service of food and beverages during the event.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The affected parties include:

* The Congressional National Prayer Breakfast organizers * Event attendees (Members of Congress, dignitaries, and guests) * The Architect of the Capitol (responsible for physical preparations and conditions)

**Potential Impact & Implications**

While this bill may seem innocuous, it's essential to consider the underlying motivations and potential implications:

* **Influence of Evangelical Groups**: The Congressional National Prayer Breakfast is an annual event organized by a Christian evangelical group, The Fellowship Foundation. This organization has been known to promote conservative values and has ties to influential politicians. * **Potential for Partisan Politics**: By authorizing the use of the Capitol rotunda for this event, Congress may be seen as endorsing or promoting a specific religious ideology, potentially alienating non-Christian constituents. * **Donor Influence**: It's worth noting that Rep. Cline (R-VA), one of the bill's sponsors, has received campaign contributions from conservative Christian groups and individuals who support The Fellowship Foundation.

In conclusion, while HCONRES 63 appears to be a straightforward authorization bill, it may have underlying implications related to partisan politics, religious influence, and donor interests.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Cline, Ben [R-VA-6]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$67,000

13 donors

PACs

Organizations

$1,000

Committees

Individuals

$66,000

No PAC contributions found

THE CHICKASAW NATION

1 transaction

$1,000

No committee contributions found

JOHNSON, CAMERON MR.

3 transactions

$9,900

STOLTZFUS, MICHAEL

2 transactions

$6,600

CLINE, JULIA S MRS.

2 transactions

$6,600

CARTLEDGE, GEORGE B MR. III

2 transactions

$6,600

GOOD, JOHN P JR

2 transactions

$6,600

KIRK, JOHN W MR.

2 transactions

$6,600

MCNICHOLS, ROBERT MR.

2 transactions

$6,600

ROSENBERG, DIANE MS.

1 transaction

$3,300

STOLTZFUS, MELISSA

1 transaction

$3,300

UIHLEIN, RICHARD MR.

1 transaction

$3,300

MCLEOD, JOHN G. MR.

1 transaction

$3,300

PEARMAN, JAMES E. MR. JR.

1 transaction

$3,300

Donor Network - Rep. Cline, Ben [R-VA-6]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Showing 23 nodes and 21 connections (30 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $67,000

Top Donors - Rep. Cline, Ben [R-VA-6]

Showing top 13 donors by contribution amount

1 Org12 Individuals

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of Health and Human Services

Weak

Vector: 55%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HCONRES 63 authorizes a religious event in the Capitol, which tangentially touches on themes of religious freedom and conscience protection that appear in the Project 2025 HHS section, but it does not address healthcare policy, regulations, or the specific HHS initiatives listed."

Key themes:religious freedomconscience protectionfaith-based initiatives

— 501 — Department of Health and Human Services 54. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Office of Civil Rights, and Office of the Secretary, “Special Responsibilities of Medicare Hospitals in Emergency Cases and Discrimination on the Basis of Disability in Critical Health and Human Service Programs or Activities,” draft of Proposed Rule, January 14, 2021, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/infants-nprm.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 55. H.R. 26, Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https:// www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr26/BILLS-118hr26pcs.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 56. H.R. 7, No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr7/BILLS-118hr7ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 57. S. 401, Conscience Protection Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced February 24, 2021, https://www.congress. gov/117/bills/s401/BILLS-117s401is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 58. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and Office of the Secretary, “Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Notice of Tribal Consultation, Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 149 (August 4, 2022), pp. 47824–47920, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-04/pdf/2022-16217.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 59. Ibid., p. 47916. 60. The regulation was not finalized before the end of the Administration. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Services, “Revision of Categorical Eligibility in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 142 (July 24, 2019), pp. 35570–55581, https:// www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/07/24/2019-15670/revision-of-categorical-eligibility-in-the- supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap (accessed March 17, 2023). 61. 45 Code of Federal Regulations § 75.300(c) and (d), https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/ subchapter-A/part-75/subpart-D/subject-group-ECFR911e5e1a30bfbcb/section-75.300 (accessed March 17, 2023). 62. H.R. 1750, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https:// www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1750/BILLS-117hr1750ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023), and S. 656, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/ s656/BILLS-117s656is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 63. S. 3949, Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117-348, 117th Congress, January 25, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ348/PLAW-117publ348.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 64. Kelsey Y. Santamaria, “Child Migrants at the Border: The Flores Settlement Agreement and Other Legal Developments,” Congressional Research Service In Focus No. IF11799, April 1, 2021, https://crsreports.congress. gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11799 (accessed March 17, 2023). 65. Report, Building a Happy Home: Marriage Education as a Tool to Strengthen Families, Social Capital Project Report No. 1-22, March 2022, p. 17, https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3d102525-6f0d-48ed- 92f4-d71edd468ad6/building-a-happy-home.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). The cover of the report reflects that the Social Capital Project is “[a] project of the Joint Economic Committee – Republicans.” 66. See, for example, Alan J. Hawkins, “Are Federally Supported Relationship Education Programs for Lower-Income Individuals and Couples Working? A Review of Evaluation Research,” American Enterprise Institute, September 2019, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 67. H.R. 8404, Respect for Marriage Act, Public Law No. 117-228, 117th Congress, December 13, 2022, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 68. Madison Marino, “Over 1,000 Safety Violations Mar Head Start. Children Deserve Better,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, November 10, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/over-1000-safety- violations-mar-head-start-children-deserve-better. 69. American Hospital Association v. Becerra, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), https://www.supremecourt.gov/ opinions/21pdf/20-1114_09m1.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 70. U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration; and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, “Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 22 (February 2, 2023), pp. 7236–7281, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-02-02/pdf/2023-01981.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). — 502 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 71. 42 U.S. Code § 238n, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/238n (accessed March 17, 2023). 72. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, “Early Childhood Health,” last reviewed October 2022, https://mchb.hrsa.gov/programs-impact/focus-areas/early- childhood-health (accessed March 17, 2023). 73. American Pregnancy Association, “Having a Doula—What Are the Benefits?” https://americanpregnancy. org/healthy-pregnancy/labor-and-birth/having-a-doula/#:~:text=Other%20studies%20have%20shown%20 that%20having%20a%20doula,massage%20to%20reduce%20stress%20and%20anxiety%20during%20labor (accessed March 17, 2023). 74. S. 2372, VA MISSION [Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks] Act of 2018, Public Law No. 115-182, 115th Congress, June 6, 2018, https://www.congress.gov/115/plaws/publ182/ PLAW-115publ182.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 75. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Securing Updated and Necessary Statutory Evaluations Timely,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 11 (January 19, 2021), pp. 5694–5764, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-01-19/pdf/2021-00597.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023). 76. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, “Compliance with Statutory Program Integrity Requirements,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 42 (March 4, 2029), pp. 7714–7791, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-03-04/pdf/2019-03461.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 77. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, “Ensuring Access to Equitable, Affordable, Client-Centered, Quality Family Planning Services,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 192 (October 7, 2021), pp. 56144–56180, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/ pkg/FR-2021-10-07/pdf/2021-21542.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 78. S. 624, Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act, 118th Congress, introduced March 2, 2023, https://www. congress.gov/118/bills/s624/BILLS-118s624is.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 79. 50 U.S. Code Chapter 55, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/chapter-55 (accessed March 22, 2023). 80. 18 U.S. Code § 13, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/13 (accessed March 18, 2023). 81. Bowen v. American Hospital Association, 476 U.S. 610 (1986), https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/ usrep/usrep476/usrep476610/usrep476610.pdf (accessed 22, 2023). 82. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, “Notification of Interpretation and Enforcement of Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972,” Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 99 (May 25, 2021), pp. 27984–27985, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- 2021-05-25/pdf/2021-10477.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 83. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, “HHS Notice and Guidance on Gender Affirming Care, Civil Rights, and Patient Privacy,” March 2, 2022, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/hhs- ocr-notice-and-guidance-gender-affirming-care.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 84. Heckler v. Chaney, 420 U.S. 821 (1985), https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/470/821.html (accessed March 18, 2022). 85. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, “Guidance to Nation’s Retail Pharmacies: Obligations Under Federal Civil Rights Laws to Ensure Access to Comprehensive Reproductive Health Care Services,” content last reviewed July 14, 2022, https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/ special-topics/reproductive-healthcare/pharmacies-guidance/index.html (accessed March 18, 2023). 86. H.R. 3103, “Health Insurance and Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Public Law No. 104-191, 104th Congress, August 21, 1996, https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ191/PLAW-104publ191.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 87. U.S. Department of Human Services, “HIPAA Privacy Rule and Disclosures of Information Relating to Reproductive Health Care,” content last reviewed June 29, 2022, (accessed March 18, 2023). See also “Protecting the Privacy and Security of Your Health Information When Using Your Personal Cell Phone or Tablet,” content last reviewed June 29, 2022, https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/guidance/ cell-phone-hipaa/index.html (accessed March 18, 2023).

Department of Health and Human Services

Weak

Vector: 55%

Pages: 527-529AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill facilitates a religious event in the Capitol, touching on religious expression, while the Project 2025 HHS section focuses on enforcing conscience protections and religious freedom laws within healthcare funding and regulation. The connection is tangential, sharing only a general theme of religious liberty without substantive policy overlap."

Key themes:religious freedomconscience protectionfaith-based eventsgovernment accommodationRFRA

— 494 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise provide a private right of action that would allow victims to seek legal redress in court. At the same time, when it continues to fund governmental and private enti- ties that violate these laws, HHS is spending taxpayer funds unlawfully. Under liberal Administrations, OCR has amassed a poor record of devoting resources to conscience and religious freedom enforcement and is often complicit in approving or looking the other way at the Administration’s own attacks on religious liberty. Congress should pass the Conscience Protection Act so that victims can pursue redress through courts without having to depend exclusively on OCR. In addition: l OCR should return to Trump Administration policies that initiated robust enforcement of these conscience laws. It should restore and fully fund the Office of the Deputy Director for the Conscience and Religious Freedom Division (CRFD) and ensure that it has the necessary delegations from the Secretary to enforce these laws. The Secretary should give adequate delegations to OCR to pursue enforcement of conscience laws, including RFRA, and require all HHS components that provide funding or grants to cooperate with OCR CRFD investigations. The Secretary, the Deputy Secretary, and principals in other HHS divisions should endorse the remedial measures recommended by OCR CRFD and limit territorial objections and slow-down attempts by other divisional officials including OGC. HHS should withdraw funding from any violating entities that refuse to correct their behavior, and OCR CRFD should work with ASFR to ensure that all grant announcements and instruments inform grantees and applicants of their obligations to comply with federal health care conscience laws specifically as a condition of obtaining or maintaining their funding. l A draft OCR RFRA and religious freedom rule from the Trump Administration should be issued and finalized. These regulations would provide a clear process for OCR’s enforcement in coordination with other HHS divisions and existing HHS grants regulations. l HHS should reestablish waivers for state and child welfare agencies for religious exemptions, especially for faith-based adoption and foster care agencies. It should also rescind subjective case-by-case eval- uations for religious and faith-based organizations that request religious exemptions. These case-by-case determinations are currently coordinated with ACF and OCR. The recommended waivers should be granted to all states and agencies that request them, and OCR memos finding that RFRA would be violated if the waivers are not granted should be restored. — 495 — Department of Health and Human Services l HHS should restore OCR authority to review requests for and render opinions on the application of RFRA to requests for religious accommodation of people, families, and doctors who cannot in good conscience take or administer vaccines, including those made or tested with aborted fetal cell lines. l HHS should restore Section 1557, Section 504, and other OCR regulations and fix guidance documents. In 2020, the Trump Administration’s OCR published regulations under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act that restored the agency’s enforcement of that law to the limits of its statutory text, deferred to the ACA’s widespread use of a binary biological conception of sex discrimination, and specified that the regulation must comply with the religious exemption and abortion neutrality clauses in Title IX from which it is derived as well as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and other laws. Courts blocked core provisions of that rule from going into effect. In 2022, the Biden Administration proposed to reinstate a rule contradicting the scope of the statute and imposing nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. It is expected that this rule will be finalized in 2023 even though several courts have issued rulings against the interpretation on which it is based. l OCR should return its enforcement of sex discrimination to the statutory framework of Section 1557 and Title IX. Specifically, it should: 1. Remove all guidance issued under the Biden Administration concerning sexual orientation and gender identity under Section 1557, particularly the May 2021 announcement of enforcement82 and March 2022 statement threatening states that protect minors from genital mutilation.83 2. Issue a general statement of policy specifying that it will not enforce any prohibition on sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination in the Section 1557 regulation and that it will prioritize compliance with the First Amendment, RFRA, and federal conscience laws in any case implicating those claims. DOJ should commit to defending these actions aggressively against inevitable court challenges, including under cases such as Heckler v. Chaney.84

Foreword

Weak

Vector: 54%

Pages: 49-52AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HCONRES 63 merely authorizes a recurring prayer breakfast in the Capitol rotunda; it does not enact or advance the broader conservative policy goals outlined in Project 2025, such as combating 'woke' ideology or defending constitutional governance. The connection is limited to a general theme of promoting faith and national unity."

Key themes:religious freedomnational unityAmerican traditionsfaith-based initiatives

— 17 — Foreword will enter office on January 20, 2025, with a simple choice: greatness or failure. It will be a daunting test, but no more so than every generation of Americans has faced and passed. The Conservative Promise represents the best effort of the conservative move- ment in 2023—and the next conservative President’s last opportunity to save our republic. ENDNOTES 1. Ronald Reagan, Inaugural Address, January 5, 1967, https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/january- 5-1967-inaugural-address-public-ceremony (accessed March 14, 2023). 2. Quispe López, “6 Tech Executives Who Raise Their Kids Tech-Free or Seriously Limit Their Screen Time,” Business Insider, March 5, 2020, https://www.businessinsider.com/tech-execs-screen-time-children-bill-gates- steve-jobs-2019-9#google-ceo-sundar-pichais-middle-school-aged-son-doesnt-own-a-cell-phone-and-the- tv-can-only-be-accessed-with-activation-energy-1 (accessed March 14, 2023). 3. Simon Hankinson, “‘Woke’ Public Diplomacy Undermines the State Department’s Core Mission and Weakens U.S. Foreign Policy,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3738, December 12, 2022, https://www.heritage. org/global-politics/report/woke-public-diplomacy-undermines-the-state-departments-core-mission-and. 4. Michelle Nichols, “Venezuelans Facing ‘Unprecedented Challenges,’ Many Need Aid—Internal U.N. Report,” https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-un/venezuelans-facing-unprecedented-challenges- many-need-aid-internal-u-n-report-idUSKCN1R92AG (accessed March 14, 2023). — 19 — Section One TAKING THE REINS OF GOVERNMENT Am erica’s Bicentennial, which culminated on July 4, 1976, was a spirited a nd unifying celebration of our country, its Founding, and its ideals. As we approach our nation’s 250th anniversary, which will take place during the next presidency, America is now divided between two opposing forces: woke revolu- tionaries and those who believe in the ideals of the American revolution. The former believe that America is—and always has been—“systemically racist” and that it is not worth celebrating and must be fundamentally transformed, largely through a cen- tralized administrative state. The latter believe in America’s history and heroes, its principles and promise, and in everyday Americans and the American way of life. They believe in the Constitution and republican government. Conservatives—the Ameri- canists in this battle—must fight for the soul of America, which is very much at stake. Just two years after the death of the last surviving Constitutional Convention delegate, James Madison, Abraham Lincoln warned that the greatest threat to America would come not from without, but from within. This is evident today: Whether it be mask and vaccine mandates, school and business closures, efforts to keep Americans from driving gas cars or using gas stoves, or efforts to defund the police, indoctrinate schoolchildren, alter beloved books, abridge free speech, undermine the colorblind ideal, or deny the biological reality that there are only two sexes, the Left’s steady stream of insanity appears to be never-ending. The next Administration must stand up for American ideals, American families, and American culture—all things in which, thankfully, most Americans still believe. Highlighting this need, former director of the Office of Management and Budget Russ Vought writes in Chapter 2, “The modern conservative President’s task is to

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Minimal

Vector: 55%

Pages: 545-547AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill authorizes a religious event in the Capitol rotunda, whereas the Project 2025 HUD section discusses housing policy reforms, administrative oversight, and program management; there is no substantive thematic or policy connection between the two."

— 513 — Department of Housing and Urban Development ENDNOTES 1. At a 1998 Senate hearing, then-HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo acknowledged that the department “faced a competence gap” and had “the dubious distinction of being the only federal agency designated as ‘high risk’ by the General Accounting [now Government Accountability] Office (GAO),” even referencing the Section 8 rental subsidy as “on the brink of becoming the next savings and loan scandal,” and explained how the department was stepping up enforcement efforts “focused on closing the competence gap by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse.” See “Testimony of Secretary Andrew Cuomo before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies,” March 25, 1998, https://archives.hud.gov/ testimony/1998/tst32598.cfm (accessed March 4, 2023). 2. H.R. 7984, Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965, Public Law No. 89-117, 89th Congress, August 10, 1965, https://www.congress.gov/89/statute/STATUTE-79/STATUTE-79-Pg451.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 3. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Budget in Brief, pp. 2 and 7, https://www.hud.gov/ sites/dfiles/CFO/documents/2023_BudgetInBriefFINAL.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 4. For example, the Special Applications Center (SAC) located in Chicago, Illinois, was established in 1998 as a division of the Office of Public and Indian Housing to accept, review, and approve all nonfunded, noncompetitive applications and plans for demolition, disposition, and conversion of land subject to an annual contributions contract (ACC) in public housing. 5. The Secretary has delegated full authority for the Administration and enforcement of the Fair Housing Act to the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity but also has delegated limited assignment and decision-making authority to the General Counsel. 6. Effectively the HUD Chief Operating Officer and appointed by the President with Senate advice and consent. 7. The Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) is an independent adjudicatory office within the Office of the Secretary. Led by a Director who is appointed by the Secretary, it supervises the Administrative Judges of the Office of Appeals, the administrative law judges of the Office of Administrative Law Judges, and the OHA support staff. The HUD Secretary appoints administrative judges and administrative law judges in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. Chapter 5, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/part-I/ chapter-5 (accessed March 4, 2023). 8. HUD currently has a Departmental Equity Assessment Working Group, supported with five FTEs funded by the OSDBU, “as part of the President’s Executive Order 13985, Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.” See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 35-15, https://www.hud.gov/sites/ dfiles/CFO/documents/2023HUDCongressionalJustificationsFINALelectronicversion.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023), and President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government,” January 20, 2021, in Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 14 (January 25, 2021), pp. 7009–7013, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-01-25/pdf/2021- 01753.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 9. Interestingly, “[t]he 2023 President’s Budget requests $748 thousand for CFBNP, which is $436 thousand less than the 2022 Annualized CR level. The Budget reflects total funding (carryover and new authority) of $1.2 million, $448 thousand less than 2022 total funding.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 35-16. 10. See H.R. 558, Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, Public Law No. 100-77, 100th Congress, July 22, 1987, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-101/pdf/STATUTE-101-Pg482.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). Later renamed the McKinney–Vento Homeless Assistance Act. 11. Established under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5301 et seq., https:// www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 12. S. 566, Cranston–Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, Public Law No. 101-625, 101st Congress, November 28, 1990, Title II, https://www.congress.gov/101/statute/STATUTE-104/STATUTE-104-Pg4079.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 13. S. 1, Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Public Law No. 91-646, 91st Congress, January 2, 1971, https://www.congress.gov/91/statute/STATUTE-84/STATUTE-84-Pg1894.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). “The URA establishes the minimum Federal requirements for the acquisition of real property for Federally-funded programs and projects, and for the relocation of persons who must move from — 514 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise their homes, businesses, or farms as a direct result of acquisition, rehabilitation, or demolition for a Federally- funded program or project.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD Exchange, “49 CFR Part 24–URA Regulations,” published February 2005, https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/804/ura-and- real-property-acquisition-policies-act-49-cfr-part-24/ (accessed March 4, 2023). HUD is one of the 18 federal departments and agencies that “are subject to the Uniform Act.” U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, “Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally Assisted Programs,” Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 243 (December 18, 2019), pp. 69466–69521, esp. p. 69484, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-12-18/pdf/2019-25558.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 14. H.R. 3219, Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996, Public Law No. 104-330, 104th Congress, October 26, 1996, https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ330/PLAW-104publ330.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 15. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 6-1. The U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (Wagner–Steagall Act) established the origins of locally chartered housing agencies that administer federal funding for various rental assistance programs—a quintessentially progressive New Deal–era policy that expanded the administrative state’s powers to the housing market—with the primary legislative intent of eradicating slum housing in urban areas, boosting jobs, and providing housing for the working poor. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1437 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). A decade later, the Housing Act of 1949 codified federal standards for housing livability—a rationale that HUD and federal legislators have continued to use to justify federal intervention in housing—establishing as a national policy objective the provision of a minimum standard of housing quality for all Americans. This legislation also statutorily established many of the rural housing programs that are administered at USDA and expanded programs facilitating the removal of slum housing in urban areas. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1441 et seq., https:// www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 16. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, pp. 1-2 and 2-2. 17. The National Housing Act of 1934 established the FHA and the statutory authority for the secondary market. The main stated premise was to stimulate jobs and facilitate the housing and construction sector during the Great Depression. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1701 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12 (accessed March 4, 2023). 18. 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 19. 29 U.S.C. §§ 701 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/29 (accessed March 4, 2023). 20. HUD’s Departmental Enforcement Center (DEC) is led by a Director. It was established in 1998 as part of a broader effort to streamline and consolidate functions at HUD and was later merged with the Office of General Counsel. The DEC “is comprised of the Office of the Director, the Compliance Division, the Operations Division and five Satellite Offices” and describes its mission as “assuring the highest standards of ethics, management and accountability in the resolution of HUD's troubled properties.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Departmental Enforcement Center, “Program Offices: Departmental Enforcement Center,” https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/enforcement (accessed March 4, 2023). 21. H.R. 5334, Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, Public Law No. 102-1017, 102nd Congress, October 28, 1992, Title X, https://www.congress.gov/102/statute/STATUTE-106/STATUTE-106-Pg3672.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 22. H.R. 8588, Inspector General Act of 1978, Public Law No. 95-452, 95th Congress, October 12, 1978, https://www. congress.gov/95/statute/STATUTE-92/STATUTE-92-Pg1101.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 23. Guiding questions: What immediate administrative reforms of HUD and its programs can be made with high probability of success? What short-term legislative reforms can be proposed that, in tandem with administrative reforms, would achieve the HUD vision/mission objective? What HUD offices should be eliminated and/or realigned to reduce any redundancy that may persist in programmatic functions? 24. Wholly aside from reforms that would require legislation, the next Administration must ensure that key political appointees are able to acquit themselves as change agents to execute administrative reforms. Otherwise, whether because of a sheer lack of skill and expertise or simply a lack of will and philosophical alignment with reforms, staff may frustrate the efforts of committed political appointee staff and leadership to execute substantive administrative reforms. To achieve the policy and regulatory reforms outlined in this chapter, political appointees must be carefully placed in positions that reflect not only technical, market/ industry, and operational expertise, but also a shared will and commitment.

Department of Homeland Security

Minimal

Vector: 54%

Pages: 201-204AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HCONRES 63 authorizes the use of the Capitol Rotunda for a religious event and contains no provisions related to homeland security, immigration, border enforcement, or any of the policy objectives outlined in the Project 2025 DHS section. The bill is purely ceremonial and administrative in nature."

— 168 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise ENDNOTES 1. H.R. 5005, Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law No. 107-296, 107th Congress, November 25, 2002, § 101(b)(1), https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ296/PLAW-107publ296.pdf (accessed March 14, 2023). 2. See, for example, “Elon Musk Slams CISA Censorship Network as ‘Propaganda Platform,’” Kanekoa News, December 28, 2022, https://kanekoa.substack.com/p/elon-musk-slams-cisa-censorship-network (accessed March 14, 2023). 3. H.R. 2680, An Act to Amend the Immigration and Nationality Act, and for Other Purposes, Public Law No. 89-236, 89th Congress, October 3, 1965, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-79/pdf/STATUTE-79- Pg911.pdf (accessed March 14, 2023). 4. Added to the Immigration and Nationality Act by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. See H.R. 3610, Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act, 1997, Public Law No. 104-208, 104th Congress, September 30, 1996, Division C, https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ208/ PLAW-104publ208.pdf (accessed March 14, 2023). 5. 8 U.S. Code, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8 (accessed March 14, 2023). 6. 18 U.S. Code, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18 (accessed March 14, 2023). 7. 5 U.S. Code §§ 551–559, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/part-I/chapter-5/subchapter-II (accessed March 14, 2023). 8. Table, “United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Budget Comparison and Adjustments Appropriation and PPA Summary,” in U.S. Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Budget Overview, Fiscal Year 2023 Congressional Justification, p. CIS-4, https://www.uscis.gov/ sites/default/files/document/reports/U.S._Citizenship_and_Immigration_Services%E2%80%99_Budget_ Overview_Document_for%20Fiscal_Year_2023.pdf#:~:text=The%20FY%202023%20Budget%20includes%20 %24913.6M%2C%204%2C001%20positions%3B,of%20%24444.1M%20above%20the%20FY%202022%20 President%E2%80%99s%20Budget (accessed March 14, 2023), and Table, “United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Comparison of Budget Authority and Request,” in ibid., p. CIS-5. 9. H.R. 7311, William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, Public Law No. 110-457, 110th Congress, December 23, 2008, § 235, https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ457/PLAW- 110publ457.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 10. Matter of A-B-, Respondent, 27 I&N Dec. 316 (A.G. 2018), https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1070866/ download (accessed January 18, 2023). 11. Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012), https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/567/387/ (accessed January 18, 2023). 12. Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act [Public Law 93–288; Approved May 22, 1974] [As Amended Through P.L. 117–328, Enacted December 29, 2022], https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/ COMPS-2977/pdf/COMPS-2977.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 13. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Budget Overview, Fiscal Year 2023 Congressional Justification, p. FEMA-24, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2022-03/Federal%20Emergency%20 Management%20Agency_Remediated.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 14. Report, United States Secret Service: An Agency in Crisis, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives, 114th Congress, December 9, 2015, https://republicans-oversight.house.gov/ wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Oversight-USSS-Report.pdf (accessed January 18, 2023). 15. 5 U.S. Code § 7103, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/7103 (accessed March 15, 2023). 16. S. 3418, Privacy Act of 1974, Public Law No. 93-579, 93rd Congress, December 31, 1974, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-88/pdf/STATUTE-88-Pg1896.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 17. H.R. 1428, Judicial Redress Act of 2015, Public Law No. 114-126, 114th Congress, February 24, 2016, https://www. congress.gov/114/plaws/publ126/PLAW-114publ126.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 18. H.R. 1158, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, Public Law No. 116-93, 116th Congress, December 20, 2019, https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1158 (accessed January 18, 2023).

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Related Bills

Other Bills by Rep. Cline, Ben

Bankruptcy Threshold Adjustment Act

119/hr/7730

Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act

119/hr/421

Protecting Our Courts from Foreign Manipulation Act

119/hr/2675

Back to All Bills