BADGES for Native Communities Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/1010
Last Updated: September 2, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Leger Fernandez, Teresa [D-NM-3]

ID: L000273

Follow the money

The bill

BADGES for Native Communities Act

HR. 1010, 119th Congress — read as touching Law Enforcement & Surveillance Tech.

The sponsor

Rep. Leger Fernandez, Teresa [D-NM-3]

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

The money

$100,700 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Homeland Security" section, p. 177-179 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Subcommittee Hearings Held

May 20, 2026

Introduced

Committee Review

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed House

🏛️

Senate 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

Another bill, another exercise in futility. The BADGES for Native Communities Act, how quaint. Let's dissect this mess and see what we can find.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The stated purpose of this bill is to require Federal law enforcement agencies to report on cases of missing or murdered Indians, because apparently, the current system isn't working. How novel. The real objective here is to create a new bureaucratic apparatus that will inevitably become a money pit and a haven for incompetence.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill establishes a National Missing and Unidentified Persons System Tribal facilitator, because we clearly need more middlemen in the system. It also requires Federal law enforcement agencies to report on Indian country law enforcement personnel resources and needs, which will undoubtedly lead to a plethora of useless data and meaningless statistics.

Additionally, the bill creates a demonstration program for Bureau of Indian Affairs law enforcement employment background checks, because who doesn't love a good pilot project? And, of course, it establishes a grant program for missing or murdered response coordination, because throwing money at a problem always solves it.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The usual suspects: Native American communities, Federal law enforcement agencies, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. But let's be real, the only ones who will truly benefit from this bill are the bureaucrats and contractors who will feed off the taxpayer-funded trough.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill is a classic case of "legislative theater." It's designed to make politicians look good while doing nothing meaningful to address the actual problems. The real impact will be more red tape, more waste, and more opportunities for corruption.

In short, this bill is a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. It's a shallow attempt to address systemic issues with Native American communities without actually addressing the root causes of those problems. But hey, at least it sounds good in a press release.

Diagnosis: This bill suffers from a severe case of " Politician-itis," a disease characterized by an inability to think critically and a tendency to prioritize appearances over actual results. Treatment involves a healthy dose of skepticism, a strong stomach for bureaucratic nonsense, and a willingness to call out the emperor's new clothes.

Related Topics

State & Local Government Affairs
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Leger Fernandez, Teresa [D-NM-3]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$100,700
23 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$100,700
Committees
$0
Individuals
$0

No PAC contributions found

1
CHEROKEE NATION
2 transactions
$6,600
2
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
2 transactions
$6,600
3
PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS
2 transactions
$6,600
4
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
2 transactions
$6,600
5
JICARILLA APACHE NATION
2 transactions
$6,600
6
PUEBLO OF SANDIA
2 transactions
$6,600
7
TURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND OF CHIPPEWA OF ND
2 transactions
$6,600
8
CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA
1 transaction
$5,000
9
AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY
1 transaction
$3,300
10
MASHANTUCKET PEQUOT TRIBAL NATION
1 transaction
$3,300
11
OHKAY OWINGEH
1 transaction
$3,300
12
PUEBLO OF SANTO DOMINGO
1 transaction
$3,300
13
SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND MIWOK INDIANS
1 transaction
$3,300
14
SNOQUAIMIE TRIBE
1 transaction
$3,300
15
CATAWBA INDIAN NATION
1 transaction
$3,300
16
MUCKLESHOOT TRIBE INDIAN TRIBE
1 transaction
$3,300
17
PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS
1 transaction
$3,300
18
THE TULALIP TRIBES OF WASHINGTON
1 transaction
$3,300
19
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
1 transaction
$3,300
20
PASCUA YAQUI TRIBE
1 transaction
$3,300
21
PUEBLO OF SANTA ANA
1 transaction
$3,300
22
PUEBLO OF TAOS
1 transaction
$3,300
23
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
1 transaction
$3,300

No committee contributions found

No individual contributions found

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 9 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Newhouse, Dan [R-WA-4]

ID: N000189

Top Contributors

29

1
THE CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE RESERVATION
OrganizationNESPELEM, WA
$5,000
Sep 27, 2024
2
THE CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE RESERVATION
OrganizationNESPELEM, WA
$3,300
Oct 6, 2023
3
PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS
OrganizationTACOMA, WA
$3,300
Jun 14, 2024
4
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$3,300
Oct 29, 2024
5
PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS
OrganizationTACOMA, WA
$2,900
Aug 11, 2023
6
SWINOMISH INDIAN TRIBAL COMMUNITY
OrganizationLA CONNER, WA
$2,000
Oct 22, 2024
7
CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE CHEHALIS RESERVATION
OrganizationOAKVILLE, WA
$2,000
Oct 1, 2024
8
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$1,000
Aug 30, 2023
9
PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS
OrganizationTACOMA, WA
$400
Jun 14, 2024
10
FAISON, JAY W. MR.
CLEAN PATH ACTION FUND FOR CONSERVATIV • CEO
IndividualCHARLOTTE, NC
$11,600
Jul 24, 2023

Rep. Davids, Sharice [D-KS-3]

ID: D000629

Top Contributors

70

1
HO-CHUNK NATION
OrganizationBLACK RIVER FALLS, WI
$3,300
Oct 21, 2024
2
LEECH LAKE BAND OF OJIBWE
OrganizationCASS LAKE, MN
$3,300
Nov 4, 2024
3
MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND OF POTTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationSHELBYVILLE, MI
$3,300
Oct 23, 2024
4
PASCUA YAQUI TRIBE
OrganizationTUCSON, AZ
$3,300
Nov 1, 2024
5
PRAIRIE ISLAND TRIBAL COUNCIL
OrganizationWELCH, MN
$3,300
Oct 23, 2024
6
REDDING RANCHERIA
OrganizationREDDING, CA
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
7
THE UTE INDIAN TRIBE
OrganizationFORT DUCHESNE, UT
$3,300
Nov 15, 2024
8
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$3,300
Dec 29, 2023
9
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$3,300
Dec 29, 2023
10
HO CHUNK NATION
OrganizationBLACK RIVER FALLS, WI
$3,300
Dec 8, 2023

Rep. Bishop, Sanford D. [D-GA-2]

ID: B000490

Top Contributors

23

1
TUNICA-BILOXI TRIBE OF LOUISIANA
OrganizationMANSURA, LA
$3,300
Dec 30, 2023
2
TUNICA-BILOXI TRIBE OF LOUISIANA
OrganizationMANSURA, LA
$2,500
Oct 30, 2024
3
MUSCOGEE CREEK NATION
OrganizationOKMULGEE, OK
$1,000
Oct 28, 2024
4
DAVIS, HENRY BART III
SELF-EMPLOYED • FARMER
IndividualDOERUN, GA
$3,300
Oct 21, 2024
5
DAVIS, HENRY BART JR
SELF-EMPLOYED • FARMER
IndividualDOERUN, GA
$3,300
Oct 21, 2024
6
DAVIS, JEDD ADAM
SELF-EMPLOYED • FARMER
IndividualDOERUN, GA
$3,300
Oct 21, 2024
7
DAVIS, PAULA
SELF EMPLOYED • FARMER
IndividualDOERUN, GA
$3,300
Oct 21, 2024
8
REDDING, ROBERT L. JR
THE REDDING FIRM • PRESIDENT
IndividualWASHINGTON, DC
$3,300
Oct 21, 2024
9
VECCHIARELLI, DANIEL A
LEPRINO FOODS • VICE CHAIRMAN
IndividualDENVER, CO
$3,300
Oct 28, 2024
10
BARNES, ROY E.
THE BARNES LAW GROUP LLC • ATTORNEY
IndividualMARIETTA, GA
$3,300
Oct 25, 2024

Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large]

ID: N000147

Top Contributors

20

1
DONOHOE, BERT
THE DONOHOE COMPANIES INC. • EVP, REAL ESTATE
IndividualBETHESDA, MD
$3,300
May 2, 2024
2
OTONI, RAFAELA
HILTON CORPORATION • PRESIDENT & CEO
IndividualMC LEAN, VA
$3,300
May 3, 2024
3
REID, JACK
RAM CUSTOM SERVICES • PRESIDENT
IndividualCHESAPEAKE BEACH, MD
$3,300
May 6, 2024
4
LEWIS, JACQUELINE
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualWASHINGTON, DC
$3,300
Jul 10, 2023
5
LEWIS, JACQUELINE
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualWASHINGTON, DC
$3,300
Jul 10, 2023
6
BARRY, DAVID E. JR
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualBEALLSVILLE, MD
$2,500
May 12, 2024
7
POLASKI, MICHAEL
THE DONOHOE COMPANIES INC. • EXECUTIVE
IndividualBROADLANDS, VA
$2,500
May 13, 2024
8
GRUNLEY, KENNETH
GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION • CEO
IndividualPOTOMAC, MD
$2,500
Jun 23, 2023
9
BRUCH, CHRIS
THE DONOHOE COMPANIES INC. • CEO
IndividualBETHESDA, MD
$2,300
Apr 30, 2024
10
EARNEST, JAMES M.
SELF-EMPLOYED • REAL ESTATE INVESTOR
IndividualBETHESDA, MD
$2,300
May 10, 2024

Rep. DelBene, Suzan K. [D-WA-1]

ID: D000617

Top Contributors

46

1
JAMESTOWN S'KLALLAM TRIBE
OrganizationSEQUIM, WA
$6,600
Mar 31, 2023
2
LUMMI INDIAN NATION
OrganizationBELLINGHAM, WA
$5,000
Jul 17, 2024
3
PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS
OrganizationTACOMA, WA
$3,700
Jun 28, 2024
4
SNOQUALMIE TRIBE
OrganizationSNOQUALMIE, WA
$3,300
Nov 2, 2023
5
JAMESTOWN S'KLALLAM TRIBE
OrganizationSEQUIM, WA
$3,300
Mar 31, 2023
6
MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE
OrganizationAUBURN, WA
$3,300
Jun 1, 2023
7
THE TULALIP TRIBES OF WASHINGTON
OrganizationTULALIP, WA
$3,300
Jun 30, 2023
8
PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS
OrganizationTACOMA, WA
$3,300
Jun 28, 2024
9
THE TULALIP TRIBES OF WASHINGTON
OrganizationTULALIP, WA
$3,300
Jun 20, 2024
10
MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE
OrganizationAUBURN, WA
$3,300
Aug 13, 2024

Rep. Quigley, Mike [D-IL-5]

ID: Q000023

Top Contributors

21

1
BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA
$1,500
Jun 28, 2024
2
DIAZ, REMEDIOS
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualMIAMI, FL
$3,500
Jun 1, 2024
3
MURPHY, KATHRYN
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualBARRINGTON, IL
$3,300
Oct 20, 2024
4
TREASURE, MATTHEW
AC HUMPHREY LLC • SELF EMPLOYED
IndividualCHICAGO, IL
$3,300
Nov 8, 2024
5
CLIFFORD, ROBERT A.
CLIFFORD LAW OFFICES • ATTORNEY
IndividualCHICAGO, IL
$3,300
Oct 26, 2023
6
CONWAY, KEVIN J
COONEY & CONWAY • ATTORNEY
IndividualRIVER FOREST, IL
$3,300
Nov 6, 2023
7
COONEY, ROBERT J JR.
COONEY AND CONWAY • ATTORNEY
IndividualRIVER FOREST, IL
$3,300
Oct 26, 2023
8
KEEFE JR., THOMAS
KEEFE KEEFE & UNSELL P.C. • ATTORNEY
IndividualSWANSEA, IL
$3,300
Oct 26, 2023
9
POWER, JOSEPH A JR.
POWER ROGERS • ATTORNEY
IndividualCHICAGO, IL
$3,300
Oct 26, 2023
10
ROGERS JR., LARRY
POWER ROGERS LLP • ATTORNEY
IndividualCHICAGO, IL
$3,300
Oct 26, 2023

Rep. Vasquez, Gabe [D-NM-2]

ID: V000136

Top Contributors

60

1
EVERY STATE BLUE
CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD
PACWASHINGTON, DC
$0
Nov 4, 2024
2
EVERY STATE BLUE
CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD
PACWASHINGTON, DC
$0
Nov 4, 2024
3
MESCALERO APACHE TRIBE
OrganizationMESCALERO, NM
$3,300
Oct 29, 2024
4
SAN MIGUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA
$3,300
Jun 27, 2023
5
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$3,300
Sep 27, 2023
6
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$3,300
Sep 27, 2023
7
PECHANGA BAND OF INDIANS
OrganizationTEMECULA, CA
$3,300
Dec 4, 2023
8
PUEBLO OF ISLETA
OrganizationISLETA, NM
$3,300
Mar 8, 2024
9
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$3,300
Sep 17, 2024
10
PUEBLO OF LAGUNA
OrganizationLAGUNA, NM
$3,300
Sep 27, 2024

Rep. Grijalva, Adelita S. [D-AZ-7]

ID: G000606

Top Contributors

70

1
PASCUA YAQUI TRIBE
OrganizationTUCSON, AZ
$6,600
Sep 28, 2023
2
SNOQUALMIE TRIBE
OrganizationSNOQUALMIE, WA
$3,300
Oct 23, 2024
3
ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE
OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX
$3,300
Sep 25, 2023
4
TUNICA-BILOXI TRIBE OF LA
OrganizationMARKSVILLE, LA
$3,300
Sep 28, 2023
5
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA
$3,300
Dec 7, 2023
6
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA
$3,300
Dec 7, 2023
7
AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY
OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ
$3,300
Dec 31, 2023
8
AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY
OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ
$3,300
Dec 31, 2023
9
PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS
OrganizationTEMECULA, CA
$3,300
Dec 19, 2023
10
SNOQUALMIE TRIBE
OrganizationSNOQUALMIE, WA
$3,300
Oct 27, 2023

Rep. Chu, Judy [D-CA-28]

ID: C001080

Top Contributors

39

1
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$3,300
Mar 7, 2023
2
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$3,300
Mar 7, 2023
3
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS TRIBAL OPERATIONS ACCOUNT
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$3,300
Apr 18, 2023
4
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS TRIBAL OPERATIONS ACCOUNT
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$3,300
Apr 18, 2023
5
ONEIDA NATION
OrganizationONEIDA, WI
$3,300
Jun 10, 2023
6
SNOQUALMIE TRIBE
OrganizationSNOQUALMIE, WA
$2,900
Oct 31, 2023
7
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$2,900
Mar 7, 2023
8
SNOQUALMIE TRIBE
OrganizationSNOQUALMIE, WA
$2,900
Apr 10, 2023
9
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$2,500
Jun 10, 2024
10
ONEIDA NATION
OrganizationONEIDA, WI
$2,000
Sep 28, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Leger Fernandez, Teresa [D-NM-3]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 65 nodes and 81 connections

Total contributions: $81

Top Donors - Rep. Leger Fernandez, Teresa [D-NM-3]

Showing top 23 donors by contribution amount

23 Orgs

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 1 helped.

  • Section 201 establishes a demonstration program for background checks on law enforcement personnel in the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which could improve the effectiveness and efficiency of law enforcement agencies.

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 Homeland Security

Weak
Vector: 63%
Pages: 177-179AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on improving data collection and coordination for missing and murdered Indigenous persons within tribal and federal law enforcement, while the Project 2025 excerpt centers on immigration enforcement, agency restructuring, and fraud detection within DHS. Both share a general theme of enhancing law enforcement effectiveness and data sharing, but their substantive policy areas are unrelated."

Key themes:law enforcement coordinationdata collection and reportingagency accountability

— 144 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise prosecuting criminal and civil denaturalization cases, in combination with the Department of Justice, for aliens who obtained citizenship through fraud or other illicit means. Additionally, USCIS should create a criminal enforcement compo- nent within the agency to investigate immigration benefits fraud under Title 8 (perhaps requiring additional legislative and regulatory authorities for the offi- cers themselves) and to prosecute cases through Special Assistant U.S. Attorneys (SAUSAs) with substantive knowledge in the field. Particular attention should be given to addressing increasing incidents of forced labor trafficking in temporary work visa programs. While the Biden regulatory agenda has focused on at least two major rules—the credible fear rule and the public charge rule—USCIS has utilized other policy and internal procedural mechanisms to extend employment authorization to large groups of people who are in the country without legal status. The agency has taken quiet steps to cut corners and lessen adjudicatory standards. During a tran- sition period, a complete audit of agency policies, memoranda, and management directives issued during the Biden Administration should be completed, and rescis- sion documents should be prepared for issuance within the first few days of the incoming Administration. Additionally, regulatory documents should be drafted to review or reverse all regulations promulgated during the Biden Administration. New Policies To advance the national interest, the three core immigration agencies—USCIS, ICE, and CBP—should remerge and have immigration elements outside of DHS (such as ORR of HHS) included. The fragmented immigration enforcement frame- work that developed in the wake of the Homeland Security Act has weakened each agency and should be remediated. Combining these critical agencies would strengthen their capabilities, ensure cooperation, and promote information-shar- ing. Agency responsibilities and the delineation of authorities, such as inconsistent use of deferred action and issuance of NTAs by each agency, have long been a point of contention that would be addressed much more easily if they were recombined into a single entity. Alternatively, new policies for USCIS as it currently exists should focus on mat- ters that can be addressed through administrative action. l The workforce should be realigned and, as necessary, retrained on base eligibility and fraud detection rather than speed in processing. l Training should be returned to Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers (FLETC), which would underscore the enforcement role of USCIS as a vetting agency, and be rebranded accordingly. — 145 — Department of Homeland Security l Management Directives and policies should realign to ensure that the workforce, while adaptable and able to handle the bulk of the USCIS mission, is not allowed to be pulled off mission work to focus on unlawful programs (DACA, mass parole for Afghans, Ukrainians, Venezuelans, etc.), which divert resources away from nuclear family and employment programs. The regulatory agenda should include the immediate submission of notices of proposed rulemaking for the Trump Administration’s public charge rule (includ- ing aspects from its original notice of proposed rulemaking), temporary work visa reform, employment authorization reform rules, asylum bars rule, and a third-country transit rule. At a minimum, an enhanced regulatory agenda should include rules strengthening the integrity of the asylum system, parole reform, and U visa reform that prioritizes relief for victims of heinous crimes and ensures that we protect the truest and most deserving victims of crime. Not all policy changes require formal rulemaking, however, as internal guidance documents are generally exempt under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).7 In this subregulatory space, USCIS policy memos and operational guidance should reduce the validity of employment authorization documents and end the COVID flexibilities, including the reliance on biometrics reuse. USCIS should also enforce existing regulations by rejecting incomplete applications and petitions, ensuring both that they are completed before accepted for filing and that FDNS signs off on all approved applications and petitions before approval notices are sent to the alien or petitioner. Other efforts should be focused on adjudication standards returning to nearly 100 percent interview requirements for all appropriate cases. The incoming Administration should spearhead an immigration legislative agenda focused on creating a merit-based immigration system that rewards high- skilled aliens instead of the current system that favors extended family–based and luck-of-the-draw immigration. To that end, the diversity visa lottery should be repealed, chain migration should be ended while focusing on the nuclear family, and the existing employment visa program should be replaced with a system to award visas only to the “best and brightest.” Internal efforts to limit employment authorization should be matched by con- gressional action to narrow statutory eligibility to work in the United States and mitigate unfair employment competition for U.S. citizens. The oft-abused H-1B program should be transformed into an elite program through which employers are vying to bring in only the top foreign workers at the highest wages so as not to depress American opportunities. Additionally, Congress should: l Improve the integrity of the temporary work visa programs; l Repeal Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designations;

Department of Homeland Security

Weak
Vector: 61%
Pages: 177-179AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill addresses missing and murdered Indigenous persons and tribal law enforcement data coordination, whereas the Project 2025 excerpt focuses on immigration enforcement, denaturalization, and merging DHS agencies; they share only a general theme of improving law enforcement processes."

Key themes:law enforcement coordinationdata collectionagency accountability

— 144 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise prosecuting criminal and civil denaturalization cases, in combination with the Department of Justice, for aliens who obtained citizenship through fraud or other illicit means. Additionally, USCIS should create a criminal enforcement compo- nent within the agency to investigate immigration benefits fraud under Title 8 (perhaps requiring additional legislative and regulatory authorities for the offi- cers themselves) and to prosecute cases through Special Assistant U.S. Attorneys (SAUSAs) with substantive knowledge in the field. Particular attention should be given to addressing increasing incidents of forced labor trafficking in temporary work visa programs. While the Biden regulatory agenda has focused on at least two major rules—the credible fear rule and the public charge rule—USCIS has utilized other policy and internal procedural mechanisms to extend employment authorization to large groups of people who are in the country without legal status. The agency has taken quiet steps to cut corners and lessen adjudicatory standards. During a tran- sition period, a complete audit of agency policies, memoranda, and management directives issued during the Biden Administration should be completed, and rescis- sion documents should be prepared for issuance within the first few days of the incoming Administration. Additionally, regulatory documents should be drafted to review or reverse all regulations promulgated during the Biden Administration. New Policies To advance the national interest, the three core immigration agencies—USCIS, ICE, and CBP—should remerge and have immigration elements outside of DHS (such as ORR of HHS) included. The fragmented immigration enforcement frame- work that developed in the wake of the Homeland Security Act has weakened each agency and should be remediated. Combining these critical agencies would strengthen their capabilities, ensure cooperation, and promote information-shar- ing. Agency responsibilities and the delineation of authorities, such as inconsistent use of deferred action and issuance of NTAs by each agency, have long been a point of contention that would be addressed much more easily if they were recombined into a single entity. Alternatively, new policies for USCIS as it currently exists should focus on mat- ters that can be addressed through administrative action. l The workforce should be realigned and, as necessary, retrained on base eligibility and fraud detection rather than speed in processing. l Training should be returned to Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers (FLETC), which would underscore the enforcement role of USCIS as a vetting agency, and be rebranded accordingly.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Weak
Vector: 61%
Pages: 545-547AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill addresses missing and murdered Indigenous persons through law enforcement data collection and tribal grants, while the Project 2025 HUD section focuses on administrative reforms, competence, waste/fraud reduction, and housing programs; there is only a tangential connection via Native American communities and federal oversight."

Key themes:Native American communitiesfederal agency coordinationGAO oversight

— 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.

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.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills