To authorize the International Boundary and Water Commission to accept funds for activities relating to wastewater treatment and flood control works, and for other purposes.

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/1948
Last Updated: July 12, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Peters, Scott H. [D-CA-50]

ID: P000608

Follow the money

The bill

To authorize the International Boundary and Water Commission to accept funds for activities relating to wastewater treatment and flood control works, and for other purposes.

HR. 1948, 119th Congress — read as touching Construction & Engineering.

The sponsor

Rep. Peters, Scott H. [D-CA-50]

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

The money

$72,600 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Housing and Urban Development" section, p. 548-550 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

June 9, 2025

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

Passed House

Senate Review

📍 Current Status

Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.

🎉

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 masterpiece of legislative lunacy, courtesy of the esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this abomination and expose its true nature.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's stated purpose is to authorize the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) to accept funds for wastewater treatment and flood control works along the US-Mexico border. How noble. In reality, it's a thinly veiled attempt to funnel more taxpayer dollars into the pockets of well-connected contractors and consultants.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill allows the IBWC to accept funds from federal or non-federal entities, including grants and funding agreements, for various projects related to wastewater treatment and flood control. It also sets a limit on reimbursement to non-federal entities ($5 million per fiscal year) and prohibits accepting funds from foreign countries of concern (because we wouldn't want any suspicious foreign money influencing our already-corrupt system). The bill requires the IBWC to submit annual reports on the activities carried out with these funds, because transparency is just a myth perpetuated by naive voters.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The IBWC, contractors, consultants, and other interested parties (read: lobbyists) will be the primary beneficiaries of this bill. Taxpayers, on the other hand, will foot the bill for these "essential" projects. The environment might also benefit from improved wastewater treatment, but let's not get too optimistic – we all know how well-intentioned government projects usually turn out.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic example of "pork barrel politics," where lawmakers insert pet projects and earmarks to appease their constituents and donors. The real impact will be the perpetuation of crony capitalism, with taxpayer dollars being funneled into the pockets of well-connected individuals and companies. The environmental benefits, if any, will likely be negligible compared to the costs.

In conclusion, HR 1948 is a symptom of a larger disease: the corruption and incompetence that plagues our legislative system. It's a bill designed to benefit special interests at the expense of taxpayers, with a healthy dose of bureaucratic red tape thrown in for good measure. Bravo, Congress. You've managed to create another masterpiece of legislative lunacy.

Diagnosis: Terminal Stupidity Syndrome (TSS), characterized by an inability to recognize or address the root causes of problems, instead opting for superficial solutions that benefit only a select few. Prognosis: Poor. Treatment: None available; just more of the same old politics as usual.

Related Topics

Water & Air Quality RegulationsFederal Budget & Appropriations
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Peters, Scott H. [D-CA-50]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$72,600
16 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$6,600
Committees
$0
Individuals
$66,000

No PAC contributions found

1
SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION
2 transactions
$6,600

No committee contributions found

1
LINDEN, LAWRENCE
2 transactions
$6,600
2
LICHTER, JAY B
2 transactions
$6,600
3
SCHLEIN, THEODORE E
2 transactions
$6,600
4
BYERS, BROOK
2 transactions
$6,600
5
KLEIN, ROB
2 transactions
$6,600
6
ARISON, MADELEINE
1 transaction
$3,300
7
ARISON, MICKY
1 transaction
$3,300
8
EMERSON, LANGSTON
1 transaction
$3,300
9
EPSTEIN, DANIEL J.
1 transaction
$3,300
10
GATES, WILLIAM H III
1 transaction
$3,300
11
GONZALEZ, JOHN MICHAEL
1 transaction
$3,300
12
GHAJARI, HOUMAN
1 transaction
$3,300
13
GREY, MIKE
1 transaction
$3,300
14
GORGUZE, GLORIA MARIE
1 transaction
$3,300
15
KLEIN, ROBERT SR
1 transaction
$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Vargas, Juan [D-CA-52]

ID: V000130

Top Contributors

10

1
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$3,300
Mar 6, 2023
2
SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION
OrganizationEL CAJON, CA
$3,300
Mar 6, 2023
3
SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION
OrganizationEL CAJON, CA
$3,300
Mar 6, 2023
4
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$3,300
Apr 29, 2024
5
BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA
$3,300
Jun 27, 2024
6
PALA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationPALA, CA
$2,900
Oct 16, 2024
7
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$1,000
Oct 7, 2024
8
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$700
Mar 6, 2023
9
KOHN, VICTOR
CAPITAL GROUP COMPANIES INC. • FINANCIAL ANALYST
IndividualENCINO, CA
$3,300
Dec 6, 2023
10
DE TOLEDO, PHILIP
CAPITAL GROUP COMPANIES • MANAGER
IndividualSHERMAN OAKS, CA
$3,300
Dec 8, 2023

Rep. Crenshaw, Dan [R-TX-2]

ID: C001120

Top Contributors

10

1
CHEVRON
OrganizationSAN RAMON, CA
$5,000
Sep 4, 2024
2
COMPLETE EMERGENCY CARE HOLDING LLC
OrganizationSOUTHLAKE, TX
$3,500
Mar 11, 2024
3
SANDLIAN REALTY
OrganizationWICHITA, KS
$1,000
Feb 7, 2024
4
ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE
OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX
$1,000
Sep 30, 2024
5
RUSSELL W H KRIDEL MD PA
OrganizationHOUSTON, TX
$250
Feb 28, 2023
6
JONES RANCH LLC
OrganizationCORPUS CHRISTI, TX
$250
Mar 13, 2024
7
MAFRIGE, DAVID
SELF • COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$9,900
Jun 21, 2023
8
MAFRIGE, DAVID
SELF • COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$9,900
Jun 21, 2023
9
ODEN, KEITH
CAMDEN PROPERTY TRUST • EXECUTIVE VICE CHAIRMAN
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$9,900
Jun 27, 2023
10
ODEN, KEITH
CAMDEN PROPERTY TRUST • EXECUTIVE VICE CHAIRMAN
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$9,900
Jun 27, 2023

Rep. Jacobs, Sara [D-CA-51]

ID: J000305

Top Contributors

10

1
SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION
OrganizationEL CAJON, CA
$3,300
Jun 30, 2023
2
SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA
$3,300
Aug 28, 2023
3
SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION
OrganizationEL CAJON, CA
$3,300
Sep 18, 2024
4
BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA
$2,000
Jun 30, 2024
5
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$1,000
Feb 14, 2023
6
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$1,000
Sep 30, 2024
7
ONEIDA NATION
OrganizationONEIDA, WI
$1,000
Sep 30, 2024
8
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
OrganizationATMORE, AL
$1,000
Aug 5, 2024
9
JACOBS, MARA
NYC DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION • TEACHER
IndividualBROOKLYN, NY
$4,300
Dec 14, 2023
10
HESS, LAWRENCE
LEHBROS LIMITED • REAL ESTATE
IndividualSAN DIEGO, CA
$3,300
Oct 22, 2024

Rep. Van Orden, Derrick [R-WI-3]

ID: V000135

Top Contributors

10

1
EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS
OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC
$3,300
Dec 9, 2024
2
HO CHUNK NATION
OrganizationBLACK RIVER FALLS, WI
$3,300
Nov 2, 2024
3
FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY
OrganizationCRANDON, WI
$3,300
Sep 17, 2024
4
AIPAC PAC CONDUIT ACCOUNT
OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC
$500
Oct 23, 2024
5
ALLIANCE OF BANKERS FOR WISCONSIN
OrganizationMADISON, WI
$250
Apr 23, 2024
6
ANDERSON, JOHN R. MR.
ANDERSON ENTERPRISES LLC • OWNER
IndividualROCKFORD, IL
$10,000
Dec 19, 2023
7
BROIN, JEFF
POET LLC • CEO
IndividualSIOUX FALLS, SD
$6,600
Aug 24, 2023
8
UIHLEIN, RICHARD E. MR.
ULINE INC. • CEO
IndividualLAKE BLUFF, IL
$6,600
Feb 28, 2023
9
LEVY, EDWARD C.
EDW. C. LEVY CO. • CHAIRMAN
IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI
$6,600
Mar 28, 2024
10
LEVY, EDWARD C.
IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI
$6,600
May 6, 2024

Rep. Levin, Mike [D-CA-49]

ID: L000593

Top Contributors

10

1
DIGIDEMS PAC
CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD
PACLOS ANGELES, CA
$250
Nov 5, 2024
2
SANTA ROSA RANCHERIA
OrganizationLEMOORE, CA
$6,600
Jun 13, 2024
3
SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION
OrganizationEL CAJON, CA
$3,300
Nov 2, 2024
4
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA
$3,300
Jun 29, 2023
5
SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION
OrganizationEL CAJON, CA
$3,300
Jun 29, 2023
6
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$3,300
May 12, 2023
7
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$3,300
May 12, 2023
8
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
OrganizationATMORE, AL
$3,300
Jun 21, 2023
9
SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA
$3,300
Aug 22, 2024
10
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
OrganizationATMORE, AL
$3,300
Jun 13, 2024

Rep. Ellzey, Jake [R-TX-6]

ID: E000071

Top Contributors

10

1
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
2
BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS AGUA CALIENTE
OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA
$3,300
Feb 9, 2024
3
INDIAN COMMUNITY AK-CHIN
OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ
$3,300
Feb 9, 2024
4
BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS AGUA CALIENTE
OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA
$3,300
Sep 30, 2024
5
PECHANGA BAND OF INDIANS
OrganizationTEMECULA, CA
$3,000
Nov 6, 2023
6
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$2,500
Dec 11, 2023
7
TIGUA INDIAN RESERVATION TRIBAL COUNCIL GENERAL FUND
OrganizationEL PASO, TX
$2,500
Aug 9, 2023
8
INDIAN COMMUNITY AK-CHIN
OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ
$2,000
Sep 30, 2024
9
ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE
OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX
$1,000
Oct 16, 2024
10
TALK FARMS
OrganizationITASCA, TX
$500
Dec 31, 2023

Rep. Escobar, Veronica [D-TX-16]

ID: E000299

Top Contributors

10

1
ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE
OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX
$3,300
Mar 20, 2024
2
TIGUA INDIAN RESERVATION YSLETA DEL SUR PUEBLO
OrganizationEL PASO, TX
$3,300
May 12, 2023
3
TIGUA INDIAN RESERVATION YSLETA DEL SUR PUEBLO
OrganizationEL PASO, TX
$3,300
Jun 30, 2023
4
ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE
OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX
$2,900
Feb 1, 2023
5
SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA
$1,000
Oct 16, 2024
6
GUTHRIE, BARRETT
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualCAVE CREEK, AZ
$3,300
Oct 24, 2024
7
BOWLING, BOBBY
TROPICANA BUILDING • HOME BUILDER & DEVELOPER
IndividualEL PASO, TX
$3,300
Nov 15, 2023
8
DELANEY, QUINN
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualPIEDMONT, CA
$3,300
Oct 24, 2023
9
GOODMAN, DAVID
NORTH ARROWS • PRESIDENT
IndividualUPPER SADDLE RIVER, NJ
$3,300
Nov 28, 2023
10
GOODMAN, DAVID
NORTH ARROWS • PRESIDENT
IndividualUPPER SADDLE RIVER, NJ
$3,300
Nov 28, 2023

Rep. Zinke, Ryan K. [R-MT-1]

ID: Z000018

Top Contributors

10

1
PASCUA YAQUI TRIBE
OrganizationTUCSON, AZ
$3,300
Dec 31, 2023
2
PECHANGA BAND OF INDIANS
OrganizationTEMECULA, CA
$3,300
Feb 5, 2024
3
PECHANGA BAND OF INDIANS
OrganizationTEMECULA, CA
$3,300
Feb 5, 2024
4
THE TULALIP TRIBES OF WASHINGTON
OrganizationTULALIP, WA
$3,300
Jun 30, 2024
5
PALA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationPALA, CA
$2,500
Jun 6, 2023
6
CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES OF THE FLATHEAD NATION
OrganizationPABLO, MT
$2,350
Mar 20, 2023
7
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIAN TRIBE
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$2,000
Oct 28, 2024
8
SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND MIWOK INDIANS
OrganizationPLACERVILLE, CA
$2,000
Jan 16, 2024
9
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$2,000
Mar 5, 2024
10
AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY
OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ
$2,000
Sep 30, 2024

Rep. Castro, Joaquin [D-TX-20]

ID: C001091

Top Contributors

10

1
CHEROKEE NATION OF OKLAHOMA
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$1,000
Dec 13, 2023
2
ALABAMA COUSHATTA TRIBE
OrganizationWOODVILLE, TX
$1,000
Sep 26, 2024
3
QUINONES, KARLA
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualSAN ANTONIO, TX
$5,000
Sep 30, 2024
4
SNEIDER, ARTURO
PRIMESTOR DEVELOPMENT INC. • REAL ESTATE
IndividualCULVER CITY, CA
$3,300
Oct 23, 2024
5
RAMIREZ, DANIEL N.
MONTY & RAMIREZ • ATTORNEY
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$3,300
Jan 11, 2024
6
PARKER, ALEXANDRA
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualPALO ALTO, CA
$3,300
Mar 22, 2024
7
PARKER, ALEXANDRA
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualPALO ALTO, CA
$3,300
Mar 22, 2024
8
PARKER, SEAN
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualPALO ALTO, CA
$3,300
Mar 22, 2024
9
PARKER, SEAN
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualPALO ALTO, CA
$3,300
Mar 22, 2024
10
SILBEY, ALEX
ATS COMMUNICATIONS • CONSULTANT
IndividualWASHINGTON, DC
$3,300
Mar 29, 2024

Rep. Gonzalez, Vicente [D-TX-34]

ID: G000581

Top Contributors

10

1
EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS
OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC
$3,300
Oct 22, 2024
2
TIGUA INDIAN RESERVATION - YSLETA DEL SUR PUEBLO
OrganizationEL PASO, TX
$3,000
May 21, 2024
3
ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE
OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX
$1,000
Sep 25, 2024
4
BROE, PAT
THE BROE GROUP • OWNER
IndividualDENVER, CO
$6,600
Dec 18, 2023
5
KARPLUS, BARBARA
SELF • TAX PRACTITIONER
IndividualNEWBURY PARK, CA
$6,600
Nov 29, 2023
6
WOMER, ROD
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualNEWBURY PARK, CA
$6,600
Dec 1, 2023
7
LAUFER, ERIC
LAUFER WIND • ENGINEER
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$6,600
Feb 26, 2024
8
RANDALL, GIOVANNA
HONOR NYC • PRESIDENT/HEAD DESIGNER
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$6,600
Feb 26, 2024
9
SAGAN, BRUCE
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualCHICAGO, IL
$6,600
Mar 5, 2024
10
SAGAN, BRUCE
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualCHICAGO, IL
$6,600
Mar 5, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Peters, Scott H. [D-CA-50]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 55 nodes and 37 connections (52 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $121,950

Top Donors - Rep. Peters, Scott H. [D-CA-50]

Showing top 16 donors by contribution amount

1 Org15 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

  • Section 1(a) authorizes the International Boundary and Water Commission to accept funds for constructing wastewater treatment works, water conservation projects, or flood control works, which could benefit construction and engineering firms.

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 Housing and Urban Development

Weak
Vector: 63%
Pages: 548-550AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 1948 focuses on authorizing the IBWC to accept funds for border water infrastructure, while the Project 2025 HUD section concerns housing market reforms, foreign influence on housing, DEI/ESG policies, and regulatory changes. The only modest overlap is the bill's restriction on accepting funds from foreign entities of concern, which echoes the HUD objective of preventing foreign disruption of markets."

Key themes:foreign influence restrictionsfunding authorizationintergovernmental cooperation

— 515 — Department of Housing and Urban Development 25. Process must prioritize where political leadership can implement administrative reforms through regulatory action and subregulatory guidance reforms. 26. China and other foreign nations should not be able to disrupt our nation’s housing markets, including by artificially driving up prices and reducing affordability and access to housing for Americans who are crowded out of the market by such market participation. 27. These initiatives are maintained under such designations as diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); critical race theory (CRT); black, indigenous, Pacific Islander, and other people of color (BIPOC); and environmental, social, and governance (ESG). 28. At a minimum, these efforts duplicate what the federal government already collects and assesses; at worst, they institute arbitrary procedures in real estate appraisal practices that undermine integrity and perversely introduce arbitrary biases into what should be an unbiased system for determining financial value. 29. Revise regulatory and subregulatory guidance, where applicable within statutory authorities, that adds unnecessary delay and costs to the construction and development of new housing and has been estimated to account for about 40 percent of new housing unit costs in multifamily housing. 30. The Biden Administration has issued a proposed rule to replace the Trump Administration’s “Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice” rule that had repealed earlier rules expanding AFFH enforcement. See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Fair Housing, “Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 153 (August 7, 2020), pp. 47899–47912, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-08-07/pdf/2020-16320.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023), and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Secretary, “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 27 (February 9, 2023), pp. 8516–8590, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-07-16/pdf/2015-17032.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 31. Certain pilot initiatives may encourage greater take-up of loan products designed for faster equity accumulation, including loans with shorter terms and accelerated amortization schedules. In concept, the FHA’s Home Equity Accelerator Loan (HEAL) and Good Neighbor Next Door (GNND) pilot initiatives might lead to meaningful wealth generation for first-time buyers, but they should be available to all eligible households only when they do not arbitrarily discriminate based on race or other characteristics. 32. Housing supply does remain a problem in the U.S., but constructing more units at the low end of the market will not solve the problem. Investors and developers can deliver at more efficient cost new units that will allow for greater upward mobility of rental and ownership housing stock and better target increased construction of mid-tier rental units. Further, and more fundamental to the housing supply challenge in markets across the U.S., localities can consider revising land use, zoning, and building regulations that constrict new housing development, adding time delays and costs that impede construction. Federal housing policy should get out of the way where possible and minimize the distortive impact that stimulating greater demand through loose lending can have in driving up housing prices for households that are looking for affordable entry into the housing market. 33. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Secretary, “Housing and Community Development Act of 1980: Verification of Eligible Status,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 91 (May 10, 2019), pp. 20589–20595, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-05-10/pdf/2019-09566.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 34. Reforms should contemplate rent payment flexibilities, allow escrow savings, and set maximum term limits that can reduce implicit penalties for increasing household incomes over eligibility terms for housing assistance and reweight waiting-list prioritization for two-parent households. 35. Some PHAs have been able to implement work requirements and term limit policies in various congressionally authorized demonstration programs, notably the Moving to Work (MTW) demonstration program established in 1996 for 39 PHAs (Congress has since authorized another 100 PHAs) in which participating MTW PHAs were given authority to implement rent reforms, work requirements and other experimental policies in rental assistance programs along with flexibilities in the use of capital and operating appropriations. 36. The FSS program has a general five-year term with a possible two-year extension, which could be applied at the term limit for overall benefits, and certain PHAs have imposed five-year to seven-year term limits. Families in these programs build escrow savings during their term eligibility that helps to facilitate successful transitions to family self-sufficiency and unassisted housing. — 516 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 37. HUD should implement administrative changes in regulation and guidance and seek statutory authority to end all Housing First directives of Continuum of Care (CoC) grantees and contract homelessness providers in addition to establishing restrictions on local Housing First policies where HUD grant funds are used. 38. The U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) was established in the 1990s, and numerous Administrations have devoted enormous resources to the Housing First model, experimenting with various ways to provide federally financed rapid rehousing and permanent housing opportunities. Housing First is a far-left idea premised on the belief that homelessness is primarily circumstantial rather than behavioral. The Housing First answer to homelessness is to give someone a house instead of attempting to understand the underlying causes of homelessness. Federal intervention centered on Housing First has failed to acknowledge that resolving the issue of homelessness is often a matter of resolving mental health and substance abuse challenges. Instead of the permanent supportive housing proffered by Housing First, a conservative Administration should shift to transitional housing with a focus on addressing the underlying issues that cause homelessness in the first place. 39. The Senate Low-Income First-Time Homebuyers (LIFT) Act would address this policy goal. See S. 2797, Low-Income First-Time Homebuyers Act of 2021 (LIFT Homebuyers Act of 2021), 117th Congress, introduced September 22, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/s2797/BILLS-117s2797is.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 40. FHA did not facilitate the widespread use of 30-year mortgages until the 1950s when, interacting with Federal Reserve policies, federal agencies began broader adoption of the mortgages, which, despite lowering the monthly repayment terms, result in slow equity accumulation and wealth-building opportunities. 41. The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 fundamentally revised the scope of federal regulation in the nation’s housing finance system, placing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under the purview of a newly established Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and establishing a Housing Trust Fund (HTF) that is administered in the HUD Office of Community Planning and Development. See H.R. 3221, Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, Public Law No. 110-289, 110th Congress, July 30, 2008, https://www.congress. gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 42. Guiding questions: What reforms should be proposed that could be accomplished within five years? What reforms can be done administratively, and what reforms would need legislative authorization? Are there functions that HUD administers that could be achieved more effectively at another department or agency? What big-picture reforms should be proposed that might take more than five years that would reorganize HUD and its programs to meet the objectives in the vision or mission? What would occur in the absence of these public finance subsidies? How much crowd-out do these subsidies create in the market? Would America be a seriously underhoused nation without these subsidies? Who are the policies intended to benefit? What organizational changes must be made? 43. The Faircloth Amendment (Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998) amended the Housing Act of 1937 to maintain public housing units at 1999 levels, preventing housing authorities from maintaining more public housing than they did then. H.R. 4194, Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999, Public Law No. 105-276, 105th Congress, October 21, 1998, Title V, https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ276/PLAW-105publ276.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). In recent years, the statutory restriction on new construction of public housing units has been circumvented through some narrow uses of preservation programs such as the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) program, initially authorized in 2012 and reauthorized several times since under higher program unit conversion caps. Congress also provided paths for renewal and continuation of a portion of existing public housing; project/site-based housing stock (refinancing with long-term HAP contract commitments); and Section 8 units through the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (MAHRA). H.R. 2158, Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998, Public Law No. 105-65, 105th Congress, October 27, 1997, Title V, https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ65/PLAW-105publ65.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 44. As the evolution of HUD rental assistance transitions away from the public housing model toward housing choice vouchers, there should be adequate landlord participation to ensure that the supply of housing units for rent in these programs meets the demand for rent among eligible tenants. This issue has been addressed in various ways, including by a task force instituted at the department during the Trump Administration, but could likely remain a challenge in the administration of the program.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Weak
Vector: 61%
Pages: 398-400AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 1948 focuses on cross-border water infrastructure and environmental cooperation, which is unrelated to Project 2025's emphasis on repealing clean energy subsidies, promoting fossil fuels, and refocusing energy agencies on security and innovation. There is no direct thematic overlap in objectives or mechanisms."

Key themes:infrastructurefederal fundingenergy-water nexus

— 365 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions l Support repeal of massive spending bills like the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)3 and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA),4 which established new programs and are providing hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to renewable energy developers, their investors, and special interests, and support the rescinding of all funds not already spent by these programs. l Unleash private-sector energy innovation by ending government interference in energy decisions. l Stop the war on oil and natural gas. l Allow individuals, families, and business to use the energy resources they want to use and that will best serve their needs. l Secure and protect energy infrastructure from cyber and physical attacks. l Refocus the Department of Energy on energy security, accelerated remediation, and advanced science. l Promote U.S. energy resources as a means to assist our allies and diminish our strategic adversaries. l Refocus FERC on ensuring that customers have affordable and reliable electricity, natural gas, and oil and no longer allow it to favor special interests and progressive causes. l Ensure that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission facilitates rather than hampers private-sector nuclear energy innovation and deployment. American Science Dominance. Ever since the age of Benjamin Franklin, the United States has been at the forefront of scientific discovery and technological advancement. Beginning with the groundbreaking science of the Manhattan Proj- ect, the U.S. has developed 17 National Laboratories that conduct fundamental and advanced scientific research. The National Labs have been critical in supporting national defense and ensuring that the United States leads on scientific discoveries with transformative applications that benefit America and the world. In recent years, however, U.S. science has been under threat. Externally, adversaries like the Chinese military have been engaged in scientific espionage, infiltrating taxpayer-funded scientific research projects, and funding their own science research. In addition, the National Labs have been too focused on climate change and renewable technologies.

Department of Agriculture

Weak
Vector: 61%
Pages: 347-349AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 1948 focuses on IBWC-authorized water infrastructure projects along the U.S.-Mexico border, while the Project 2025 excerpt centers on USDA nutrition programs, school meals, and conservation reserve policies. The only tangential connection is a shared interest in water conservation, but the bills address different sectors and objectives."

Key themes:water conservationinfrastructure fundingenvironmental management

— 315 — Department of Agriculture 79. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “WIC Data Tables,” December 9, 2022, https:// www.fns.usda.gov/pd/wic-program (accessed December 16, 2022). 80. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, “Regulations and Information on the Manufacture and Distribution of Infant Formula,” May 16, 2022, https://www.fda.gov/food/infant-formula-guidance-documents-regulatory- information/regulations-and-information-manufacture-and-distribution-infant-formula (accessed December 14, 2022). 81. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “History of the National School Lunch Program,” January 17, 2008, https://www.fns.usda.gov/nslp/program-history (accessed December 14, 2022). 82. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “School Breakfast Program History,” July 24, 2013, https://www.fns.usda.gov/sbp/program-history (accessed December 14, 2022), and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “History of the National School Lunch Program.” 83. Crystal FitzSimons, “Free School Meals for All Is the Key to Supporting Education and Health Outcomes,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol 41, No. 1 (2022), pp. 358–364, https://econpapers.repec.org/ article/wlyjpamgt/v_3a41_3ay_3a2022_3ai_3a1_3ap_3a358-364.htm (accessed December 14, 2022). 84. Jonathan Butcher and Vijay Menon, “Returning to the Intent of Government School Meals: Helping Students in Need,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3399, March 22, 2019, https://www.heritage.org/sites/ default/files/2019-03/BG3399.pdf. 85. Daren Bakst and Jonathan Butcher, “A Critical Fix to the Federal Overreach on School Meals,” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 4976, July 11, 2019, https://www.heritage.org/hunger-and-food-programs/report/ critical-fix-the-federal-overreach-school-meals. 86. Ibid., and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “Community Eligibility Provision,” April 19, 2019, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/community-eligibility-provision (accessed December 16, 2022). 87. See Payment Accuracy, https://www.paymentaccuracy.gov/ (accessed December 16, 2022). 88. Payment Accuracy, “Payment Integrity Scorecard,” https://www.cfo.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/Q3/ FNS%20National%20School%20Lunch%20Program%20(NSLP)%20Payments%20Integrity%20Scorecard%20 FY%202022%20Q3.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 89. U.S. Government Accountability Office, “School Meals Programs: USDA Has Reported Taking Some Steps to Reduce Improper Payments But Should Comprehensively Assess Fraud Risks,” GAO–19–389, May 21, 2022, https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-19-389 (accessed December 14, 2022). 90. Payment Accuracy, “Payment Integrity Scorecard.” 91. White House, “Fact Sheet: The American Families Plan,” April 28, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/ briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/28/fact-sheet-the-american-families-plan/ (accessed December 14, 2022). 92. Universal School Meals Program Act of 2021, S. 1530, 117th Cong., 1st Sess., https://www.congress.gov/ bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1530 (accessed December 14, 2022). 93. See, for example, U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Find Meals for Kids When Schools Are Closed,” Food and Nutrition Service, September 22, 2022, https://www.fns.usda.gov/meals4kids (accessed December 16, 2022), and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “Seamless Summer and Other Options for School,” July 16, 2013, https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/seamless-summer-and-other-options-schools (accessed December 16, 2022). 94. Tom Driscoll, “From the Field: Farmers Are the Original Conservationists,” National Farmers Union, August 30, 2017, https://nfu.org/2017/08/30/from-the-field-farmers-are-the-original-conservationists/ (accessed December 16, 2022). 95. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, “Conservation Programs,” https://www.fsa.usda.gov/ programs-and-services/conservation-programs/index (accessed December 16, 2022), and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, “Programs and Initiatives,” https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/ programs-initiatives (accessed December 16, 2022). 96. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, “Conservation Reserve Program: About the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP),” https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/conservation- programs/conservation-reserve-program/ (accessed December 16, 2022). — 316 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 97. American Bakers Association et al., letter to U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, March 23, 2022, https://www.dropbox.com/s/yfyv04ilkom11zd/USDA%20Letter%20to%20Secretary%20Vilsack%20on%20 Tools%20to%20Address%20Global%20Commodity%20Supply%20Challenges%203.23.22_.pdf?dl=0 (accessed December 15, 2022). It is also necessary to increase food production to mitigate high food inflation. Approximately 25 percent of idled land is considered prime farmland. Therefore, one-quarter of idled land is merely idling, not producing food—and this does not include other land that may viably be used for food production. The Conservation Reserve Program should be eliminated. There are also two issues connected to property rights and fairness that should be addressed: challenging NRCS determinations and problems with USDA easements. To be eligible for many USDA programs, farmers must comply with certain conservation provisions enforced by NRCS. Conservation compliance of wetlands and highly erodible lands consist of federal restrictions that prevent farmers from using parts of their property. If farmers plant crops or modify the areas federal officials deem protected, farmers can lose all access to USDA programs and support. For farmers, there are real, practical concerns to challenging NRCS determinations, including the time and costs of challenging the federal bureaucracy. NRCS is empowered to declare areas wetlands and highly erodible areas, which are therefore off limits for farming. If these wetland-or-erodible-declared areas are used in a manner deemed unacceptable by federal officials, NRCS may revoke access to federal resources and subsidies by making technical determinations that carry potential penalties. There must be a fair and reasonable process for farmers to challenge such actions. See Daren Bakst, “Food Price Inflation Continues to Worsen. Here’s What Should Be Done About It,” The Daily Signal, April 25, 2022, https:// www.dailysignal.com/2022/04/25/food-price-inflation-continuing-to-worsen-heres-what-should-be-done- about-it/ (accessed December 15, 2022); American Bakers Association et.al., letter to Vilsack; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, “Conservation Compliance Appeals Process,” https://www. nrcs.usda.gov/getting-assistance/compliance/conservation-compliance-appeals-process (accessed December 15, 2022); and Chris Bennett, “Regulatory Hell: Farmer and Veteran Wins 10-Year Wetlands Fight With Government,” AG Web, August 30, 2021, https://www.agweb.com/news/crops/crop-production/regulatory-hell-farmer-and- veteran-wins-10-year-wetlands-fight (accessed December 15, 2022). 98. Fortunately, there are already resources available to help states establish their own wetlands conservation programs. One particular example, the American Legislative Exchange Council’s Wetlands Mapping and Protection Act model policy, is available for states to define the procedures, guidelines, and administration of wetlands programs. American Legislative Exchange Council, “Wetlands Mapping and Protection Act,” November 16, 2017, https://alec.org/model-policy/wetlands-mapping-and-protection-act/ (accessed December 16, 2022). The new Administration should focus on best practices instead of imposing prescriptive federal practices. It should support the policies contained within the “NRCS Wetland Compliance and Appeals Reform Act” and modify NRCS compliance rules to protect farmers and ranchers by adding protections against regulatory overreach—such as banning the practice of re-engaging farmers in new technical determinations appeals processes for the same areas of their farms. See NRCS Wetland Compliance and Appeals Reform Act, S. 4931, 117th Cong., 2nd Sess., https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/4931?s=1&r=8 (accessed December 15, 2022). 99. Ibid 100. See, for example, Daren Bakst and Jeremy Dalrymple, “Reducing Federal Barriers for the Sale of Meat,” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 5078, June 1, 2020, https://www.heritage.org/agriculture/report/ reducing-federal-barriers-the-sale-meat, and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service, “State Inspection Programs,” updated January 12, 2023, https://www.fsis.usda.gov/inspection/state- inspection-programs (accessed December 15, 2022). 101. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service, “Cooperative Interstate Shipping Program,” September 7, 2022, https://www.fsis.usda.gov/inspection/state-inspection-programs/cooperative- interstate-shipping-program (accessed December 15, 2022). 102. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “State Inspection Programs.” 103. The Senate bill removes obstacles for both meat and poultry. The House version does not appear to cover poultry. New Markets for State-Inspected Meat and Poultry Act of 2021, S. 107, 117th Cong., 1st Sess., https:// www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/107#:~:text=This%20bill%20allows%20meat%20and,be%20 sold%20in%20interstate%20commerce (accessed December 15, 2022), and Expanding Markets for State- Inspected Meat Processors Act of 2021, H.R. 1998, 117th Cong., 1st Sess., https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th- congress/house-bill/1998 (accessed December 15, 2022).

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