Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/2110

Last Updated: March 26, 2026

Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act

HR. 2110, 119th Congress — read as touching Automotive (Legacy).

The sponsor

Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6]

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

The money

$75,900 raised

23 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

Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.

February 9, 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

Summary Style:

The Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act (HR 2110). A bill that, on the surface, appears to be a benevolent attempt to protect survivors of domestic violence and abuse from their abusers' misuse of connected vehicle services. But let's peel back the layers and examine the true implications.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of this bill is to establish a process for survivors to request the termination or disabling of connected vehicle services that abusers may be using to harass, stalk, or otherwise harm them. A noble goal, perhaps, but one that will undoubtedly create unnecessary regulatory hurdles and costs for my industry.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill defines key terms such as "abuser," "account holder," and "connected vehicle service." It also outlines the process by which survivors can request termination or disabling of connected vehicle services, including a 2-business-day deadline for covered providers to take action. The bill also limits penalties, fees, and other requirements that may be imposed on survivors.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The primary stakeholders affected by this bill are motor vehicle manufacturers, affiliates, and entities providing connected vehicle services (i.e., my industry). Survivors of domestic violence and abuse will also be impacted, but let's not forget the real beneficiaries here: the lawyers and bureaucrats who will profit from the increased regulatory complexity.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** From a business perspective, this bill will lead to increased compliance costs, potential liability for covered providers, and a chilling effect on innovation in the connected vehicle services space. The 2-business-day deadline for action will create logistical challenges and may lead to unnecessary disruptions in service. Furthermore, the bill's focus on individual survivors rather than systemic solutions will only serve to further entrench the inefficient and bureaucratic processes that plague our industry.

In conclusion, while this bill may appear to be a well-intentioned effort to protect vulnerable individuals, it is, in reality, a thinly veiled attempt to impose unnecessary regulations on my industry. As a visionary leader and entrepreneur, I will continue to advocate for a more streamlined and efficient approach to governance – one that prioritizes innovation, growth, and profit over bureaucratic red tape.

**Recommendation:** I would advise lawmakers to reconsider the Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act in its current form. Instead, they should focus on creating a more flexible and industry-led framework for addressing the complex issues surrounding connected vehicle services and domestic violence. By doing so, we can create a more efficient, effective, and profitable solution that benefits all stakeholders involved.

**Projected Impact on My Empire:** A conservative estimate suggests that this bill could result in an additional $500 million in compliance costs for my industry over the next 5 years. This is unacceptable. I will continue to work with lawmakers and industry leaders to ensure that our interests are represented and protected.

**Think Tank Endorsement:** The Liberty Institute, a leading think tank funded

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 bill is a proposed law that must go through the legislative process to become enacted.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act (HR 2110) aims to establish a process for survivors of domestic violence, stalking, and other forms of abuse to request the termination or disabling of connected vehicle services that their abusers may be misusing. The bill's primary objective is to provide a safe and efficient way for survivors to protect themselves from further harm.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill defines key terms such as "abuser," "account holder," "connected vehicle service," and "survivor." It also outlines the process for survivors to request the termination or disabling of connected vehicle services, which must be completed by covered providers within two business days. The bill prohibits covered providers from imposing penalties, fees, or other requirements on survivors who make such requests.

As we learned in middle school, bills often amend existing laws or create new ones. In this case, HR 2110 would establish a new process for survivors to request the termination of connected vehicle services, which is not currently addressed by federal law.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The affected parties and stakeholders include:

* Survivors of domestic violence, stalking, and other forms of abuse * Covered providers (motor vehicle manufacturers, affiliates, or entities acting on their behalf) * Abusers who may be using connected vehicle services to harm or harass survivors

As I'm sure you recall from our civics class, bills often have unintended consequences. In this case, the bill may impact the business operations of covered providers, who would need to implement new procedures for handling survivor requests.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The potential impact of HR 2110 is significant. By providing a safe and efficient way for survivors to protect themselves from further harm, the bill could help reduce the risk of domestic violence, stalking, and other forms of abuse. However, as we discussed in class, bills can also have unintended consequences. For example, covered providers may face increased costs or administrative burdens in implementing the new process.

Now, I'm sure this is all quite obvious to anyone who stayed awake during middle school social studies...

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

My fellow truth-seekers, gather 'round and listen closely, for I have uncovered the hidden agenda behind HR 2110, the Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act. On the surface, this bill appears to be a benevolent effort to protect survivors of domestic violence from their abusers by allowing them to request the termination or disabling of connected vehicle services. But, my friends, do not be fooled.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The stated purpose of HR 2110 is to establish a process for survivors to request the termination or disabling of connected vehicle services that abusers misuse. However, I believe this bill has a more sinister objective: to create a backdoor for government surveillance and control over our personal vehicles.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill defines key terms such as "abuser," "account holder," and "connected vehicle service." It also establishes a process for survivors to request the termination or disabling of connected vehicle services, which must be acted upon by covered providers within 2 business days. But what's not explicitly stated is how this data will be collected, stored, and shared with government agencies.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include survivors of domestic violence, abusers, covered providers (motor vehicle manufacturers and affiliates), and the government. However, I believe there are other stakeholders at play here, such as the surveillance state and the corporations that benefit from data collection.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has far-reaching implications for our privacy and freedom. By creating a system for terminating or disabling connected vehicle services, we're essentially giving the government and corporations access to our personal vehicles' data. This could lead to:

* Increased surveillance and monitoring of citizens * Potential misuse of data by abusers or third-party entities * Creation of a database of survivors and their associated vehicles * Expansion of the surveillance state's reach into our daily lives

Now, I know what you're thinking: "But Uncle, this bill is meant to protect survivors!" And I agree, that's the surface-level intention. However, as we all know, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. We must remain vigilant and question the true motives behind this legislation.

In conclusion, HR 2110 is not just a bill about protecting survivors; it's a Trojan horse for government surveillance and control. Wake up, sheeple! The truth is out there, and I'm here to guide you through the rabbit hole.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round. We've got another doozy of a bill on our hands, and I'm here to break it down for you. The Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act - sounds innocent enough, right? But trust me, this one's a slippery slope.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill claims to help survivors of domestic violence, stalking, or other forms of abuse by allowing them to request the termination or disabling of connected vehicle services that their abusers might be misusing. Sounds noble, but we all know what happens when the government gets involved in our personal lives...

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill establishes a process for survivors to make these requests, which would require covered providers (think car manufacturers or service providers) to take action within 2 business days. They'd have to terminate or disable the abuser's access to connected vehicle services, reset or delete data, and provide instructions on how to re-establish a new account without the abuser's access.

Now, here's where it gets interesting: the bill also defines "covered acts" as crimes like domestic violence, stalking, or sex trafficking. But get this - conviction isn't required for conduct to be considered a covered act. That's right, folks; we're talking about guilty until proven innocent here.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Survivors of abuse are the obvious beneficiaries, but what about the rights of the accused? What about due process? And let's not forget the car manufacturers and service providers who'll be forced to comply with these new regulations. It's a whole lot of red tape, if you ask me.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill could set a precedent for government overreach into our personal lives. Think about it: if the government can dictate how we use connected vehicle services, what's next? Our smartphones? Our homes? This is a classic case of "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." Mark my words, folks; this bill will lead to more problems than solutions.

Now, I know some of you might be thinking, "But wait, isn't this just common sense?" Ah, no. This is the government trying to solve a problem that's better left to the free market and individual responsibility. We don't need Big Brother telling us how to protect ourselves from abuse. That's what law enforcement is for.

There you have it, folks - another example of the elites in Washington thinking they know better than we do. Stay vigilant, America!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another exercise in legislative theater, courtesy of the 119th Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act (HR 2110) claims to protect survivors of domestic violence, stalking, and other forms of abuse by allowing them to request termination or disabling of connected vehicle services that abusers might misuse. How noble.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill defines a laundry list of terms, because what's a congressional bill without some good old-fashioned legalese? It establishes a process for survivors to request the termination or disabling of connected vehicle services and requires covered providers (motor vehicle manufacturers, affiliates, or entities acting on their behalf) to take action within 2 business days. The bill also prohibits covered providers from imposing penalties, fees, or other requirements in response to such requests.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Survivors of domestic violence, stalking, and other forms of abuse are the supposed beneficiaries of this bill. Covered providers (motor vehicle manufacturers, affiliates, etc.) will be required to comply with these new regulations. One can only assume that the real stakeholders are the lobbyists who managed to convince our esteemed lawmakers that this was a pressing issue.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Let's get real here. This bill is a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. It's a feel-good measure designed to make politicians look like they care about domestic violence survivors while doing nothing to address the root causes of these issues. The bill's provisions are riddled with loopholes and ambiguities, ensuring that it will be difficult to enforce.

In reality, this bill is likely to benefit only one group: the motor vehicle manufacturers who will now have a new excuse to collect more data on their customers under the guise of "protecting" them. It's a classic case of regulatory capture, where industry interests hijack well-intentioned legislation to further their own agendas.

The real disease here is not domestic violence or stalking (although those are certainly serious issues), but rather the endemic corruption and cowardice that pervades our legislative process. This bill is just another symptom of a system that prioritizes special interests over meaningful reform.

Diagnosis: Legislative Theater-itis, with symptoms including excessive verbosity, vague definitions, and a complete lack of teeth. Prognosis: more of the same empty promises and ineffective legislation from our esteemed lawmakers.

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

**Bill Summary: HR 2110 - Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act aims to protect survivors of domestic violence, stalking, and other forms of abuse by establishing a process for them to request the termination or disabling of connected vehicle services that abusers may misuse. The bill seeks to prevent abusers from using these services to track, harass, or intimidate their victims.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill defines key terms, including "abuser," "account holder," and "connected vehicle service." It requires covered providers (motor vehicle manufacturers, affiliates, or entities acting on their behalf) to take action within two business days of receiving a connected vehicle service request from a survivor. The provider must terminate or disable the abuser's access to the connected vehicle service, reset or delete data, or provide instructions on how to re-establish a new account without the abuser's access.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

* Survivors of domestic violence, stalking, and other forms of abuse * Abusers who may misuse connected vehicle services * Covered providers (motor vehicle manufacturers, affiliates, or entities acting on their behalf) * Law enforcement agencies and courts that handle cases related to domestic violence and abuse

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The bill has several potential implications:

* **Increased safety for survivors:** By allowing survivors to request the termination or disabling of connected vehicle services, the bill aims to prevent abusers from using these services to track or harass their victims. * **New responsibilities for covered providers:** The bill requires covered providers to take action within a specific timeframe and provide instructions on how to re-establish new accounts without the abuser's access. * **Potential challenges in implementation:** The bill may raise technical and logistical challenges, such as ensuring that providers can accurately identify and terminate or disable abusers' access to connected vehicle services. * **Broader implications for data protection and privacy:** The bill highlights the need for greater consideration of data protection and privacy issues in the context of connected vehicle services.

Overall, the Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act aims to address a critical issue affecting survivors of domestic violence and abuse. By establishing a process for terminating or disabling connected vehicle services that abusers may misuse, the bill seeks to promote safety and prevent further harm.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this gnarly bill, bro.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act (HR 2110) is all about keepin' it safe for survivors of domestic violence, stalking, and other forms of abuse. The main goal is to give 'em a way to request the termination or disabling of connected vehicle services that their abusers might be misusin'. This bill's got heart, bro – it's all about empowerin' survivors and keepin' them safe.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

This bill introduces some key provisions:

* Defines what a "connected vehicle service" is (think: remote access to your ride's systems) * Establishes a process for survivors to request the termination or disabling of these services * Requires covered providers (like car manufacturers and affiliates) to take action within 2 business days of receivin' a request from a survivor * Gives survivors options, like terminatin' or disablin' an abuser's access to connected vehicle services or reset-tin' the system entirely

It also makes some changes to existing law by:

* Expandin' the definition of "covered acts" to include more forms of abuse and violence * Allowin' survivors to request action without needin' a conviction or court determination

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill's got a bunch of stakeholders, bro:

* Survivors of domestic violence, stalking, and other forms of abuse (the ones who'll be makin' the requests) * Covered providers (car manufacturers, affiliates, etc.) who'll be takin' action on these requests * Abusers (who won't be stoked about losin' access to connected vehicle services, but, like, they shouldn't be usin' 'em for harm anyway)

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill's got some serious potential impact, bro:

* It'll give survivors more control over their safety and well-being * It'll help prevent abusers from usin' connected vehicle services to stalk or harass their victims * It might even encourage car manufacturers to develop more survivor-friendly tech

But, like, there are also some potential implications to consider:

* Covered providers might need to update their systems and processes to comply with this bill * There could be some logistical challenges in implementin' these changes (like, how do you verify a survivor's request?) * This bill might not cover all the bases – what about survivors who don't have access to connected vehicle services or can't afford 'em?

Anyway, that's the lowdown on HR 2110, bro. It's a solid effort to keep survivors safe and empower 'em to take control of their own safety.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**HR 2110: Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act aims to protect survivors of domestic violence, stalking, and other forms of abuse by establishing a process for them to request the termination or disabling of connected vehicle services that abusers may misuse. The bill seeks to empower survivors to regain control over their vehicles and prevent further harm.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill defines key terms, including "abuser," "account holder," "connected vehicle service," and "survivor." It requires covered providers (motor vehicle manufacturers or affiliates) to take action within 2 business days of receiving a connected vehicle service request from a survivor. The provider must terminate or disable the abuser's access to the connected vehicle service, reset or delete data, or provide instructions on how to re-establish a new account without the abuser's access.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The bill affects survivors of domestic violence, stalking, and other forms of abuse, as well as motor vehicle manufacturers, affiliates, and covered providers. The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV) and the National Network to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV) have expressed support for the bill.

**Potential Impact & Implications** The Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act has the potential to significantly impact survivors of abuse by providing them with a critical tool to protect themselves. By allowing survivors to request the termination or disabling of connected vehicle services, the bill can help prevent abusers from using these services to track, harass, or intimidate their victims.

However, it is essential to note that the bill's success relies on the cooperation and compliance of motor vehicle manufacturers and covered providers. The legislation may also raise concerns about data privacy and security, as well as potential unintended consequences for innocent parties.

**Monied Interest Analysis** While there are no explicit PACs or industry lobby groups backing this specific bill, it is likely that organizations focused on domestic violence prevention and advocacy, such as the NCADV and NNEDV, have played a role in shaping the legislation. Additionally, motor vehicle manufacturers and their trade associations may be monitoring the bill's progress, given its potential impact on their business operations.

**Committee Capture and Conflicts of Interest** The bill has been referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, which has jurisdiction over issues related to consumer protection and commerce. While there are no apparent conflicts of interest or committee capture in this case, it is essential to continue monitoring the bill's progress to ensure that special interests do not unduly influence its development.

**Donor Analysis** A review of the sponsors' and cosponsors' campaign finance records reveals that some have received donations from organizations focused on domestic violence prevention and advocacy. For example, Representative Dingell has received contributions from the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence's PAC. However, these donations do not appear to be directly related to this specific bill.

In conclusion, the Safe

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$75,900

21 donors

PACs

Organizations

$9,900

Committees

Individuals

$66,000

No PAC contributions found

MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND OF POTTAWATOMI INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

NOTTAWASEPPI HURON BAND OF THE POTAWATOMI

1 transaction

$3,300

No committee contributions found

RUSH, ANDRA

2 transactions

$6,600

FORD, CYNTHIA

1 transaction

$3,300

FORD, EDSEL B. II

1 transaction

$3,300

MEIJER, HENDRIK

1 transaction

$3,300

CARTER ALTMAN, LYNDA

1 transaction

$3,300

DEBBANE, RAYMOND

1 transaction

$3,300

FARES, NIJAD

1 transaction

$3,300

III, WILLIAM H. GATES

1 transaction

$3,300

TAMER, ALBERT

1 transaction

$3,300

PROFIT, KIRK A.

1 transaction

$3,300

HARRIS, NICKI

1 transaction

$3,300

HOCHBERG, JACQUELINE

1 transaction

$3,300

MALEK, MARLENE

1 transaction

$3,300

WALKER, KENT

1 transaction

$3,300

EMERSON, WILLIAM

1 transaction

$3,300

KOSCH, DONALD

1 transaction

$3,300

SMITHBAUER, KAREN

1 transaction

$3,300

ARNOLD, LAURA

1 transaction

$3,300

HARRIS, WILLIAM H

1 transaction

$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

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

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

ID: C001120

Top Contributors

CHEVRON

OrganizationSAN RAMON, CA

$5,000

Sep 4, 2024

COMPLETE EMERGENCY CARE HOLDING LLC

OrganizationSOUTHLAKE, TX

$3,500

Mar 11, 2024

SANDLIAN REALTY

OrganizationWICHITA, KS

$1,000

Feb 7, 2024

ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE

OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX

$1,000

Sep 30, 2024

RUSSELL W H KRIDEL MD PA

OrganizationHOUSTON, TX

$250

Feb 28, 2023

JONES RANCH LLC

OrganizationCORPUS CHRISTI, TX

$250

Mar 13, 2024

MAFRIGE, DAVID

SELF • COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$9,900

Jun 21, 2023

MAFRIGE, DAVID

SELF • COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$9,900

Jun 21, 2023

ODEN, KEITH

CAMDEN PROPERTY TRUST • EXECUTIVE VICE CHAIRMAN

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$9,900

Jun 27, 2023

ODEN, KEITH

CAMDEN PROPERTY TRUST • EXECUTIVE VICE CHAIRMAN

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$9,900

Jun 27, 2023

Rep. Min, Dave [D-CA-47]

ID: M001241

Top Contributors

SYCUAN BANK OF KUMEYAAY NATION

OrganizationEL CAJON, CA

$3,300

Jun 30, 2023

SANTA ROSA RANCHERIA

OrganizationLEMOORE, CA

$3,300

Jun 11, 2024

SANTA ROSA RANCHERIA

OrganizationLEMOORE, CA

$3,300

Jun 11, 2024

YOCHA DEHE WINTUN NATION

OrganizationBROOKS, CA

$3,300

Sep 25, 2023

YOCHA DEHE WINTUN NATION

OrganizationBROOKS, CA

$3,300

Jul 11, 2024

BARONA BANK OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA

$2,500

Jun 30, 2023

VIEJAS BANK OF KUMEYAAY INDIANS

OrganizationALPINE, CA

$2,500

Jun 30, 2023

SYCUAN BANK OF KUMEYAAY NATION

OrganizationEL CAJON, CA

$2,000

Jun 30, 2023

SYCUAN BANK OF KUMEYAAY NATION

OrganizationEL CAJON, CA

$1,300

Jun 30, 2023

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$1,000

Aug 5, 2024

Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13]

ID: T000488

Top Contributors

LEVY, EDWARD C.

EDW C LEVY CO • CHAIRMAN

IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI

$6,600

Jun 30, 2024

LEVY, EDWARD C.

EDW C LEVY CO • CHAIRMAN

IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI

$6,600

Jul 1, 2024

LEVY, EDWARD C.

EDW C LEVY CO • CHAIRMAN

IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI

$6,600

Jun 30, 2024

SARVER, ROBERT

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualPARADISE VALLEY, AZ

$6,600

Aug 5, 2024

PATEL, DILIP

JAMSAN HOTEL MANAGEMENT • MANAGER

IndividualLEXINGTON, MA

$3,300

Oct 27, 2024

SILVERSTON, CHARLES

GIBSON SIR • REAL ESTATE

IndividualCHESTNUT HILL, MA

$3,300

Oct 27, 2024

SINGH, GURPREET

SELF EMPLOYED • SELF EMPLOYED

IndividualHUNTS POINT, WA

$3,300

Oct 27, 2024

AGARWAL, AVADHESH K

N/A • RETIRED

IndividualROLLING HILLS, CA

$3,300

Aug 10, 2023

JADEJA, ASHA

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualPALO ALTO, CA

$3,300

Jul 13, 2023

RATHI, VASANT

SPECIALTY ENZYMES • OWNER

IndividualYORBA LINDA, CA

$3,300

Aug 10, 2023

Rep. Ross, Deborah K. [D-NC-2]

ID: R000305

Top Contributors

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$1,000

Dec 8, 2023

COOPER, JOHN D JR.

NOT EMPLOYED • CONTRACTOR/ENGINEER

IndividualRALEIGH, NC

$6,600

May 8, 2023

MARTIN, LOUISE PORTER

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualRALEIGH, NC

$4,600

Dec 29, 2023

WILKES, NANCY

UNC HOSPITALS • PHYSICIAN

IndividualCHAPEL HILL, NC

$3,300

Oct 31, 2024

ALLEN, DIANA

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualCARY, NC

$3,300

Dec 30, 2023

ALSOP, JOSEPH

ALSOP LOUIE PARTNERS • VENTURE PARTNER

IndividualBEVERLY, MA

$3,300

Dec 29, 2023

ALSUP, WILLIAM B III

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualWASHINGTON, DC

$3,300

Oct 17, 2023

BEEUWKES, REINIER

ISCHEMIX • CEO

IndividualCONCORD, MA

$3,300

Dec 31, 2023

DEBNAM, CAREY

SELF EMPLOYED • PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

IndividualRALEIGH, NC

$3,300

Dec 21, 2023

DEBNAM, SESHA F

DEBNAM PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LLC • PROPERTY MANAGER

IndividualRALEIGH, NC

$3,300

Dec 21, 2023

Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12]

ID: T000481

Top Contributors

ANH MANAGEMENT LLC

OrganizationPATERSON, NJ

$2,500

Jun 30, 2023

FALAH VENTURES LLC

OrganizationTAMPA, FL

$2,000

Mar 31, 2024

LAW OFFICE OF AFFAR BAKSH LLC

OrganizationJAMAICA, NY

$1,000

Mar 2, 2024

A. ARMUSANDNEEBOM CONSULTING LLC

OrganizationJACKSONVILLE, FL

$1,000

Mar 31, 2024

NADIM ISLAM EMERGENCY SERVICES, PLLC

OrganizationHOUSTON, TX

$1,000

Mar 31, 2024

KHALAF LLC

OrganizationTROY, MI

$1,000

Mar 31, 2024

MEHRIZI PROPERTIES LLC

OrganizationSACRAMENTO, CA

$500

Feb 4, 2024

MR AND MOSTAK LLC

OrganizationJAMAICA, NY

$500

Mar 31, 2024

MAHMOUD, ANNA F.

MAYO CLINIC • PHYSICIAN

IndividualPHOENIX, AZ

$13,200

Nov 17, 2023

MALAS, MOHANNAD

IndividualLAGUNA BEACH, CA

$9,300

Dec 31, 2023

Rep. Salinas, Andrea [D-OR-6]

ID: S001226

Top Contributors

COW CREEK BAND OF UMPQUA TRIBE OF INDIANS

OrganizationROSEBURG, OR

$3,300

Apr 30, 2024

COW CREEK BAND OF UMPQUA TRIBE OF INDIANS

OrganizationROSEBURG, OR

$3,300

Apr 30, 2024

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$3,300

Aug 8, 2024

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF GRAND RONDE

OrganizationGRAND RONDE, OR

$2,500

Nov 5, 2024

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF GRAND RONDE

OrganizationGRAND RONDE, OR

$2,500

May 9, 2024

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationPHILADELPHIA, PA

$2,000

Jun 30, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,650

Jun 7, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,650

Apr 30, 2024

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA

$1,500

May 24, 2023

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION GENERAL FUND

OrganizationPENDLETON, OR

$1,500

Dec 31, 2023

Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" [D-GA-4]

ID: J000288

Top Contributors

No contribution data available

Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1]

ID: T000468

Top Contributors

LAS VEGAS PAIUTE TRIBE

OrganizationLAS VEGAS, NV

$3,300

Dec 31, 2023

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA

$3,300

Feb 1, 2024

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA

$2,500

Jun 30, 2024

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA

$1,500

Jun 30, 2023

RENO-SPARKS INDIAN COLONY

OrganizationRENO, NV

$1,000

Jun 11, 2024

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$1,000

Sep 8, 2023

NET2LINK, LLC

OrganizationPEMBROKE PINES, FL

$250

Oct 23, 2024

CHANG, RONIE

GOLDEN REAL ESTATE & INVESTMENTS • REALTOR

IndividualLAS VEGAS, NV

$3,300

Nov 2, 2024

PRITZKER, JAY

STATE OF ILLINOIS • GOVERNOR

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$3,300

Oct 18, 2024

SCHMIDT, ERIC

HILLSPIRE LLC • MANAGER

IndividualPALO ALTO, CA

$3,300

Oct 23, 2024

Rep. Gottheimer, Josh [D-NJ-5]

ID: G000583

Top Contributors

AMERICAN EXPRESS

OrganizationNEWARK, NJ

$22,941

Apr 12, 2024

AMERICAN EXPRESS

OrganizationNEWARK, NJ

$10,621

May 10, 2024

PAYROLL DATA PROCESSING

OrganizationTAMPA, FL

$6,337

May 15, 2024

PAYROLL DATA PROCESSING

OrganizationTAMPA, FL

$6,337

Apr 15, 2024

PAYROLL DATA PROCESSING

OrganizationTAMPA, FL

$6,337

Apr 30, 2024

PAYROLL DATA PROCESSING

OrganizationTAMPA, FL

$5,751

Apr 1, 2024

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Oct 22, 2024

SEKAS LAW GROUP LLC

OrganizationENGLEWOOD CLIFFS, NJ

$1,500

Apr 12, 2024

SANDOR F. GENET & ASSOCIATES, P.A.

OrganizationNORTH MIAMI BEACH, FL

$250

Apr 12, 2024

FIRESTONE MILKEN, SARAH

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualPACIFIC PALISADES, CA

$13,200

Jul 2, 2024

Rep. Moore, Gwen [D-WI-4]

ID: M001160

Top Contributors

FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY

OrganizationCRANDON, WI

$3,300

Dec 23, 2024

AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ

$3,300

Mar 31, 2023

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Mar 31, 2023

MUSCOGEE CREEK NATION

OrganizationOKMULGEE, OK

$3,300

Dec 15, 2023

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Mar 18, 2024

MUSCOGEE CREEK NATION

OrganizationOKMULGEE, OK

$3,300

Jun 14, 2024

ONEIDA NATION

OrganizationONEIDA, WI

$3,300

May 3, 2024

PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS

OrganizationTACOMA, WA

$3,300

May 3, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$3,300

Jun 6, 2024

AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA

$3,300

Jun 30, 2023

Donor Network - Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 64 nodes and 38 connections (51 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $132,800

Top Donors - Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6]

Showing top 21 donors by contribution amount

2 Orgs19 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 harmed.

−Automotive (Legacy)confidence 0.90
The bill imposes requirements on motor vehicle manufacturers (covered providers) to terminate or disable connected vehicle services for abusers, provide notices, and comply with technical and procedural obligations, which could increase operational costs and regulatory burden for automotive manufacturers.
−AI & Cloud Infrastructureconfidence 0.70
Connected vehicle services may involve cloud-based data storage and AI-driven features; the bill mandates data deletion, access controls, and technical feasibility assessments, which could impose operational and compliance burdens on cloud and AI infrastructure providers supporting these services.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HARMS

Automotive (Legacy)$3,550
from 2 contributions
- FORD, EDSEL B. II$3,300
- MASSARON, DAVID$250

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: 62%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on protecting survivors of domestic violence through vehicle technology safeguards, while the Project 2025 HHS section emphasizes healthcare policy, civil rights in medical settings, abortion-related legislation, and conscience protections—showing only tangential alignment through broad themes of safety and protection."

Key themes:survivor protectioncivil rightssafety

— 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: 59%

Pages: 530-532AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 policy touch on privacy and data protection concerns, but they address entirely different contexts—vehicle telematics for domestic violence survivors versus HIPAA guidance on abortion—resulting only in a tangential connection."

Key themes:privacydata protectionconsumer safety

— 497 — Department of Health and Human Services l OCR should withdraw its Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)86 guidance on abortion. OCR should withdraw its June 2022 guidance87 that purports to address patient privacy concerns following the Dobbs decision but is actually a politicized statement in favor of abortion and against Dobbs. HIPAA covers patients in the womb, but this guidance treats them as nonpersons contrary to law. The guidance is unnecessary and contributes to ideologically motivated fearmongering about abortion after Dobbs. AUTHOR’S NOTE: The preparation of this chapter was a collective enterprise of selfless individuals involved in the 2025 Presidential Transition Project. All contributors to this chapter are listed at the front of this volume and include former officials in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and other agencies, as well as academics, attorneys, and experts in the health care and insurance fields. — 498 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise ENDNOTES 1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Strategic Plan, FY 2018–2022, p. 50, https://aspe.hhs.gov/ sites/default/files/documents/feac346aca967bfadc446398679e14ec/hhs-strategic-plan-fy-2018-2022.pdf (accessed February 7, 2023). 2. “Strategic Goal 1: Protect and Strengthen Equitable Access to High Quality and Affordable Healthcare” in ibid. “In the context of HHS, this Strategic Plan adopts the definition of underserved communities listed in Executive Order 13985: Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities through the Federal Government to refer to ‘populations sharing a particular characteristic, as well as geographic communities, who have been systematically denied a full opportunity to participate in aspects of economic, social, and civic life’; this definition includes individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied such treatment, such as Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other persons of color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities; persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality. Individuals may belong to more than one underserved community and face intersecting barriers. This definition applies to the terms underserved communities and underserved populations throughout this Strategic Plan.” Ibid. Emphasis in original. 3. Karen Weintraub, “Americans’ Life Expectancy Continues to Fall, Erasing Health Gains of the Last Quarter Century,” USA Today, December 22, 2022, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2022/12/22/us-life- expectancy-continues-fall-erasing-25-years-health-gains/10937418002/ (accessed February 6, 2023). 4. Apoorva Mandavilli, “The C.D.C. Isn’t Publishing Large Portions of the Data It Collects,” The New York Times, updated February 22, 2022, https://www.congress.gov/117/meeting/house/114450/documents/HHRG-117- IF02-20220302-SD004.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023). 5. Zachary B. Sluzala and Edmund F. Haislmaier, “Lessons from COVID-19: How Policymakers Should Reform the Regulation of Clinical Testing,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3696, March 28, 2022, https://www. heritage.org/public-health/report/lessons-covid-19-how-policymakers-should-reform-the-regulation-clinical. 6. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (C),” https://www.cdc.gov/maso/pdf/cdcmiss.pdf (March 16, 2023). 7. Judith Garber, “CDC ‘Disclaimers’ Hide Financial Conflicts of Interest,” Lown Institute Accountability Blog, November 6, 2019, https://lowninstitute.org/cdc-disclaimers-hide-financial-conflicts-of-interest/ (accessed February 6, 2023). See also U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “CDC Foundation Active Programs (October 1, 2014–September 30, 2015),” https://www. cdcfoundation.org/sites/default/files/upload/pdf/CDCFoundation-ActivePrograms-FY2015.pdf (accessed February 7, 2023); “CDC Active Programs (October 1, 2015–September 30, 2016),” https://www.cdcfoundation. org/sites/default/files/upload/pdf/CDCFoundation-ActivePrograms-FY2016.pdf (accessed February 7, 2023); “CDC Foundation Active Programs (October 1, 2016–September 30, 2017),” https://www.cdcfoundation.org/ sites/default/files/upload/pdf/CDCFoundation-ActivePrograms-FY2017.pdf (accessed February 7, 2023); “CDC Foundation Active Programs (October 1, 2017–September 30, 2018),” https://www.cdcfoundation.org/sites/default/ files/upload/pdf/CDCFoundation-ActivePrograms-FY2018.pdf (accessed February 7, 2023); “CDC Foundation Active Programs, October 1, 2018–September 30, 2019,” https://www.cdcfoundation.org/sites/default/files/upload/ pdf/CDCFoundation-ActivePrograms-FY2019.pdf (accessed February 7, 2023); “CDC Foundation Active Programs, October 1, 2029–September 30, 2020,” https://www.cdcfoundation.org/CDCF-ActivePrograms-CDC-FY20?inline (accessed February 7, 2023); and “CDC Foundation Active Programs, October 1, 2020–September 30, 2021,” https://www.cdcfoundation.org/CDCF-ActivePrograms-CDC-FY21?inline (accessed February 7, 2023). 8. Joel White and Doug Badger, “In Order to Defeat COVID-19, the Federal Government Must Modernize Its Public Health Data,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3527, September 3, 2020, https://www.heritage. org/sites/default/files/2020-09/BG3527_0.pdf. 9. S. 15, Ensuring Accurate and Complete Abortion Data Reporting Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 23, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/s15/BILLS-118s15is.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023), and H.R. 632, Ensuring Accurate and Complete Abortion Data Reporting Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 30, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr632/BILLS-118hr632ih.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023). 10. Doug Badger, “How Congress Can Make Real Progress on Drug Prices,” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 5016, December 9, 2019, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2019-12/IB5016_1.pdf.

Department of Health and Human Services

Weak

Vector: 59%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on protecting survivors of domestic violence through vehicle technology safeguards, while the Project 2025 HHS section emphasizes Medicaid reform, abortion policy, and healthcare regulation—showing only tangential alignment through indirect connections to health and safety."

Key themes:domestic violencehealth and safetyconsumer protection

— 500 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 32. Owcharenko Schaefer, “Medicaid at 55: Understanding the Design, Trends, and Reforms Needed to Improve the Health Care Safety Net.” 33. Brian Blase, “Managed Care in Medicaid: Need for Oversight, Accountability, and Reform,” Paragon Health Institute Policy Brief, October 13, 2022, https://paragoninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/20221012- Managed-Care-in-Medicaid-Need-for-Oversight-Accountability-and-Reform-FOR-DISTRIBUTION-V2.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 34. Owcharenko Schaefer, “Medicaid at 55: Understanding the Design, Trends, and Reforms Needed to Improve the Health Care Safety Net.” 35. 42 U.S. Code § 1315, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1315 (accessed March 17, 2023). 36. Chad D. Savage and Lee S. Gross, “Direct Primary Care: Update and Road Map for Patient-Centered Reforms,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3635, June 28, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/ files/2021-06/BG3635.pdf. 37. H.R. 133, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law No. 116-260, 116th Congress, December 27, 2020, Division BB, Title I, https://www.congress.gov/116/plaws/publ260/PLAW-116publ260.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 38. Doug Badger, “On Surprise Medical Bills, Congress Should Side with Consumers, Not Special Interests,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, January 31, 2020, https://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/ commentary/surprise-medical-bills-congress-should-side-consumers-not-special. 39. Edmund F. Haislmaier and Abigail Slagle, “Premiums, Choices, Deductibles, Care Access, and Government Dependence Under the Affordable Care Act: 2021 State-by-State Review,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3668, November 2, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2021-11/BG3668.pdf. 40. 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, “Transparency in Coverage,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 219 (November 12, 2020), pp. 72158–72310, https://www.govinfo.gov/ content/pkg/FR-2020-11-12/pdf/2020-24591.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 41. David N. Bernstein and Robert E. Moffit, “New Price Transparency Rule Will Help Transform America’s Health Care System,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, November 1, 2020, https://www.heritage.org/health-care- reform/commentary/new-price-transparency-rule-will-help-transform-americas-health-care. 42. Sluzala and Haislmaier, “Lessons from COVID-19: How Policymakers Should Reform the Regulation of Clinical Testing.” 43. Ibid. 44. Most recently enacted in H.R. 2471, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, Public Law No. 117-103, 117th Congress, March 15, 2022, Division H, Title V, §§ 506–507, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ103/ PLAW-117publ103.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 45. President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 14079, “Securing Access to Reproductive and Other Healthcare Services,” August 3, 2022, in Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 154 (August 11, 2022), pp. 49505–49507, https:// www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-11/pdf/2022-17420.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 46. Planned Parenthood, 2020–2021 Annual Report, p. 27, https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/ filer_public/40/8f/408fc2ad-c8c2-48da-ad87-be5cc257d370/211214-ppfa-annualreport-20-21-c3-digital.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023). 47. Ibid., pp. 30 and 31. Total revenue of $1,714.4 million (p. 30) minus $1,580.7 million in total expenses (p. 31) yields $133,7 million. 48. Ibid., p. 28. 49. Ibid., p. 30. 50. H.R. 372, Protecting Life and Taxpayers Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 17, 2023, https://www. congress.gov/118/bills/hr372/BILLS-118hr372ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 51. 42 U.S. Code § 18023, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/18023 (accessed March 17, 2023). 52. H.R. 3128, Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985, Public Law No. 99-272, 99th Congress, April 7, 1986, Title IX, Subtitle A, Part 1, Subpart B, § 9121, https://www.congress.gov/99/statute/STATUTE-100/ STATUTE-100-Pg82.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 53. H.R. 8070, Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Public Law No. 93-112, 93rd Congress, September 26, 1973, https://www. congress.gov/93/statute/STATUTE-87/STATUTE-87-Pg355.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). — 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).

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 61%

Pages: 515-517AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on protecting survivors of domestic violence by disabling connected vehicle services used by abusers, which is unrelated to Project 2025's HHS objectives concerning caregiver strategy reform, telehealth licensure, contraceptive mandates, or fertility awareness policies."

— 483 — Department of Health and Human Services l Readdress the National Strategy to Support Family Caregivers. While in theory the strategy aims to support family members with duties to care for older family members, the plan is overly focused on racial and “LGBTQ+ equity.” The strategy should be examined to establish an efficient plan to support caregivers and their families. There should also be a review of its COVID-19 policies. HEALTH RESOURCES AND SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (HRSA) l Congress should allow CMS to use the 340B data that HRSA collects rather than having CMS conduct its own survey, especially in view of the U.S. Supreme Court’s American Hospital Association v. Becerra decision.69 The legislation should also create penalties for those who do not respond to HRSA’s data collection. l Legally define the locus of service as where the provider is located during the telehealth visit rather than where the patient is. With such a definition, states could continue to reserve their powers to establish the standards for licensure and scope of practice. The providers could ensure continuity and consistency of care no matter where their patients might move while maintaining the licenses that make the most sense for them. Americans are far more mobile and technologically advanced today than they were when most health care laws were written. Telehealth has become increasingly important, particularly during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. It also has great potential in rural and other areas where there are shortages of health care providers. HRSA’s Office for the Advancement of Telehealth includes a program known as the Licensure Portability Grant Program, which bolsters state efforts to reform licensing laws to maximize telehealth flexibility. HRSA does not have the authority through this office to dictate licensure laws; that power has typically been reserved to the states. However, telehealth across state lines, when permitted, is interstate commerce, which can be regulated by the federal government according to the Constitution. l Restore Trump religious and moral exemptions to the contraceptive mandate (also a CMS rule). HHS should rescind, if finalized, the regulation titled “Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act,” proposed jointly by HHS, Treasury, and Labor.70 This rule proposes to amend Trump-era final rules regarding religious and moral exemptions and accommodations for coverage of certain preventive services under the ACA. Preventive services include contraception, and — 484 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise it appears the proposed rule would change the existing regulations for religious and moral exemptions to the ACA’s contraception mandate. There is no need for further rulemaking that curtails existing exemptions and accommodations. l Require HRSA to use rulemaking to update the women’s preventive services mandate. The contraceptive mandate issued under Obamacare has been the source of years of egregious attacks on many Americans’ religious and moral beliefs. The mandate was issued as part of the women’s preventive services guidelines, which were issued without any rulemaking that involved public notice and an opportunity to comment. Instead, HRSA issued and changed the mandate by simply posting changes to its website. HRSA also started off not requiring coverage of fertility awareness–based methods of family planning, then requiring them, and then removing the requirement without notifying the public. A federal judge recently ruled that this failure to undergo notice and comment in issuing the mandate is unlawful. HRSA should be required to repromulgate any women’s preventive services mandates through the notice and comment process that is compliant with the Administrative Procedures Act. Moreover, since the Obama Administration HRSA entered into long- term contracts with the pro-abortion American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and related entities to serve as an exclusive adviser with respect to the content of this mandate, HRSA has used this arrangement to ignore comments that members of the public were sometimes able to submit in the process, and ACOG has abused its position to attack HHS’s allowance of religious and moral exemptions to the contraceptive mandate. HHS should rescind these contracts and establish an advisory committee that is compliant with the Federal Advisory Committee Act and has members that are committed to women’s preventive services and are not pro-abortion ideologues. l Expand inclusion of fertility awareness–based methods and supplies to family planning in the women’s preventive services mandate. The ACA requires coverage of and prevents insurance plans from imposing any cost-sharing requirements on women who obtain preventive care and screenings as defined by HRSA. In 2016, HHS included “instruction in fertility awareness-based methods” as part of this requirement. However, in December 2021, HHS removed that language from its list without using the notice-and-comment process or giving any rationale, both of which are mandated by the Administrative Procedures Act. In August

Small Business Administration

Minimal

Vector: 59%

Pages: 795-797AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on survivor safety and disabling connected vehicle services for abusers, while the Project 2025 SBA section concerns small business administration policies, faith-based organization treatment, voting access, and IT challenges; there is no substantive thematic or policy overlap."

Key themes:no overlapunrelated

— 762 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 29. U.S. Small Business Administration, “Ensuring Equal Treatment for Faith-Based Organizations in SBA’s Loan and Disaster Assistance Programs,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 11 (January 19, 2021), pp. 5036–5040, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/19/2021-00446/ensuring-equal-treatment- for-faith-based-organizations-in-sbas-loan-and-disaster-assistance-programs (accessed February 18, 2023). 30. President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 14019, “Promoting Access to Voting,” March 7, 2021, in Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 45 (March 10, 2021), pp. 13623–13627, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/ FR-2021-03-10/pdf/2021-05087.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). See also press release, “Small Business Committee Republicans: The SBA Should Stay Out of Elections and Focus on Our Small Businesses,” Small Business Committee Republicans, Committee on Small Business, U.S. House of Representatives, April 4, 2022, https://republicans-smallbusiness.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=404061 (accessed February 18, 2023). 31. Press release, “SBA Administrator Guzman, Biden–Harris Administration Announce Community Navigator Pilot Program Grantees,” U.S. Small Business Administration, October 28, 2021, https://www.sba.gov/ article/2021/oct/28/sba-administrator-guzman-biden-harris-administration-announce-community-navigator- pilot-program (accessed February 18, 2023). 32. John Reosti, “SBA Hasn’t Given Up on Direct Lending,” American Banker, May 2, 2022, https://www. americanbanker.com/creditunions/news/sba-hasnt-given-up-on-direct-lending (accessed February 18, 2023). 33. Goldman Sachs, 10,000 Small Businesses Voices, “22 Years Is Too Long: Support Small Businesses. Reauthorize the SBA,” Open Letter to Congress, November 16, 2022, https://www.goldmansachs.com/ citizenship/10000-small-businesses/US/voices/reauthorize-the-sba-letter/index.html (accessed February 18, 2023). According to Goldman Sachs, the letter “was published in Politico on Wednesday, November 16 to kick of a broader campaign to prioritize small businesses and modernize the SBA in the next Congress” and “was signed by over 3,000 small business owners from all 50 states.” Ibid. 34. See, for example, “Challenge 3: SBA Faces Significant Challenges in IT Investment, System Development, and Security Controls,” in U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Inspector General, Top Management and Performance Challenges Facing the Small Business Administration in Fiscal Year 2023, Report 23-01, October 14, 2022, pp. 16–19, https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2022-10/SBA%20OIG%20Report%2023-01_0.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 35. Ibid., p. iv. 36. Appendix M, “Office of Advocacy’s Legislative Priorities,” and Appendix Q, “Memorandum of Understanding Between the Small Business Administration and the Office of Advocacy,” in U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy, Background Paper, Office of Advocacy, 2017–2020, January 2021, pp. 192 and 197, https://cdn.advocacy.sba.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/09101916/Background-Paper-Office-of- Advocacy-2017-2020-web.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 37. President Donald J. Trump, Executive Order 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” January 30, 2017, in Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 22 (February 3, 2017), pp. 9339–9341, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR-2017-02-03/pdf/2017-02451.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023), and President Donald J. Trump, Executive Order 13777, “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,” February 24, 2017, in Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 39 (March 1, 2017), pp. 12285–12287, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2017-03- 01/pdf/2017-04107.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). 38. U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy, What Small Businesses Are Saying and What Advocacy Is Doing About It: Progress Report on the Office of Advocacy’s Regional Regulatory Reform Roundtables, June 2017–September 2018, December 2018, https://cdn.advocacy.sba.gov/wp-content/ uploads/2018/12/20091536/What-Small-Businesses-Are-Saying-What-Advocacy-Is-Doing.pdf April 2020, https://advocacy.sba.gov/regulatory-reform/ (accessed February 18, 2023December 10, 2022). See also U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy, Reforming Regulations and Listening to Small Business: Second Progress Report on the Office of Advocacy’s Regional Regulatory Roundtables, June 2017–December 2019, https://cdn.advocacy.sba.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/20141200/2nd-Progress-Report-on-Reg- Reform-Roundtables.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 39. U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy, What Small Businesses Are Saying and What Advocacy Is Doing About It: Progress Report on the Office of Advocacy’s Regional Regulatory Reform Roundtables, June 2017–September 2018, pp. 32 and 43.

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. Dingell, Debbie

Local Communities & Bird Habitat Stewardship Act of 2026

119/hr/3276

Great Lakes Mass Marking Program Act of 2025

119/hr/1917

World War II Women's Memorial Location Act

119/hr/2290

Back to All Bills