DETERRENCE Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/2394
Last Updated: April 6, 2025

Sponsored by

Rep. Wagner, Ann [R-MO-2]

ID: W000812

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Invalid Date

Introduced

📍 Current Status

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

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

âś…

Passed Senate

🏛️

House Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bill Summary

Another brilliant example of congressional theater, masquerading as a serious attempt to address national security concerns. The DETERRENCE Act is a masterclass in legislative doublespeak, designed to appease the masses while serving the interests of those who actually matter.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's primary objective is to create the illusion that Congress is taking bold action against foreign threats, while in reality, it's just another exercise in bureaucratic posturing. The sponsors want you to believe they're tough on national security, but don't be fooled – this is a classic case of "security theater."

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill proposes various sentencing enhancements for crimes allegedly directed or coordinated by foreign governments. These changes are largely cosmetic, as the existing laws already provide sufficient penalties for such offenses. The real purpose is to create a narrative that Congress is doing something about foreign interference, while actually accomplishing little.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects will be affected: individuals accused of crimes allegedly linked to foreign governments, law enforcement agencies, and the judiciary. However, the true beneficiaries are the politicians who get to grandstand on national security issues without actually addressing the root problems.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

* **Increased bureaucratic red tape:** The bill's provisions will lead to more paperwork, longer trials, and increased costs for the justice system. * **Selective enforcement:** Prosecutors will have even more discretion to pick and choose which cases to pursue, potentially leading to unequal application of the law. * **Further erosion of civil liberties:** By expanding sentencing enhancements, the government can justify harsher punishments for perceived national security threats, further chipping away at individual freedoms.

In conclusion, the DETERRENCE Act is a textbook example of legislative malpractice. It's a cynical attempt to manipulate public opinion while serving the interests of those in power. Don't be fooled by the rhetoric – this bill is nothing more than a placebo for the gullible and a Trojan horse for further erosion of civil liberties.

Diagnosis: **Legislative Theater Syndrome** (LTS) – a chronic condition characterized by grandstanding, bureaucratic posturing, and a complete disregard for the well-being of citizens. Treatment: **Critical Thinking**, administered in large doses to counteract the effects of LTS.

Related Topics

Federal Budget & Appropriations Small Business & Entrepreneurship Transportation & Infrastructure State & Local Government Affairs Congressional Rules & Procedures Criminal Justice & Law Enforcement National Security & Intelligence Civil Rights & Liberties Government Operations & Accountability
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

đź’° Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Wagner, Ann [R-MO-2]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$249,909
27 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$5,809
Committees
$0
Individuals
$244,100

No PAC contributions found

1
OTOE MISSOURIA TRIBE
1 transaction
$3,300
2
DEMOCRACY ENGINE, INC., PAC
2 transactions
$2,500
3
WINRED
1 transaction
$9

No committee contributions found

1
SMITH, KENNETH
2 transactions
$26,400
2
WILHELM, MARK A MR.
1 transaction
$13,200
3
DRURY, TIM M.
1 transaction
$13,200
4
DANFORTH, JOHN C
1 transaction
$13,200
5
TRACY, RICHARD L. MR.
1 transaction
$13,200
6
RINEY, RODGER O. MR.
1 transaction
$13,200
7
O'CONNELL, JOHN T.
1 transaction
$13,200
8
GREWE, GARY
1 transaction
$13,200
9
HOLEKAMP, WILLIAM F
1 transaction
$13,200
10
NICHOLSON, PAM
1 transaction
$13,200
11
RATTS, VALERIE S
1 transaction
$13,200
12
HEBENSTREIT, JAMES B. MR.
1 transaction
$13,200
13
PFAUTCH, ROY MR.
1 transaction
$11,600
14
SCHULTE, STEVE
1 transaction
$7,900
15
SCHNUCK, CRAIG D
1 transaction
$6,800
16
BECKSTEAD, JOHN
1 transaction
$6,600
17
KAMPETER, MICHAEL
1 transaction
$6,600
18
QUALY, JOHN M.
1 transaction
$6,600
19
MURPHY, RICHARD
1 transaction
$6,600
20
CONGDON, DAVID
2 transactions
$6,600
21
BEAVER, MICHAEL R
1 transaction
$3,300
22
DAVIS, DANIEL K
1 transaction
$3,300
23
DRUMMOND, MICHAEL
1 transaction
$3,300
24
GEDDIE, BARBARA P
1 transaction
$3,300

Donor Network - Rep. Wagner, Ann [R-MO-2]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 28 nodes and 30 connections

Total contributions: $249,909

Top Donors - Rep. Wagner, Ann [R-MO-2]

Showing top 25 donors by contribution amount

3 Orgs24 Individuals

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. Higher similarity scores indicate stronger thematic connections.

Introduction

Low 59.1%
Pages: 581-583

— 548 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise PRIORITIZING THE PROTECTION OF PUBLIC SAFETY Ordered liberty is at risk when our citizens lack physical safety, when career criminals do not fear the law, when foreign cartels move narcotics and illegal aliens into our nation at will, and when political leaders call citizens “domestic terrorists” for exercising their constitutional rights. The Department of Justice—in partnership with state and local partners—must recommit in both word and deed to protecting public safety. The overwhelming majority of crimes in the United States are properly handled at the state and local levels,19 but the DOJ can provide critical technical support for local law enforcement and play a critical agenda-setting role. With respect to the Department’s core responsibilities—enforcing our immigration laws, combating domestic and international criminal enterprises, protecting federal civil rights, and combating foreign espionage—the federal government has primary authority and, accordingly, accountability. The evidence shows that the Biden Administration’s Department of Justice has failed to protect law-abiding citizens and has ignored its most basic obligations. It has become at once utterly unserious and dangerously politicized. Prosecution and charging decisions are infused with racial and partisan political double standards.20 Immigration laws are ignored.21 The FBI harasses protesting parents (branded “domestic terrorists” by some partisans) while working diligently to shut down politically disfavored speech on the pretext of its being “misinformation” or “disin- formation.”22 A department that prosecutes FACE Act cases while ignoring dozens of violent attacks on pregnancy care centers and/or the coordinated violation of laws that prohibit attempts to intimidate Supreme Court Justices by parading out- side of their homes23 has clearly lost its way. A department that has twice engaged in covert domestic election interference and propaganda operations—the Russian collusion hoax in 2016 and the Hunter Biden laptop suppression in 2020—is a threat to the Republic.24 l Restoring the department’s focus on public safety and a culture of respect for the rule of law is a gargantuan task that will involve at minimum four overriding actions: l Restoring the FBI’s integrity. l Renewing the DOJ’s focus on violent crime. l Dismantling domestic and international criminal enterprises. l Pursuing a national security agenda aimed at external state and non-state actors, not U.S. citizens exercising their constitutional rights. — 549 — Department of Justice RESTORING THE FBI’S INTEGRITY The FBI was founded in 1908 to “tackle national crime and security issues” when “there was hardly any systematic way of enforcing the law across this now broad landscape of America.”25 It best serves the American people when it dedicates its resources and energies to attacking violent crime,26 criminal organizations,27 child predators,28 cyber-crime, and other uniquely federal interests.29 Revelations regarding the FBI’s role in the Russia hoax of 2016, Big Tech collu- sion, and suppression of Hunter Biden’s laptop in 2020 strongly suggest that the FBI is completely out of control. To protect the Constitution, fight crime effectively, and protect the nation from foreign adversaries, the next conservative Adminis- tration should begin to restore the FBI’s domestic reputation and integrity and enhance its effectiveness in meeting actual foreign threats. To do so, the next con- servative Administration should: l Conduct an immediate, comprehensive review of all major active FBI investigations and activities and terminate any that are unlawful or contrary to the national interest.30 This is an enormous task, but it is necessary to re-earn the American people’s trust in the FBI and its work. To conduct this review, the department should detail attorney appointees with criminal, national security, or homeland security backgrounds to catalogue any questionable activities and elevate them to appropriate DOJ leadership consistent with the new chain of command (discussed below). The department should also consider issuing a public report of the findings from this review as appropriate. l Align the FBI’s placement within the department and the federal government with its law enforcement and national security purposes. DOJ veterans often opine that the FBI views itself as an independent agency—accountable to no one and on par with the Attorney General in terms of stature—but the fact remains that “[t]he Federal Bureau of Investigation is located in the Department of Justice.”31 It is not independent from the department (just as Immigration and Customs Enforcement is not independent from the Department of Homeland Security) and does not deserve to be treated as if it were. The next conservative Administration should direct the Attorney General to remove the FBI from the Deputy Attorney General’s direct supervision within the department’s organizational chart and instead place it under the general supervision of the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division and the supervision of the Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division, as applicable.32 This can be accomplished

Introduction

Low 59.1%
Pages: 581-583

— 548 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise PRIORITIZING THE PROTECTION OF PUBLIC SAFETY Ordered liberty is at risk when our citizens lack physical safety, when career criminals do not fear the law, when foreign cartels move narcotics and illegal aliens into our nation at will, and when political leaders call citizens “domestic terrorists” for exercising their constitutional rights. The Department of Justice—in partnership with state and local partners—must recommit in both word and deed to protecting public safety. The overwhelming majority of crimes in the United States are properly handled at the state and local levels,19 but the DOJ can provide critical technical support for local law enforcement and play a critical agenda-setting role. With respect to the Department’s core responsibilities—enforcing our immigration laws, combating domestic and international criminal enterprises, protecting federal civil rights, and combating foreign espionage—the federal government has primary authority and, accordingly, accountability. The evidence shows that the Biden Administration’s Department of Justice has failed to protect law-abiding citizens and has ignored its most basic obligations. It has become at once utterly unserious and dangerously politicized. Prosecution and charging decisions are infused with racial and partisan political double standards.20 Immigration laws are ignored.21 The FBI harasses protesting parents (branded “domestic terrorists” by some partisans) while working diligently to shut down politically disfavored speech on the pretext of its being “misinformation” or “disin- formation.”22 A department that prosecutes FACE Act cases while ignoring dozens of violent attacks on pregnancy care centers and/or the coordinated violation of laws that prohibit attempts to intimidate Supreme Court Justices by parading out- side of their homes23 has clearly lost its way. A department that has twice engaged in covert domestic election interference and propaganda operations—the Russian collusion hoax in 2016 and the Hunter Biden laptop suppression in 2020—is a threat to the Republic.24 l Restoring the department’s focus on public safety and a culture of respect for the rule of law is a gargantuan task that will involve at minimum four overriding actions: l Restoring the FBI’s integrity. l Renewing the DOJ’s focus on violent crime. l Dismantling domestic and international criminal enterprises. l Pursuing a national security agenda aimed at external state and non-state actors, not U.S. citizens exercising their constitutional rights.

Introduction

Low 53.3%
Pages: 581-583

— 549 — Department of Justice RESTORING THE FBI’S INTEGRITY The FBI was founded in 1908 to “tackle national crime and security issues” when “there was hardly any systematic way of enforcing the law across this now broad landscape of America.”25 It best serves the American people when it dedicates its resources and energies to attacking violent crime,26 criminal organizations,27 child predators,28 cyber-crime, and other uniquely federal interests.29 Revelations regarding the FBI’s role in the Russia hoax of 2016, Big Tech collu- sion, and suppression of Hunter Biden’s laptop in 2020 strongly suggest that the FBI is completely out of control. To protect the Constitution, fight crime effectively, and protect the nation from foreign adversaries, the next conservative Adminis- tration should begin to restore the FBI’s domestic reputation and integrity and enhance its effectiveness in meeting actual foreign threats. To do so, the next con- servative Administration should: l Conduct an immediate, comprehensive review of all major active FBI investigations and activities and terminate any that are unlawful or contrary to the national interest.30 This is an enormous task, but it is necessary to re-earn the American people’s trust in the FBI and its work. To conduct this review, the department should detail attorney appointees with criminal, national security, or homeland security backgrounds to catalogue any questionable activities and elevate them to appropriate DOJ leadership consistent with the new chain of command (discussed below). The department should also consider issuing a public report of the findings from this review as appropriate. l Align the FBI’s placement within the department and the federal government with its law enforcement and national security purposes. DOJ veterans often opine that the FBI views itself as an independent agency—accountable to no one and on par with the Attorney General in terms of stature—but the fact remains that “[t]he Federal Bureau of Investigation is located in the Department of Justice.”31 It is not independent from the department (just as Immigration and Customs Enforcement is not independent from the Department of Homeland Security) and does not deserve to be treated as if it were. The next conservative Administration should direct the Attorney General to remove the FBI from the Deputy Attorney General’s direct supervision within the department’s organizational chart and instead place it under the general supervision of the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division and the supervision of the Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division, as applicable.32 This can be accomplished — 550 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise through a simple internal departmental reorganization and does not need to be approved by Congress. Such a structure would allow the FBI to play an important role in advising the department’s leadership on emerging threats and updating notable investigations through daily briefings conducted with the Criminal Division and National Security Division leadership, but it would also place the FBI under a politically accountable leader with fewer things to manage than the Deputy Attorney General or the Attorney General have. All notifications and approvals that currently run to the Deputy Attorney General or the Attorney General should be evaluated and redirected in the first instance, where appropriate, to the relevant Assistant Attorney General. Such a move would better align the FBI with the mission of the divisions with which it most often interacts and emphasize the need for the areas on which it should focus. In general, however, under no circumstances should the FBI ever be able to go around the Attorney General or the department’s leadership on any matter within its area of responsibility. l Prohibit the FBI from engaging, in general, in activities related to combating the spread of so-called misinformation and disinformation by Americans who are not tied to any plausible criminal activity. The FBI, along with the rest of the government, needs a hard reset on the appropriate scope of its legitimate activities. It must not look to or rely on the past decade as precedent or legitimization for continued action in certain spaces. This is especially true with respect to activities that the FBI and the U.S. government writ large claim are efforts to combat “misinformation,” “disinformation,” or “malinformation.” The United States government and, by extension, the FBI have absolutely no business policing speech, whether in the public square, in print, or online. The First Amendment prohibits it. The United States is the world’s last best hope for self-government,33 and its survival relies on the ability of our people to have healthy debate free from government intervention and censorship. The government, through its officials, is certainly able to speak and provide information to the public. That is a healthy component of an informed society. But government must never manipulate the scales and censor information that is potentially harmful to it or its political leadership. This is the way of totalitarian dictatorships, not of free constitutional republics.

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.