The bill
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to establish an enhanced deduction for wages paid to automobile manufacturing workers, and for other purposes.
HR. 2814, 119th Congress — read as touching Automotive (Legacy).
Sponsored by
Rep. Balderson, Troy [R-OH-12]
ID: B001306
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 2814, 119th Congress — read as touching Automotive (Legacy).
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
23 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
The alignment
This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 458-460 of the Mandate for Leadership.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Invalid Date
📍 Current Status
Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.
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!
Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this abomination and expose its true purpose.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Transportation Freedom Act (HR 2814) is a cleverly crafted bill that masquerades as a benevolent measure to support American automobile manufacturing workers. In reality, it's a thinly veiled attempt to curry favor with the automotive industry and their unionized workforce while simultaneously gutting environmental regulations.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill establishes an enhanced deduction for wages paid to automobile manufacturing workers, which is nothing more than a handout to the industry. It also repeals various emissions standards, including multipollutant emissions standards for light-duty and medium-duty vehicles, phase 3 heavy-duty vehicle greenhouse gas emissions standards, and CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards rules.
The bill's proponents claim that these changes will promote American manufacturing and create jobs. However, this is nothing more than a cynical ploy to appease the industry's lobbying efforts while ignoring the devastating environmental consequences of their actions.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The primary beneficiaries of this bill are the automotive manufacturers and their unionized workforce. The bill's sponsors, Mr. Balderson and Mr. Barr, have likely received generous campaign contributions from these interests. Meanwhile, the American public will be left to suffer the environmental consequences of this legislation.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** The Transportation Freedom Act is a recipe for disaster. By repealing emissions standards, it will lead to increased air pollution, exacerbate climate change, and harm public health. The enhanced deduction for wages paid to automobile manufacturing workers is nothing more than a Band-Aid on the industry's self-inflicted wounds.
This bill is a classic example of " regulatory capture," where special interests hijack the legislative process to serve their own agendas at the expense of the general public. It's a stark reminder that, in Washington D.C., money talks and the environment walks.
In conclusion, HR 2814 is a toxic piece of legislation that prioritizes the interests of the automotive industry over those of the American people. Its proponents should be ashamed of themselves for peddling such blatant falsehoods and ignoring the devastating consequences of their actions.
Rep. Balderson, Troy [R-OH-12]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 29 nodes and 23 connections (36 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $71,950
Showing top 17 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 helped, 4 harmed.
Title I, Section 101 establishes an enhanced deduction for wages paid to automobile manufacturing workers, providing a tax benefit to automotive manufacturers.
Title I, Section 101 includes advanced battery cells in the definition of qualifying taxpayer activities, benefiting EV battery manufacturers as part of automobile manufacturing.
Title II repeals multipollutant emissions standards for light/medium-duty vehicles (Sec 201), phase 3 heavy-duty GHG standards (Sec 202), and CAFE standards (Sec 203), reducing regulatory pressure on fossil fuel vehicle markets and thus benefiting oil/gas demand.
Weak inference: repeal of vehicle emissions standards may increase fossil fuel demand, indirectly benefiting coal as an energy source, though less directly than oil/gas.
Weak inference: reduced emissions standards may lower demand for alternative fuels and EV infrastructure, negatively impacting midstream energy infrastructure investments in electrification.
Weak inference: repeal of emissions standards may slow EV adoption, reducing electricity demand growth from transportation sector, mildly negative for utilities investing in grid modernization for EVs.
For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Balderson, Troy [R-OH-12])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.
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.
— 426 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Conduct realistic cost assessments that reflect actual consumer experiences instead of the current unrealistic ones claiming that the program is virtually cost-free. Mobile Source Regulation by the Office of Transportation and Air Quality l Establish GHG car standards under Department of Transportation (DOT) leadership that properly consider cost, choice, safety, and national security. l Review the existing “ramp rate” for car standards to ensure that it is actually achievable. l Include life cycle emissions of electric vehicles and consider all of their environmental impacts. l Restore the position that California’s waiver applies only to California- specific issues like ground-level ozone, not global climate issues. l Ensure that other states can adopt California’s standards only for traditional/criteria pollutants, not greenhouse gases. l Stop the use of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to increase standards on airplanes. l Reconsider the Cleaner Trucks Initiative to balance the goal of driving down emissions without creating significant costs or complex burdens on the industry. Air Permitting Reforms for New Source Review (Pre-Construction Per- mits) and Title V (Operating Permits) l Develop reforms to ensure that when a facility improves efficiency within its production process, new permitting requirements are not triggered. l Restore the Trump EPA position on Once-In, Always-In (that major sources can convert to area sources when affiliated emissions standards are met). l Revisit permitting and enforcement assumptions that sources will operate 24 hours a day, 365 days a year; this artificially inflates a source’s potential to emit (PTE), which can result in more stringent permit terms. — 427 — Environmental Protection Agency l Defend the position that petitions to object to Title V should not be used to second-guess previous state decisions. l Clarify the relationship between New Source Review and Title V to ensure that Title V is used only as intended by Congress. CAA Section 11123 l Restore the position that EPA cannot regulate a new pollutant from an already regulated source category without making predicate findings for that new pollutant. l Institute automatic withdrawal of any proposed rule that is not finalized within the statutorily prescribed one-year period. l Revise general implementing regulations for existing source regulatory authority under CAA § 111(d)24 to ensure that EPA gives full meaning to Congress’s direction, including source-specific application, and that the state planning program is flexible, federalist, and deferential to the states. CAA Section 112 (Hazardous Air Pollutants)25 l Unregulated point or non-point source (fugitive emissions) of an already regulated hazardous air pollutant do not require a Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT) standard. l Ensure that Section 112 regulations are harmonized with Section 111 regulations that apply to the same sector/sources. l Ensure that cost-benefit analysis is focused on a regulation’s targeted pollutant and separately identify ancillary or co-benefits. Radiation l Assess and update the agency’s radiation standards so that they align with those of other agencies, including the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy, and Department of Transportation, as well as international standards. l Level-set past, misleading statements regarding radiological risk and reassess the Linear Non-Threshold standard.
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.