National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2025

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/3168

Last Updated: July 21, 2026

National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2025

HR. 3168, 119th Congress — read as touching Telecommunications.

The sponsor

Rep. Valadao, David G. [R-CA-22]

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

The money

$79,400 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Housing and Urban Development" section, p. 545-547 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by Voice Vote.

July 20, 2026

Introduced

📍 Current Status

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

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

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 National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2025 (HR 3168) is a bill that reauthorizes and amends the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977. As a self-serving billionaire, I'll analyze this bill through the lens of its potential impact on my wealth, influence, and control.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of HR 3168 is to improve the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program by enhancing earthquake hazard mitigation, preparedness, and response efforts. The bill aims to reduce the risks associated with earthquakes and tsunamis, promote public safety, and minimize economic losses.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill makes several key changes to existing law:

1. Expands program activities to include designing, constructing, evaluating, and retrofitting buildings, structures, and lifeline infrastructure. 2. Develops standards, guidelines, and voluntary consensus codes for earthquake hazards reduction. 3. Enhances the duties of the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction, including coordinating with the Federal Communications Commission on emergency alerts. 4. Increases funding for the Advanced National Seismic System.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties and stakeholders include:

1. Government agencies (e.g., USGS, FEMA, FCC) 2. State and Tribal governments 3. Local governments 4. Private sector companies involved in construction, infrastructure development, and emergency response services

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

From my perspective as a self-serving billionaire, this bill has both positive and negative implications:

Positive:

* Increased funding for the Advanced National Seismic System could lead to improved earthquake detection and warning systems, potentially reducing losses for my business interests. * Enhanced standards and guidelines for earthquake hazards reduction could create new opportunities for my companies to provide consulting services or develop innovative products.

Negative:

* The bill's focus on public safety and risk reduction may lead to increased regulatory burdens and costs for private sector companies, including mine. * The expansion of program activities and funding could divert resources away from other areas that are more critical to my business interests.

Overall, I view this bill as a mixed bag. While it presents some opportunities for growth and innovation, it also poses potential risks and challenges to my wealth and influence. As a self-serving billionaire, I will continue to monitor the progress of this bill and advocate for changes that align with my interests.

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 goes through the legislative process. This one, HR 3168, aims to reauthorize the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to update and improve the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP). The objectives are to enhance earthquake hazard reduction efforts, promote research and development, and improve emergency preparedness and response. Remember when we learned about the importance of checks and balances? This bill aims to ensure that various government agencies work together to achieve these goals.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill makes several changes to existing law, including:

* Expanding program activities to include designing, constructing, evaluating, and retrofitting buildings, structures, and lifeline infrastructure. * Developing standards and guidelines for earthquake hazards reduction. * Improving the duties of the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction. * Enhancing the responsibilities of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) in coordinating with other agencies and providing timely earthquake alerts.

These changes aim to improve the effectiveness of NEHRP and ensure that various stakeholders work together to reduce earthquake hazards.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties and stakeholders include:

* The USGS, which will play a key role in implementing the program. * Other government agencies, such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). * State and Tribal governments, which will be involved in earthquake early warning system improvements. * Local communities, which will benefit from improved emergency preparedness and response.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this bill is significant. By improving NEHRP, the government can reduce the risks associated with earthquakes and save lives. The bill's emphasis on coordination between agencies and stakeholders should lead to more effective earthquake hazard reduction efforts. However, as we learned in civics class, the actual implementation of this bill will depend on various factors, including funding and bureaucratic efficiency.

Now, I hope that was clear enough for everyone. As I always say, "A bill becomes a law when it's passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President." Simple, right?

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

My fellow truth-seekers, gather 'round and behold the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2025! On the surface, this bill appears to be a benevolent effort to reduce earthquake hazards and improve disaster preparedness. But, my friends, do not be fooled by its innocuous title. As we delve deeper into the text, we'll uncover a web of intrigue, hidden agendas, and potential power grabs.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's primary objective is to reauthorize the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977, which aims to reduce earthquake hazards through research, education, and preparedness. However, I suspect there's more to it than meets the eye. The bill's language suggests a broader scope, encompassing not only earthquake mitigation but also "other purposes." What could these mysterious purposes be?

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill introduces several key provisions:

1. **Expansion of program activities**: The bill amends existing law to include Tribal governments and adds new responsibilities for the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction. 2. **Enhanced earthquake early warning system**: The bill requires the United States Geological Survey (USGS) to expand the earthquake early warning system, improve detection, and increase warning times. 3. **Increased funding**: The bill authorizes $83,403,000 for fiscal years 2026-2028, with a minimum of $30,000,000 allocated for the Advanced National Seismic System.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The bill affects various stakeholders, including:

1. **Tribal governments**: The bill explicitly includes Tribal governments in program activities and decision-making processes. 2. **Federal agencies**: The USGS, Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and other federal agencies will play a significant role in implementing the bill's provisions. 3. **State and local governments**: These entities will be involved in earthquake early warning system improvements and disaster response efforts.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, my friends, let's connect the dots:

1. **Increased government control**: The bill's emphasis on coordination between federal agencies and state/local governments might lead to a more centralized approach to disaster management, potentially infringing upon individual rights. 2. **Surveillance and data collection**: The expanded earthquake early warning system could be used as a pretext for increased surveillance and data collection, raising concerns about privacy and civil liberties. 3. **Funding and resource allocation**: The bill's funding provisions might divert resources away from other critical areas, such as infrastructure development or social programs.

In conclusion, while the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2025 appears to be a well-intentioned effort, its true intentions and implications remain shrouded in mystery. As we continue to peel back the layers, we may uncover a more sinister agenda lurking beneath the surface. Stay vigilant, my friends

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, we've got a doozy of a bill on our hands here. The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2025 - try saying that five times fast! (smirk)

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This bill is all about reauthorizing the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977, because, you know, earthquakes are a thing and we need to be prepared. The main objective is to improve our national earthquake hazards reduction program, which sounds like a mouthful, but trust me, it's crucial for our freedom... I mean, safety.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** Now, let's get into the nitty-gritty. This bill makes some significant changes to existing law, including:

* Expanding the program to include Tribal governments (because, you know, they're part of America too) * Improving standards and guidelines for earthquake-resistant buildings and infrastructure * Enhancing the earthquake early warning system (because who doesn't love a good heads-up?) * Increasing funding for seismic research and development (science!)

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** This bill affects all sorts of folks, including:

* State and local governments (they'll be working closely with the feds on this one) * Tribal governments (see above) * The Federal Communications Commission (they're in charge of broadcasting those emergency alerts) * The United States Geological Survey (USGS) - they're the ones who'll be doing all the science-y stuff * And, of course, the American people (because we all want to be safe from earthquakes)

**Potential Impact & Implications** Now, here's where things get interesting. This bill could have a significant impact on our nation's preparedness for earthquakes and other natural disasters. It could also lead to:

* Improved safety standards for buildings and infrastructure * Enhanced emergency response systems * Increased funding for seismic research (which could lead to new technologies and innovations) * And, of course, more jobs in the field of earthquake science (because who doesn't love a good job?)

But, let's be real, folks. This bill is just another example of the elites trying to control our lives. I mean, who needs the government telling us how to build our buildings or warning us about earthquakes? It's all just a ploy to take away our freedom... (wink)

There you have it, folks. The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2025 - a bill that's all about safety, science, and... well, maybe a little bit of government overreach. But hey, at least we'll be prepared for those earthquakes!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another exercise in legislative theater, courtesy of the 119th Congress. Let's dissect this farce and expose the underlying disease.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2025 (HR 3168) claims to improve earthquake preparedness and response by reauthorizing the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977. The bill's primary objective is to allocate funds for seismic research, early warning systems, and infrastructure resilience.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends various sections of the original act, including:

* Expanding program activities to include Tribal governments and post-earthquake recovery-based performance objectives. * Updating duties of the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction to include coordinating with the Federal Communications Commission for emergency alerts. * Requiring biennial reports from the committee and advisory committee. * Modifying responsibilities of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) to include data sharing, resource allocation, and expanding the earthquake early warning system.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects:

* The USGS, which will receive additional funding for seismic research and infrastructure development. * State and Tribal governments, which will benefit from expanded program activities and coordination with federal agencies. * The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which will play a key role in broadcasting emergency alerts. * Lobbyists and special interest groups representing the construction, insurance, and technology industries.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of "legislative lip service." While it appears to address earthquake preparedness, its true purpose is to funnel money to favored constituencies and maintain the status quo. The increased funding for seismic research will likely benefit private contractors and researchers rather than improving public safety.

The expanded early warning system may provide some benefits, but its effectiveness will depend on the quality of implementation and coordination between agencies. Don't hold your breath – bureaucratic inefficiencies and turf wars will likely hinder progress.

Meanwhile, the bill's authors will tout this legislation as a victory for public safety, while quietly pocketing campaign contributions from grateful stakeholders. The real winners are the politicians who get to claim credit for "doing something" about earthquake preparedness without actually addressing the underlying issues.

In conclusion, HR 3168 is a textbook example of legislative malpractice – a feel-good bill that prioritizes special interests over meaningful reform. It's a Band-Aid on a bullet wound, designed to placate voters while maintaining the lucrative status quo.

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

**National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2025 (HR 3168)**

**Main Purpose and Objectives:** The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2025 aims to reauthorize the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977, which established a national program to reduce earthquake hazards. The bill's primary objectives are to improve the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) by enhancing its activities, duties, and responsibilities, as well as increasing funding for seismic research and early warning systems.

**Key Provisions and Changes to Existing Law:**

1. **Expanded Program Activities:** The bill amends Section 5 of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 to include new program activities, such as designing, constructing, evaluating, and retrofitting buildings, structures, and lifeline infrastructure. 2. **Tribal Government Involvement:** The bill adds Tribal governments to the list of stakeholders involved in NEHRP's activities, ensuring their participation in earthquake hazards reduction efforts. 3. **Earthquake Early Warning System Improvements:** The bill requires the United States Geological Survey (USGS) to expand and improve the earthquake early warning system, including making improvements to detection and increasing warning time for nearby persons. 4. **Increased Funding:** The bill authorizes increased funding for NEHRP, with a focus on completing the Advanced National Seismic System.

**Affected Parties and Stakeholders:**

1. **Federal Agencies:** USGS, Federal Communications Commission (FCC), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) are directly involved in implementing the bill's provisions. 2. **State and Tribal Governments:** These governments will participate in NEHRP's activities and benefit from improved earthquake hazards reduction efforts. 3. **Local Communities:** Communities at risk of earthquakes will benefit from enhanced early warning systems and improved building codes.

**Potential Impact and Implications:**

1. **Enhanced Earthquake Preparedness:** The bill's provisions are expected to improve the nation's preparedness for earthquakes, reducing the risk of damage and loss of life. 2. **Increased Funding for Seismic Research:** The authorized funding will support research and development of new technologies, such as advanced seismic monitoring systems. 3. **Improved Communication and Coordination:** The bill's emphasis on interagency coordination and communication will enhance the response to earthquakes and tsunamis.

Overall, HR 3168 aims to strengthen the nation's earthquake hazards reduction efforts by improving program activities, increasing funding, and enhancing coordination among federal agencies, state and Tribal governments, and local communities.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this bill like we're catchin' waves, bro.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2025 is all about reducin' the risks and impacts of earthquakes on communities. The main goal is to improve the nation's earthquake preparedness and response by reauthorizing the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

This bill makes some gnarly changes to existing law, bro:

* Expands program activities to include designing, constructing, evaluating, and retrofitting buildings, structures, and lifeline infrastructure. * Adds Tribal governments as stakeholders in earthquake hazards reduction efforts. * Updates the duties of the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction to include coordinating with the Federal Communications Commission on emergency alerts and tsunami susceptibility. * Requires the United States Geological Survey (USGS) to coordinate with other agencies on data sharing, resource allocation, and broadcasting earthquake alerts in multiple languages.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill affects a bunch of different parties, dude:

* Communities at risk from earthquakes * Tribal governments * State and local governments * Federal agencies like the USGS, Federal Communications Commission, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) * The general public, bro

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill has some far-out implications, man:

* Improved earthquake preparedness and response could save lives and reduce economic losses. * Enhanced coordination between federal agencies and Tribal governments could lead to more effective disaster management. * Increased funding for the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) could improve earthquake detection and warning systems. * The bill's focus on equity and inclusion could help ensure that underserved communities receive the support they need during disasters.

Overall, this bill is like a solid wave, bro – it's got some great provisions and changes that could make a real difference in reducing earthquake risks. But, as with any legislation, there are always gonna be some riptides to navigate, man.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2025 (HR 3168)**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2025 aims to reauthorize and improve the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977. The bill's primary objectives are to enhance earthquake hazard reduction, promote seismic safety, and support disaster resilience.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:**

1. **Program Activities:** The bill expands program activities to include designing, constructing, evaluating, and retrofitting buildings, structures, and lifeline infrastructure. 2. **Standards and Guidelines:** It develops standards, guidelines, and voluntary consensus codes for earthquake hazards reduction, including post-earthquake recovery-based performance objectives. 3. **Interagency Coordinating Committee:** The bill updates the duties of the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction to include coordinating with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on emergency alerts and tsunami susceptibility. 4. **Biennial Report:** It modifies the biennial report requirements to focus on specific aspects of earthquake hazards reduction. 5. **Advisory Committee:** The bill updates the composition of the advisory committee to include representatives from Tribal governments.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

1. **Federal Agencies:** National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), United States Geological Survey (USGS), and FCC. 2. **State and Local Governments:** Affected states and localities will benefit from improved earthquake hazard reduction measures. 3. **Tribal Governments:** The bill recognizes the importance of Tribal governments in earthquake hazards reduction efforts. 4. **Private Sector:** Companies involved in construction, engineering, and emergency response may be impacted by new standards and guidelines.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

1. **Enhanced Earthquake Resilience:** The bill's provisions aim to improve seismic safety and reduce the impact of earthquakes on communities. 2. **Increased Funding:** Authorized appropriations for fiscal years 2026-2028 will support the completion of the Advanced National Seismic System. 3. **Improved Emergency Response:** Coordinated efforts with FCC and NOAA will enhance emergency alerts and response times. 4. **Potential Regulatory Burden:** New standards and guidelines may impose additional regulatory requirements on private sector entities.

**Monied Interest Analysis:** While no specific PACs or industry lobby groups are directly mentioned in the bill, it is likely that organizations representing construction, engineering, and emergency response industries will be interested in the legislation's provisions. The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) may be among the stakeholders monitoring this bill.

**Committee Capture:** The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology has jurisdiction over this bill. Historically, this committee has received significant contributions from industries related to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). However,

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Valadao, David G. [R-CA-22]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$79,400

18 donors

PACs

Organizations

$59,600

Committees

Individuals

$19,800

No PAC contributions found

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

5 transactions

$6,500

AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY

2 transactions

$5,300

SANTA ROSA RANCHERIA

2 transactions

$5,000

SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND MIWOK INDIANS

2 transactions

$4,000

CHEROKEE NATION

1 transaction

$3,300

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

THE CHICKASAW NATION

1 transaction

$3,300

MOORETOWN RANCHERIA

1 transaction

$3,300

SAN MANUEL BAND/MISSION INDIAN

3 transactions

$3,300

SYCUAN BAND OF KUMEYAAY NATION

1 transaction

$1,000

UNION VILLAGE

1 transaction

$1,000

RON CLARK FARMS

1 transaction

$500

No committee contributions found

EMMET, RICHARD

1 transaction

$6,600

GILLIAM, RICHARD

1 transaction

$6,600

SILVERMAN, JEFFREY

1 transaction

$6,600

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 4 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Costa, Jim [D-CA-21]

ID: C001059

Top Contributors

TABLE MOUNTAIN RANCHERIA

OrganizationFRIANT, CA

$3,300

Oct 30, 2023

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Sep 18, 2024

JJF SP TRUST

OrganizationSAN FRANCISCO, CA

$3,300

Sep 30, 2024

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER RANCH

OrganizationFRESNO, CA

$3,300

Jun 30, 2023

SALT RIVER PIMA MARICOPA INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationSCOTTSDALE, AZ

$1,000

Jul 31, 2023

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$1,000

Sep 8, 2023

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$1,000

May 19, 2023

CHAPPELL-MCLULLAR TRUST

OrganizationHONOLULU, HI

$500

Mar 2, 2024

ARK, MANDEEP

SELF EMPLOYED • INTERPRETER

IndividualFRESNO, CA

$6,500

Aug 14, 2024

AFZAL, TEHMINA

SELF EMPLOYED • INTERPRETER

IndividualCHINO HILLS, CA

$6,500

Aug 14, 2024

Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1]

ID: F000466

Top Contributors

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$1,500

Dec 31, 2024

STATA FAMILY OFFICE

Organization

$500

Apr 26, 2024

ASHER, ROBERT B.

IndividualGWYNEDD VALLEY, PA

$10,000

Oct 9, 2024

ASHER, ROBERT B.

ASHER CHOCOLATES • CHAIRMAN

IndividualGWYNEDD VALLEY, PA

$10,000

Sep 30, 2024

LEVY, EDWARD JR

EDW C LEVY CO • CHAIRMAN

IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI

$6,600

Feb 26, 2024

CROTTY, THOMAS

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualSCOTTSDALE, AZ

$6,600

Feb 27, 2024

EVANS, ROGER

GREYLOCK PARTNERS • PARTNER EMERITUS

IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA

$6,600

Feb 27, 2024

LEACH, RONALD

NPX ONE • CHAIRMAN & CEO

IndividualGENEVA, IL

$6,600

Feb 28, 2024

MCCLAIN, MARK

SAILPOINT • CEO

IndividualAUSTIN, TX

$6,600

Mar 2, 2024

CROTTY, THOMAS

IndividualSCOTTSDALE, AZ

$6,600

Mar 8, 2024

Rep. Vindman, Eugene Simon [D-VA-7]

ID: V000138

Top Contributors

LUX FOR VIRGINIA

OrganizationLADYSMITH, VA

$500

Mar 29, 2024

LUX FOR VIRGINIA

OrganizationLADYSMITH, VA

$500

Mar 31, 2024

FORSTER-BURKE, DIANE

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualCOTTONWOOD HEIGHTS, UT

$4,000

Apr 20, 2024

FORSTER-BURKE, DIANE

IndividualCOTTONWOOD HEIGHTS, UT

$4,000

May 5, 2024

VON STEIN, THOMSON

IndividualROCKVILLE, MD

$3,500

Aug 7, 2024

HULL, MEGAN

SELF • ACTIVIST

IndividualWASHINGTON, DC

$3,300

Nov 2, 2024

KAISER, GEORGE

GBK CORPORATION • EXECUTIVE

IndividualTULSA, OK

$3,300

Oct 25, 2024

PARSONS, KATHLEEN

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualPOTOMAC, MD

$3,300

Oct 18, 2024

STAPLE, HARISE

SELF • MD

IndividualLOS ALTOS, CA

$3,300

Oct 18, 2024

HOLMES, LAURA

SELF • REAL ESTATE INVESTOR

IndividualBOCA RATON, FL

$3,300

Oct 22, 2024

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

ID: D000617

Top Contributors

JAMESTOWN S'KLALLAM TRIBE

OrganizationSEQUIM, WA

$6,600

Mar 31, 2023

LUMMI INDIAN NATION

OrganizationBELLINGHAM, WA

$5,000

Jul 17, 2024

PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS

OrganizationTACOMA, WA

$3,700

Jun 28, 2024

SNOQUALMIE TRIBE

OrganizationSNOQUALMIE, WA

$3,300

Nov 2, 2023

JAMESTOWN S'KLALLAM TRIBE

OrganizationSEQUIM, WA

$3,300

Mar 31, 2023

MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE

OrganizationAUBURN, WA

$3,300

Jun 1, 2023

THE TULALIP TRIBES OF WASHINGTON

OrganizationTULALIP, WA

$3,300

Jun 30, 2023

PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS

OrganizationTACOMA, WA

$3,300

Jun 28, 2024

THE TULALIP TRIBES OF WASHINGTON

OrganizationTULALIP, WA

$3,300

Jun 20, 2024

MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE

OrganizationAUBURN, WA

$3,300

Aug 13, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Valadao, David G. [R-CA-22]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 70 nodes and 42 connections (80 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $121,600

Top Donors - Rep. Valadao, David G. [R-CA-22]

Showing top 18 donors by contribution amount

15 Orgs3 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 helped.

+Telecommunicationsconfidence 0.90
Section 2(b)(2)(VIII) adds duty to coordinate with FCC Chair on timely broadcasting of emergency alerts from earthquake early warning system, which benefits telecom providers involved in alert dissemination.
+Construction & Engineeringconfidence 0.85
Section 2(a)(1)(B) expands program activities to include designing, constructing, evaluating, and retrofitting for earthquake hazards reduction, directly aiding construction and engineering firms.
+Pipelines & Energy Infrastructureconfidence 0.80
Section 2(a)(2)(ii) includes development of standards for lifeline infrastructure (which covers pipelines, energy facilities) for earthquake hazards reduction, benefiting energy infrastructure operators.

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Weak

Vector: 60%

Pages: 545-547AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on earthquake hazards reduction, seismic research, and early warning systems, while the Project 2025 HUD section emphasizes administrative reforms, competence gap, waste fraud abuse, and housing policy. Overlap is limited to tangential topics like tribal involvement and infrastructure safety."

Key themes:tribal involvementinfrastructure resiliencefederal coordination

— 513 — Department of Housing and Urban Development ENDNOTES 1. At a 1998 Senate hearing, then-HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo acknowledged that the department “faced a competence gap” and had “the dubious distinction of being the only federal agency designated as ‘high risk’ by the General Accounting [now Government Accountability] Office (GAO),” even referencing the Section 8 rental subsidy as “on the brink of becoming the next savings and loan scandal,” and explained how the department was stepping up enforcement efforts “focused on closing the competence gap by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse.” See “Testimony of Secretary Andrew Cuomo before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies,” March 25, 1998, https://archives.hud.gov/ testimony/1998/tst32598.cfm (accessed March 4, 2023). 2. H.R. 7984, Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965, Public Law No. 89-117, 89th Congress, August 10, 1965, https://www.congress.gov/89/statute/STATUTE-79/STATUTE-79-Pg451.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 3. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Budget in Brief, pp. 2 and 7, https://www.hud.gov/ sites/dfiles/CFO/documents/2023_BudgetInBriefFINAL.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 4. For example, the Special Applications Center (SAC) located in Chicago, Illinois, was established in 1998 as a division of the Office of Public and Indian Housing to accept, review, and approve all nonfunded, noncompetitive applications and plans for demolition, disposition, and conversion of land subject to an annual contributions contract (ACC) in public housing. 5. The Secretary has delegated full authority for the Administration and enforcement of the Fair Housing Act to the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity but also has delegated limited assignment and decision-making authority to the General Counsel. 6. Effectively the HUD Chief Operating Officer and appointed by the President with Senate advice and consent. 7. The Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) is an independent adjudicatory office within the Office of the Secretary. Led by a Director who is appointed by the Secretary, it supervises the Administrative Judges of the Office of Appeals, the administrative law judges of the Office of Administrative Law Judges, and the OHA support staff. The HUD Secretary appoints administrative judges and administrative law judges in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. Chapter 5, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/part-I/ chapter-5 (accessed March 4, 2023). 8. HUD currently has a Departmental Equity Assessment Working Group, supported with five FTEs funded by the OSDBU, “as part of the President’s Executive Order 13985, Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.” See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 35-15, https://www.hud.gov/sites/ dfiles/CFO/documents/2023HUDCongressionalJustificationsFINALelectronicversion.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023), and President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government,” January 20, 2021, in Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 14 (January 25, 2021), pp. 7009–7013, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-01-25/pdf/2021- 01753.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 9. Interestingly, “[t]he 2023 President’s Budget requests $748 thousand for CFBNP, which is $436 thousand less than the 2022 Annualized CR level. The Budget reflects total funding (carryover and new authority) of $1.2 million, $448 thousand less than 2022 total funding.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 35-16. 10. See H.R. 558, Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, Public Law No. 100-77, 100th Congress, July 22, 1987, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-101/pdf/STATUTE-101-Pg482.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). Later renamed the McKinney–Vento Homeless Assistance Act. 11. Established under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5301 et seq., https:// www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 12. S. 566, Cranston–Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, Public Law No. 101-625, 101st Congress, November 28, 1990, Title II, https://www.congress.gov/101/statute/STATUTE-104/STATUTE-104-Pg4079.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 13. S. 1, Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Public Law No. 91-646, 91st Congress, January 2, 1971, https://www.congress.gov/91/statute/STATUTE-84/STATUTE-84-Pg1894.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). “The URA establishes the minimum Federal requirements for the acquisition of real property for Federally-funded programs and projects, and for the relocation of persons who must move from — 514 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise their homes, businesses, or farms as a direct result of acquisition, rehabilitation, or demolition for a Federally- funded program or project.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD Exchange, “49 CFR Part 24–URA Regulations,” published February 2005, https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/804/ura-and- real-property-acquisition-policies-act-49-cfr-part-24/ (accessed March 4, 2023). HUD is one of the 18 federal departments and agencies that “are subject to the Uniform Act.” U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, “Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally Assisted Programs,” Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 243 (December 18, 2019), pp. 69466–69521, esp. p. 69484, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-12-18/pdf/2019-25558.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 14. H.R. 3219, Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996, Public Law No. 104-330, 104th Congress, October 26, 1996, https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ330/PLAW-104publ330.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 15. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 6-1. The U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (Wagner–Steagall Act) established the origins of locally chartered housing agencies that administer federal funding for various rental assistance programs—a quintessentially progressive New Deal–era policy that expanded the administrative state’s powers to the housing market—with the primary legislative intent of eradicating slum housing in urban areas, boosting jobs, and providing housing for the working poor. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1437 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). A decade later, the Housing Act of 1949 codified federal standards for housing livability—a rationale that HUD and federal legislators have continued to use to justify federal intervention in housing—establishing as a national policy objective the provision of a minimum standard of housing quality for all Americans. This legislation also statutorily established many of the rural housing programs that are administered at USDA and expanded programs facilitating the removal of slum housing in urban areas. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1441 et seq., https:// www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 16. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, pp. 1-2 and 2-2. 17. The National Housing Act of 1934 established the FHA and the statutory authority for the secondary market. The main stated premise was to stimulate jobs and facilitate the housing and construction sector during the Great Depression. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1701 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12 (accessed March 4, 2023). 18. 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 19. 29 U.S.C. §§ 701 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/29 (accessed March 4, 2023). 20. HUD’s Departmental Enforcement Center (DEC) is led by a Director. It was established in 1998 as part of a broader effort to streamline and consolidate functions at HUD and was later merged with the Office of General Counsel. The DEC “is comprised of the Office of the Director, the Compliance Division, the Operations Division and five Satellite Offices” and describes its mission as “assuring the highest standards of ethics, management and accountability in the resolution of HUD's troubled properties.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Departmental Enforcement Center, “Program Offices: Departmental Enforcement Center,” https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/enforcement (accessed March 4, 2023). 21. H.R. 5334, Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, Public Law No. 102-1017, 102nd Congress, October 28, 1992, Title X, https://www.congress.gov/102/statute/STATUTE-106/STATUTE-106-Pg3672.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 22. H.R. 8588, Inspector General Act of 1978, Public Law No. 95-452, 95th Congress, October 12, 1978, https://www. congress.gov/95/statute/STATUTE-92/STATUTE-92-Pg1101.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 23. Guiding questions: What immediate administrative reforms of HUD and its programs can be made with high probability of success? What short-term legislative reforms can be proposed that, in tandem with administrative reforms, would achieve the HUD vision/mission objective? What HUD offices should be eliminated and/or realigned to reduce any redundancy that may persist in programmatic functions? 24. Wholly aside from reforms that would require legislation, the next Administration must ensure that key political appointees are able to acquit themselves as change agents to execute administrative reforms. Otherwise, whether because of a sheer lack of skill and expertise or simply a lack of will and philosophical alignment with reforms, staff may frustrate the efforts of committed political appointee staff and leadership to execute substantive administrative reforms. To achieve the policy and regulatory reforms outlined in this chapter, political appointees must be carefully placed in positions that reflect not only technical, market/ industry, and operational expertise, but also a shared will and commitment.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Minimal

Vector: 62%

Pages: 542-544AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on earthquake hazard reduction, seismic research, and early warning systems, which does not intersect with HUD's housing policy objectives such as repealing AFFH, restricting noncitizen eligibility, or modifying mortgage insurance programs."

— 509 — Department of Housing and Urban Development 3. Repeal the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) regulation reinstituted under the Biden Administration30 and any other uses of special-purpose credit authorities to further equity.31 4. Eliminate the new Housing Supply Fund.32 l The Office of the Secretary should recommence proposed regulation put forward under the Trump Administration that would prohibit noncitizens, including all mixed-status families, from living in all federally assisted housing.33 HUD’s statutory obligations include providing housing for American citizens who are in need. HUD reforms must also ensure alignment with reforms implemented by other federal agencies where immigration status impacts public programs, certainly to include any reforms in the Public Charge regulatory framework administered by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Local welfare organizations, not the federal government, should step up to provide welfare for the housing of noncitizens. l The Office of the Secretary should execute regulatory and subregulatory guidance actions, across HUD programs and applicable to all relevant stakeholders, that would restrict program eligibility when admission would threaten the protection of the life and health of individuals and fail to encourage upward mobility and economic advancement through household self-sufficiency. Where admissible in regulatory action, HUD should implement reforms reducing the implicit anti-marriage bias in housing assistance programs,34 strengthen work and work-readiness requirements,35 implement maximum term limits for residents in PBRA and TBRA programs,36 and end Housing First37 policies so that the department prioritizes mental health and substance abuse issues before jumping to permanent interventions in homelessness.38 Notwithstanding administrative reforms, Congress should enact legislation that protects life and eliminates provisions in federal housing and welfare benefits policies that discourage work, marriage, and meaningful paths to upward economic mobility. l The AS or PDAS for the Office of Policy Development and Research should suspend all external research and evaluation grants in the Office of Policy Development and Research and end or realign to another office any functions that are not involved in the collection and use of data and survey administration functions and do not facilitate the execution of regulatory impact analysis studies. — 510 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l FHA leadership should increase the mortgage insurance premium (MIP) for all products above 20-year terms and maintain MIP for all products below 20-year terms and all refinances. FHA should encourage wealth-building homeownership opportunities, which can be accomplished best through shorter-duration mortgages.39 Ideally, Congress would contemplate a fundamental revision of FHA’s statutory restriction of single-family housing mortgage insurance to first-time homebuyers.40 This would include (with support from HUD leadership): 1. Moving the Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECM) program once again to its own special risk insurance fund. 2. Revising loan limit determinations. 3. Providing statutory flexibility for shorter-term products that amortize principal earlier and faster. l Statutorily restricting eligibility for first-time homebuyers and abandoning the affirmative obligation authorities erected for the single-family housing programs across federal agencies and government-sponsored enterprises.41 l The HUD Secretary should move the HUD Real Estate Assessment Center (REAC) from PIH to the Office of Housing, which already implements property standards in its multifamily housing lending programs through the multifamily accelerated processing (MAP) lending guidelines. Giving HUD the authority to streamline the enforcement of compliance with housing standards across the federal government and flexibility for physical inspections through private accreditation should also be considered. l HUD should maintain its requested budget authority for modernization initiatives that are applicable to the Office of the Chief Information Officer and program offices across the department. LONGER-TERM POLICY REFORM CONSIDERATIONS42 Congress has charged HUD principally with mandates for construction of the nation’s affordable housing stock in addition to setting and enforcing standards for decent housing and fair housing enforcement. Regardless of intent, HUD’s efforts have yielded mixed results at best. Even today, more than a half-century after Congress put enforcement of so-called fair housing in the hands of the HUD bureaucracy, implementation of this policy is muddled by the repeated applica- tion of affirmative race-based policies. Also, the production mandate for HUD’s

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Minimal

Vector: 61%

Pages: 548-550AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on earthquake hazard reduction, seismic research, and early warning systems, while the Project 2025 policy section addresses HUD reforms, housing market integrity, DEI/CRT/ESG critiques, homelessness policy, and housing supply—there is no thematic or policy overlap between the two."

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

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Minimal

Vector: 60%

Pages: 548-550AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on earthquake hazard reduction and seismic safety, while the Project 2025 policy addresses homelessness and HUD's Housing First approach. There is no thematic or policy overlap between the two."

— 516 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 37. HUD should implement administrative changes in regulation and guidance and seek statutory authority to end all Housing First directives of Continuum of Care (CoC) grantees and contract homelessness providers in addition to establishing restrictions on local Housing First policies where HUD grant funds are used. 38. The U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) was established in the 1990s, and numerous Administrations have devoted enormous resources to the Housing First model, experimenting with various ways to provide federally financed rapid rehousing and permanent housing opportunities. Housing First is a far-left idea premised on the belief that homelessness is primarily circumstantial rather than behavioral. The Housing First answer to homelessness is to give someone a house instead of attempting to understand the underlying causes of homelessness. Federal intervention centered on Housing First has failed to acknowledge that resolving the issue of homelessness is often a matter of resolving mental health and substance abuse challenges. Instead of the permanent supportive housing proffered by Housing First, a conservative Administration should shift to transitional housing with a focus on addressing the underlying issues that cause homelessness in the first place. 39. The Senate Low-Income First-Time Homebuyers (LIFT) Act would address this policy goal. See S. 2797, Low-Income First-Time Homebuyers Act of 2021 (LIFT Homebuyers Act of 2021), 117th Congress, introduced September 22, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/s2797/BILLS-117s2797is.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 40. FHA did not facilitate the widespread use of 30-year mortgages until the 1950s when, interacting with Federal Reserve policies, federal agencies began broader adoption of the mortgages, which, despite lowering the monthly repayment terms, result in slow equity accumulation and wealth-building opportunities. 41. The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 fundamentally revised the scope of federal regulation in the nation’s housing finance system, placing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under the purview of a newly established Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and establishing a Housing Trust Fund (HTF) that is administered in the HUD Office of Community Planning and Development. See H.R. 3221, Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, Public Law No. 110-289, 110th Congress, July 30, 2008, https://www.congress. gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 42. Guiding questions: What reforms should be proposed that could be accomplished within five years? What reforms can be done administratively, and what reforms would need legislative authorization? Are there functions that HUD administers that could be achieved more effectively at another department or agency? What big-picture reforms should be proposed that might take more than five years that would reorganize HUD and its programs to meet the objectives in the vision or mission? What would occur in the absence of these public finance subsidies? How much crowd-out do these subsidies create in the market? Would America be a seriously underhoused nation without these subsidies? Who are the policies intended to benefit? What organizational changes must be made? 43. The Faircloth Amendment (Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998) amended the Housing Act of 1937 to maintain public housing units at 1999 levels, preventing housing authorities from maintaining more public housing than they did then. H.R. 4194, Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999, Public Law No. 105-276, 105th Congress, October 21, 1998, Title V, https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ276/PLAW-105publ276.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). In recent years, the statutory restriction on new construction of public housing units has been circumvented through some narrow uses of preservation programs such as the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) program, initially authorized in 2012 and reauthorized several times since under higher program unit conversion caps. Congress also provided paths for renewal and continuation of a portion of existing public housing; project/site-based housing stock (refinancing with long-term HAP contract commitments); and Section 8 units through the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (MAHRA). H.R. 2158, Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998, Public Law No. 105-65, 105th Congress, October 27, 1997, Title V, https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ65/PLAW-105publ65.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 44. As the evolution of HUD rental assistance transitions away from the public housing model toward housing choice vouchers, there should be adequate landlord participation to ensure that the supply of housing units for rent in these programs meets the demand for rent among eligible tenants. This issue has been addressed in various ways, including by a task force instituted at the department during the Trump Administration, but could likely remain a challenge in the administration of the program. — 517 — 16 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR William Perry Pendley The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) oversees, manages, and protects the nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and other information about those resources; and honors the nation’s trust responsibilities or special commitments to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated island communities. AGENCY OVERVIEW DOI’s purview encompasses more than 500 million acres of federal lands, including national parks and national wildlife refuges; 700 million acres of sub- surface minerals; 1.7 billion acres of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS); 23 percent of the nation’s energy; water in 17 western states; and trust responsibilities for 566 Indian tribes and Alaska Natives. DOI’s 2024 budget request totals $18.9 billion, an increase of $2 billion, or 12 percent, more than the 2023 enacted level. The budget also provides an estimated $12.6 billion in permanent funding in 2024. In 2024, DOI will generate receipts of $19.6 billion. A “Home Department” had been considered in 1789 and urged by Presidents over the decades until DOI’s creation in 1849. The variety of its early responsibil- ities—the Indian Bureau, the General Land Office, the Bureau of Pensions, and the Patent Office, among others—earned it various nicknames, including “Great Miscellany,” “hydra-headed monster,” and “Mother of Departments.”1 Its mission became more focused on natural resources with the rise of the conservation move- ment in the early 20th century; however, it kept its historic (since the days of the Founding Fathers) role as overseer of vast working landscapes involving grazing,

15

Minimal

Vector: 60%

Pages: 539-541AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on earthquake hazard reduction and seismic safety, while the Project 2025 policy excerpt details HUD's organizational structure and reform proposals, with no thematic or policy overlap between the two."

— 506 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Program (MMIF) and various other mortgage insurance, direct loan, and loan guarantee programs for single-family housing, multifamily housing, hospitals, and health care facilities that meet certain conditions.17 l Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA), headed by a Sen- ate-confirmed GNMA President or Executive Vice President. GNMA oversees more than $2 billion in federal guarantees to mortgage-backed securities structured from mortgages that are pooled from various federal programs, including mortgages backed by programs outside of HUD, principally the sin- gle-family mortgage guarantee programs administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Rural Housing Service at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). FHA-insured single-family housing mortgages comprise the largest share of GNMA-guaranteed mortgage-backed securities. l Office of Departmental Equal Employment Opportunity, headed by a Director. l Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO), headed by a Senate-confirmed AS or PDAS. The Assistant Secretary for FHEO is the designated HUD official responsible for enforcing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,18 Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,19 and Section 109 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. After informal efforts to resolve noncompliance, the AS for FHEO may make a formal finding of noncompliance and initiate enforcement action before an administrative tribunal or a referral to the Department of Justice. l Office of General Counsel (OGC), headed by the General Counsel or Principal Deputy General Counsel. OGC handles department-wide legal and compliance oversight advice with supervision responsibilities for the Deputy General Counsel for Housing Programs, Deputy General Counsel for Operations, and Deputy General Counsel for Enforcement and Fair Housing as well as the Departmental Enforcement Center.20 l Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control (OHHLHC), headed by a Director. OHHLHC was established in the early 1990s to eliminate lead-based paint hazards in America’s privately owned and low-income housing, address healthy housing initiatives, and enforce lead-based paint regulations authorized under the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 (Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992).21 These functions overlap with similar functions of the Environmental Protection Agency (also authorized to enforce lead-based — 507 — Department of Housing and Urban Development paint regulations under Title X) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Healthy Homes Initiative, Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program, and National Asthma Control Program. l Office of Policy Development and Research (PDR), headed by a Senate- confirmed AS or PDAS. PDR was established in the early 1970s and today administers research activities, including external contract research grants, and provides analytical and policy advice to senior HUD staff. PDR also provides publicly available statistics through the American Housing Survey (AHS), which is sponsored by HUD and conducted by the Census Bureau; the State of the Cities Data Systems; data on the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC); and annual Fair Market Rents and Income Limits data, among other statistical publications and datasets on the characteristics of families assisted under HUD programs. l Office of Inspector General (OIG), headed by an Inspector General. The OIG is independent of HUD and one of 12 Inspectors General across the federal government authorized under the Inspector General Act of 1978.22 Operating under its own budget authority and strategic plan, the HUD OIG conducts internal and external audits and investigations of HUD programs and operations. While independent of HUD and holding no enforcement powers over HUD programs, HUD OIG works closely with the Office of General Counsel, the Departmental Enforcement Center, and HUD program offices. The Inspector General serves as an adviser to and non- voting member of the FHA Mortgagee Review Board. l Office of Field Policy and Management (FPM), headed by an Assistant Deputy Secretary for FPM. FPM supports the Secretary through regional and field office communication and external engagement with various community stakeholders to ensure the successful implementation of Secretarial initiatives and special projects. HUD REFORM PILLARS Ideally, Congress would redelegate authorities that have been diverted to HUD’s administrative bureaucracy and safeguard taxpayers against the mission creep that inevitably occurs when Congress delegates power to an empowered and unelected bureaucracy that is insulated by civil service protections. If implemented, the reforms proposed in this chapter can help a new conservative Administration to use its Article II powers to rectify bureaucratic overreach, reverse the expansion of programs beyond their statutory authority, and end progressive policies that have been put in place at the department.

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. Valadao, David G.

Making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027, and for other purposes.

119/hr/9010

To amend Public Law 99–338 with respect to Kaweah Project permits.

119/hr/1044

Romance Scam Prevention Act

119/hr/2481

Back to All Bills