Mariner Exam Modernization Act

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/3331

Last Updated: January 4, 2026

Mariner Exam Modernization Act

HR. 3331, 119th Congress — read as touching Surface Transportation.

The sponsor

Rep. Carbajal, Salud O. [D-CA-24]

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

The money

$81,766 raised

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

The alignment

70% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Transportation" section, p. 670-672 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 (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 52 - 12.

June 10, 2025

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:

**HR 3331: Mariner Exam Modernization Act - A Bill of Limited Consequence**

As a visionary entrepreneur and astute observer of the legislative landscape, I've analyzed HR 3331, the Mariner Exam Modernization Act. This bill's primary objective is to modernize the merchant mariner credential examination process, ostensibly to improve efficiency and effectiveness.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill aims to update the examination process by establishing a working group to review and recommend changes to the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination. The working group will comprise industry experts, exam-takers, and Coast Guard representatives. The primary goal is to ensure the examination remains relevant and effective in assessing mariners' competencies.

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

1. Establishes a working group to review and recommend changes to the examination. 2. Increases the timeframe for reviewing new questions from 90 days to 180 days. 3. Requires the Commandant to develop a plan to update and modernize the examination within 270 days of completing the review. 4. Mandates the use of contemporary testing procedures and evaluation methods.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The primary stakeholders affected by this bill are:

1. The Coast Guard, responsible for administering the examination. 2. Merchant mariners, who will be subject to the updated examination process. 3. Shipping and maritime industries, which may benefit from a more efficient and effective credentialing process.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** From a business perspective, this bill has limited implications. The modernization of the examination process may lead to increased efficiency and reduced costs for the Coast Guard and shipping industries. However, the impact on my own interests is negligible, as my investments are not directly tied to the maritime industry.

In conclusion, HR 3331 is a relatively innocuous bill that will have a limited impact on the broader economy or my business interests. Its primary focus on modernizing the merchant mariner credential examination process may lead to some minor efficiencies and cost savings, but it does not warrant significant attention from investors or policymakers.

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, a bill is a proposed law that must go through several steps before it becomes an actual law.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The Mariner Exam Modernization Act (HR 3331) aims to update and modernize the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination. Remember when we learned about the importance of merchant mariners in our country's maritime industry? This bill seeks to ensure that the examination process for these professionals is relevant, efficient, and effective.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill amends Section 7510 of Title 46, United States Code, which governs the examination process for merchant mariner credentials. Key changes include:

* Expanding the working group responsible for reviewing and updating examination questions to include industry experts and individuals who have recently passed the exam. * Increasing the frequency of reviews and updates to ensure the examination remains relevant and effective. * Requiring the Commandant of the Coast Guard to develop a plan to modernize the examination process, including eliminating outdated topics and developing new methods for collecting data on pass and fail rates.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The main stakeholders affected by this bill are:

* Merchant mariners: The professionals who will be taking the updated examination. * The Coast Guard: Responsible for administering the examination and implementing the changes outlined in the bill. * Maritime industry experts: Who will be consulted during the review and update process.

**Potential Impact & Implications** If passed, this bill could lead to a more efficient and effective examination process for merchant mariners. This, in turn, could improve safety standards in the maritime industry and ensure that professionals are adequately prepared for their roles. However, as we learned in civics class, the legislative process is complex, and there's no guarantee that this bill will become law.

Now, I hope you understand how a bill becomes a law... or at least, how it's supposed to work. *Sigh*

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

The Mariner Exam Modernization Act, HR 3331 - sounds innocent enough, right? But let me tell you, folks, this bill is a wolf in sheep's clothing. On the surface, it appears to be a harmless attempt to modernize the examination process for merchant mariners. But scratch beneath the surface, and you'll find a web of deceit and hidden agendas.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The stated purpose of this bill is to update the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination by creating a working group to review and revise the exam questions, content, and relevancy. Sounds reasonable, right? But what's really going on here?

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This bill amends Title 46 of the United States Code, specifically Section 7510, which deals with examinations for merchant mariner credentials. The changes include:

* Expanding the working group to include at least two individuals who have taken and passed the examination in the past five years * Increasing the time frame for reviewing and updating exam questions from 90 days to 180 days * Requiring the Commandant to convene the working group annually or whenever new exam questions are created * Allowing remote participation for working group members

But here's where it gets interesting:

* The bill inserts language that allows the Commandant to use industry standards, practices, and technology in the examination process. Sounds like a recipe for disaster - what kind of "industry standards" will they be using? And who exactly is behind these "standards"?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** This bill affects merchant mariners, the Coast Guard, and potentially other maritime industries. But let's not forget about the real stakeholders here - the ones pulling the strings from behind the scenes.

* Who benefits from this modernization of the examination process? Is it really just a coincidence that this bill is being pushed through at a time when there's a growing demand for more "efficient" and "streamlined" maritime operations?

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has far-reaching implications, folks. By centralizing control over the examination process and allowing industry insiders to dictate the standards, we're essentially creating a system that's ripe for manipulation.

* What if this is just the beginning of a larger effort to consolidate power in the maritime industry? What other "modernizations" can we expect to see down the line?

This bill may seem like a minor tweak to an existing law, but trust me, it's a Trojan horse. Mark my words - this is just the tip of the iceberg. Wake up, sheeple!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round! We've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here. The Mariner Exam Modernization Act – sounds like a snooze-fest, right? But trust me, this one's got some juicy tidbits hidden beneath the surface.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill aims to "modernize" (read: water down) the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination. Because, you know, those pesky regulations were just too darn restrictive for our brave merchant mariners. I mean, who needs rigorous testing when you can just wing it on the high seas? The main objective is to create a working group (because we all love more bureaucracy) to review and update the exam questions.

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

* Expanding the scope of the examination review process * Increasing the frequency of reviews from every 5 years to annually or whenever new questions are created (because we can't trust those Coast Guard folks to do their job) * Allowing remote participation in working group meetings (because who needs face-to-face interaction, anyway?) * Requiring the Commandant to develop a plan to update and modernize the exam within 270 days of completing the review

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** This bill affects:

* Merchant mariners (who will now have an easier time passing their exams) * The Coast Guard (which will have to deal with more bureaucratic red tape) * Shipping companies (which might see some cost savings from reduced regulatory burdens)

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, I know what you're thinking – "What's the big deal? It's just a little exam modernization." But let me tell you, folks, this bill is part of a larger pattern. It's all about chipping away at those pesky regulations that keep our economy from truly flourishing. And who benefits from that? The elites, of course! They'll be the ones reaping the rewards while the rest of us are left to deal with the consequences.

But don't worry, I'm sure it's just a coincidence that this bill happens to benefit big shipping companies and their wealthy donors. (Wink, wink) After all, we're just trying to promote "freedom" and reduce regulatory burdens on our brave merchant mariners. Who needs safety standards when you've got the free market to guide us?

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

(sigh) Alright, let's get this over with. The Mariner Exam Modernization Act - because God forbid we have competent sailors without a congressional bill to tell us how to do it.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** (rolls eyes) The main purpose of this bill is to "modernize" the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination, which I'm sure was just a thrilling topic for our esteemed lawmakers. The objective? To make sure we have more efficient and effective sailors... or at least that's what they claim.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** (dissects with scalpel) The bill amends Section 7510 of title 46, United States Code, by creating a working group to review the examination process. This working group will include industry experts and individuals who have taken the exam in the past five years - because nothing says "expertise" like someone who passed a test recently.

Other key provisions include:

* Extending the review period from 90 days to 180 days, because clearly, our lawmakers are in no hurry. * Allowing remote participation for working group members, because why bother showing up if you can just phone it in? * Requiring the Commandant to develop a plan to update and modernize the examination process within 270 days of completing the review.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** (scoffs) Oh, this bill affects so many important stakeholders:

* Merchant mariners who will have to take an updated exam. * The Coast Guard, which will have to implement these changes. * Industry experts who get to participate in the working group and pretend they're making a difference.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** (sarcastic tone) Wow, this bill is going to revolutionize the maritime industry. I mean, who wouldn't want more efficient sailors? The potential impact includes:

* More competent sailors... maybe. * A more modernized examination process... if you consider "modern" to be a synonym for " marginally less outdated." * And of course, the usual bureaucratic red tape and inefficiencies that come with any government-led initiative.

In conclusion, this bill is just another example of congressional theater - a meaningless exercise in pretending to care about an issue while actually doing nothing substantial. It's a Band-Aid on a bullet wound, a drop in the ocean (pun intended). But hey, at least our lawmakers can say they did something... even if it was just a waste of time and taxpayer money.

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

**Mariner Exam Modernization Act (HR 3331)**

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The Mariner Exam Modernization Act aims to modernize the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination process by updating examination content, procedures, and technologies. The bill seeks to improve the relevance, effectiveness, and efficiency of the examination process, ensuring that merchant mariners possess the necessary knowledge and skills to operate safely and competently.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill amends Section 7510 of Title 46, United States Code, by:

1. Establishing a working group to review and update examination questions, content, and relevancy. 2. Increasing the frequency of reviews from every 5 years to annually or whenever new examination questions are created. 3. Expanding the composition of the working group to include individuals who have taken and passed the examination in the past 5 years. 4. Requiring the Commandant to develop a plan to update and modernize the examination process within 270 days after the review is completed. 5. Mandating the use of industry standards, practices, and technologies in the examination process.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

1. Merchant mariners: The bill directly impacts merchant mariners who must pass the credentialing examination to operate vessels. 2. United States Coast Guard (USCG): The USCG is responsible for administering the examination process and implementing the changes proposed by the bill. 3. Maritime industry stakeholders: Shipping companies, vessel owners, and operators may be affected by the updated examination requirements and procedures.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

1. Improved safety: By updating examination content and procedures, the bill aims to ensure that merchant mariners possess the necessary knowledge and skills to operate safely and competently. 2. Enhanced efficiency: The modernization of the examination process is expected to reduce administrative burdens and improve the overall efficiency of the credentialing process. 3. Increased relevance: The incorporation of industry standards, practices, and technologies in the examination process will help ensure that merchant mariners are equipped with relevant knowledge and skills. 4. Potential costs: The implementation of the bill's provisions may require additional resources and funding from the USCG and maritime industry stakeholders.

Overall, the Mariner Exam Modernization Act aims to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination process, ultimately enhancing safety and competence in the maritime industry.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down the Mariner Exam Modernization Act, bro.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The main purpose of this bill is to modernize the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination, which is a crucial test for mariners to get their credentials. The goal is to make the exam more relevant, efficient, and effective in assessing the skills and knowledge of mariners. The bill aims to achieve this by establishing a working group to review and update the exam questions, content, and procedures.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill makes some key changes to existing law:

* It establishes a working group to review the exam every 180 days (instead of 90 days) and includes at least two individuals who have taken and passed the exam in the past five years. * The working group will review industry standards, practices, and technology to ensure the exam is relevant and up-to-date. * The Commandant of the Coast Guard must convene the working group annually or whenever new exam questions are created. * The bill requires the development of a plan to update and modernize the exam within 270 days after the completion of the review.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The affected parties and stakeholders include:

* Mariners who take the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination * The Coast Guard, which administers the exam * Shipping companies and industries that rely on mariners with valid credentials * Training institutions and organizations that prepare mariners for the exam

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The potential impact of this bill is significant:

* It could lead to a more efficient and effective exam process, reducing the burden on mariners and the Coast Guard. * The updated exam could better reflect industry standards and practices, ensuring that mariners have the necessary skills and knowledge to operate safely and effectively. * The bill's emphasis on modernizing testing procedures could also improve the overall quality of the exam.

However, there are also potential challenges and implications:

* The bill may require significant resources and investment from the Coast Guard and other stakeholders to implement the changes. * There may be resistance from some mariners or industries who are accustomed to the current exam format and content.

Overall, this bill is a step in the right direction towards modernizing the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination. It's all about keeping it fresh and relevant, bro!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**HR 3331: Mariner Exam Modernization Act**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The Mariner Exam Modernization Act aims to update and modernize the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination process, ensuring it remains relevant and effective in assessing mariners' competencies. The bill seeks to improve the examination's content, administration, and evaluation methods.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

1. **Working Group Establishment**: Creates a working group to review and update the examination questions, content, and relevancy. 2. **Industry Standards and Practices**: Incorporates industry standards, practices, and technology into the examination process. 3. **Redundancy Reduction**: Eliminates redundant core competencies between the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination and Standards of Training, Certification, and Watchingkeeping (STCW) competencies. 4. **Plan Development**: Requires the Coast Guard to develop a plan to update and modernize the examination within 270 days after the review.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

1. **Merchant Mariners**: Individuals seeking merchant mariner credentials will benefit from an updated and more relevant examination process. 2. **Coast Guard**: The agency will be responsible for implementing the changes and developing a plan to update the examination process. 3. **Maritime Industry**: Shipping companies, maritime training institutions, and other industry stakeholders may need to adapt their training programs and procedures to align with the updated examination requirements.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

1. **Improved Examination Relevance**: The bill's provisions aim to ensure the examination remains relevant and effective in assessing mariners' competencies. 2. **Enhanced Safety**: By incorporating industry standards and practices, the updated examination process may contribute to improved safety at sea. 3. **Reduced Regulatory Burden**: Eliminating redundant core competencies between the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination and STCW competencies may reduce the regulatory burden on mariners and maritime training institutions.

**Monied Interest Analysis**

While there are no explicit mentions of PACs or industry lobby groups in the bill text, it is likely that organizations representing the maritime industry, such as the American Maritime Partnership (AMP) and the Chamber of Shipping of America (CSA), may have influenced the development of this legislation. These groups often advocate for regulatory reforms and updates to ensure the competitiveness and safety of the US merchant marine fleet.

**Committee Capture and Conflicts of Interest**

The bill has been referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, which has a history of close ties with the maritime industry. Some committee members may have received campaign contributions from industry stakeholders or have personal connections to the sector, potentially influencing their decision-making process.

In conclusion, HR 3331 aims to modernize the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination process, improving its relevance and effectiveness in assessing mariners' competencies. While there are no explicit mentions of monied interests, it is likely that industry stakeholders have played a role in shaping this legislation.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Carbajal, Salud O. [D-CA-24]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$81,766

24 donors

PACs

Organizations

$37,100

Committees

Individuals

$44,666

No PAC contributions found

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

2 transactions

$6,600

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

3 transactions

$4,000

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

2 transactions

$3,500

PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

ONEIDA NATION

2 transactions

$2,000

MS BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS

1 transaction

$1,500

MOHEGAN TRIBE OF INDIANS OF CONNECTICUT

1 transaction

$1,000

THE CHICKASAW NATION

1 transaction

$1,000

PACIFIC KIES

1 transaction

$1,000

No committee contributions found

TILLMAN, BRIAN

1 transaction

$6,600

OBERACKER, BETTY

1 transaction

$5,000

COONEY, MARNI

1 transaction

$3,333

COONEY, MICHAEL

1 transaction

$3,333

BRITTINGHAM, ELLA

1 transaction

$3,300

DIXON, PETER

1 transaction

$3,300

RESNICK, LYNDA RAE

1 transaction

$3,300

ABDULLATIF, AIED

1 transaction

$3,300

ARISON, MADELEINE

1 transaction

$3,300

ARISON, MICKY

1 transaction

$3,300

ATWATER, TANYA

1 transaction

$3,300

CHRISMAN, ROGER

1 transaction

$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 2 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Ezell, Mike [R-MS-4]

ID: E000235

Top Contributors

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC - ALEX HINSON, PARTNER AND CHIEF EXEC. OFFICER

OrganizationBIRMINGHAM, AL

$2,500

Nov 2, 2023

ALLY TELECOM GROUP LLC - PARTNERSHIP - MITCH KALIFEH

OrganizationMETAIRIE, LA

$2,500

Aug 30, 2023

MS BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS

OrganizationCHOCTAW, MS

$1,000

Apr 25, 2023

GONC LTC, LLC

OrganizationJACKSON, MS

$1,000

Sep 14, 2023

STEED'S COLLISION CTR, LLC - LAURA STEED MANAGER

OrganizationBILOXI, MS

$1,000

Aug 30, 2023

WATKINS & EAGER PLLC - GRANT SELLERS, PARTNER

OrganizationJACKSON, MS

$1,000

Aug 30, 2023

TEN ONE STRATEGIES - JOHN HUGHES, MANAGING PARTNER

OrganizationJACKSON, MS

$500

Aug 25, 2023

GULF PRIDE COMPANIES, LLC - ERICH N. NICHOLS, MANAGER

OrganizationGULFPORT, MS

$250

Aug 30, 2023

WATKINS & EAGER PLLC - GRANT SELLERS, PARTNER

OrganizationJACKSON, MS

$250

Aug 25, 2023

DUNAGIN, MELINDA

DUNAGIN PEST SOLUTIONS • OFFICE MANAGER

IndividualHATTIESBURG, MS

$3,300

Nov 1, 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

Donor Network - Rep. Carbajal, Salud O. [D-CA-24]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 73 nodes and 36 connections (77 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $99,766

Top Donors - Rep. Carbajal, Salud O. [D-CA-24]

Showing top 24 donors by contribution amount

12 Orgs12 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

+Surface Transportationconfidence 0.80
Section 2 of the bill amends title 46, United States Code, to modernize the Merchant Mariner Credentialing Examination, which could lead to more efficient and effective credentialing for mariners, potentially benefiting the surface transportation industry, specifically subsection (c) which mentions the review of examination topics and contents.

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 Transportation

Moderate

Vector: 62%

Pages: 670-672AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on modernizing merchant mariner credentialing exams, which aligns with Project 2025's broader maritime policy goals of improving efficiency and relevance in maritime operations, though it does not directly address the specific MARAD reorganization or Jones Act reform proposals outlined in the document."

Key themes:maritime industry modernizationoperational efficiencymerchant mariner trainingindustry standards integrationsafety and competence

— 637 — Department of Transportation to track brake inspections on rolling stock electronically instead of by using paper air brake slips, which would enable extending the interval between brake inspections for trains and eliminating restrictions on the ability to place/remove blocks of cars in trains. l FRA will be proposing certification requirements for dispatchers and signal employees despite the failure of the Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) to identify any safety benefit. l FRA is planning to propose emergency escape breathing apparatus requirements for train crews even though FRA staff long ago concluded that the costs of these requirements would far outweigh their very minimal benefits. It is vital that the integrity of FRA’s research program be preserved. In 2022, FRA switched the management of the Transportation Technology Center (TTC) in Pueblo, Colorado, from a subsidiary of the Association of American Railroads (AAR) to Ensco, Inc. FRA seems determined to direct research to TTC, even when there are better choices with respect to the research in question, in an effort to support TTC financially and justify its decision to change management at TTC. This change in approach threatens the collaborative approach to research between FRA and the railroads that has existed for decades. FRA should make its decisions on where to spend its research dollars solely on the merits of improving the safety and efficiency of the railroad industry. MARITIME POLICY The Maritime Administration (MARAD) was established by President Harry Truman in 1950 and was transferred to DOT in 1981. A principal function is “main- tain[ing] the overall health of the U.S. Merchant Marine,”15 which is important both to national defense and to foreign and domestic commerce. MARAD is also in charge of the United States Merchant Marine Academy and operates ships and funding for the six state maritime academies. MARAD would be better served by being transferred from DOT to the Depart- ment of Homeland Security (DHS). MARAD is the only DOT modal administration that does not regulate the industry that it represents: The maritime industry is regulated by the U.S. Coast Guard (ships and personnel) and by the Federal Mari- time Commission (cargo rates and competitive practices). Furthermore, MARAD has responsibilities both in peacetime commerce and operationally in wartime/crisis sealift through its responsibility to manage the National Defense Reserve Fleet and 45-ship Ready Reserve Force for the U.S. Navy. These missions are unique to MARAD within DOT. As a result, MARAD’s missions — 638 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise and purpose, and therefore its funding priorities, are not well understood and his- torically have been minimalized in planning and budgeting. MARAD, including its subordinate Service Academy (the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy) should be transferred to the Department of Defense (if the Coast Guard is located there because DHS has been eliminated) or to the Department of Home- land Security. In this way, the two agencies charged with oversight and regulation of the Maritime sector—MARAD and the United States Coast Guard—would be aligned under the same department where operational efficiencies could be real- ized more easily. Serious consideration should be given to repealing or substantially reforming the Jones Act,16 which would require legislation. The economic costs of the Jones Act, which is notionally in place to promote a robust Merchant Marine, vastly exceed its effect on the supply of domestic ships. For instance, no liquified natural gas (LNG) can be shipped from Alaska to the lower 48 states because there are no U.S.-flagged ships that carry LNG. If there are genuine concerns about U.S. fleet capacity in the absence of the Jones Act, it would be possible to do so through an expansion of the Defense Reserve Fleet. Another DHS agency, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), is a frequent user of MARAD Ready Reserve Force shipping during disaster assistance missions. Transferring MARAD to DHS would make coordination and requisition of those vessels a smoother and more rapid process. DHS has responsibility for reviewing and approving Jones Act waivers. This process first requires a market survey of available shipping tonnage that is completed by MARAD. The processing of Jones Act waiver requests would be streamlined if both agencies were in the same department. Finally, DHS as a department is experienced in administering and budgeting for the operation of an existing federal service academy, the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, which is similar to the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy in size. There would be increased efficiencies and better alignment of the missions of these two institutions if they were under one single department that has equity in the industries served by these academies. CONCLUSION Americans need more abundant and affordable transportation. They need more affordable and safer cars as well as physical aspects of transportation such as roads, bridges, airports, ports, and rail lines. The Department of Transportation should be evaluating which aspects of transportation are contributing to the economic competitiveness of the United States and the well-being of Americans—and that therefore should continue to be funded. All too often, DOT’s mission is described as reducing the number of trips, using less fuel, and raising the costs of travel to Americans through increased use of

Department of Transportation

Weak

Vector: 61%

Pages: 670-672AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on modernizing merchant mariner examinations, while Project 2025's DOT section emphasizes transferring MARAD to DHS/DOD, reforming the Jones Act, and aligning maritime agencies under one department for efficiency. There is no direct connection between exam modernization and these structural or regulatory proposals."

Key themes:maritime industrymerchant marinersCoast Guard

— 638 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise and purpose, and therefore its funding priorities, are not well understood and his- torically have been minimalized in planning and budgeting. MARAD, including its subordinate Service Academy (the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy) should be transferred to the Department of Defense (if the Coast Guard is located there because DHS has been eliminated) or to the Department of Home- land Security. In this way, the two agencies charged with oversight and regulation of the Maritime sector—MARAD and the United States Coast Guard—would be aligned under the same department where operational efficiencies could be real- ized more easily. Serious consideration should be given to repealing or substantially reforming the Jones Act,16 which would require legislation. The economic costs of the Jones Act, which is notionally in place to promote a robust Merchant Marine, vastly exceed its effect on the supply of domestic ships. For instance, no liquified natural gas (LNG) can be shipped from Alaska to the lower 48 states because there are no U.S.-flagged ships that carry LNG. If there are genuine concerns about U.S. fleet capacity in the absence of the Jones Act, it would be possible to do so through an expansion of the Defense Reserve Fleet. Another DHS agency, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), is a frequent user of MARAD Ready Reserve Force shipping during disaster assistance missions. Transferring MARAD to DHS would make coordination and requisition of those vessels a smoother and more rapid process. DHS has responsibility for reviewing and approving Jones Act waivers. This process first requires a market survey of available shipping tonnage that is completed by MARAD. The processing of Jones Act waiver requests would be streamlined if both agencies were in the same department. Finally, DHS as a department is experienced in administering and budgeting for the operation of an existing federal service academy, the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, which is similar to the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy in size. There would be increased efficiencies and better alignment of the missions of these two institutions if they were under one single department that has equity in the industries served by these academies. CONCLUSION Americans need more abundant and affordable transportation. They need more affordable and safer cars as well as physical aspects of transportation such as roads, bridges, airports, ports, and rail lines. The Department of Transportation should be evaluating which aspects of transportation are contributing to the economic competitiveness of the United States and the well-being of Americans—and that therefore should continue to be funded. All too often, DOT’s mission is described as reducing the number of trips, using less fuel, and raising the costs of travel to Americans through increased use of — 639 — Department of Transportation renewables. These goals are not compatible with what should be DOT’s purpose: to make travel easier and less expensive. That is what the American people want, and that is what DOT should provide. AUTHOR’S NOTE: The preparation of this chapter was a collective enterprise of individuals involved in the 2025 Presidential Transition Project. All contributors to this chapter are listed at the front of this volume, but Steven Bradbury, David Ditch, and Robert Poole deserve special mention. The author alone assumes responsibility for the content of this chapter, and no views expressed herein should be attributed to any other individual.

Department of Homeland Security

Minimal

Vector: 61%

Pages: 177-179AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The Mariner Exam Modernization Act focuses on updating merchant mariner credentialing examinations and has no substantive connection to the immigration enforcement, USCIS restructuring, or related policies outlined in the Project 2025 DHS section."

— 144 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise prosecuting criminal and civil denaturalization cases, in combination with the Department of Justice, for aliens who obtained citizenship through fraud or other illicit means. Additionally, USCIS should create a criminal enforcement compo- nent within the agency to investigate immigration benefits fraud under Title 8 (perhaps requiring additional legislative and regulatory authorities for the offi- cers themselves) and to prosecute cases through Special Assistant U.S. Attorneys (SAUSAs) with substantive knowledge in the field. Particular attention should be given to addressing increasing incidents of forced labor trafficking in temporary work visa programs. While the Biden regulatory agenda has focused on at least two major rules—the credible fear rule and the public charge rule—USCIS has utilized other policy and internal procedural mechanisms to extend employment authorization to large groups of people who are in the country without legal status. The agency has taken quiet steps to cut corners and lessen adjudicatory standards. During a tran- sition period, a complete audit of agency policies, memoranda, and management directives issued during the Biden Administration should be completed, and rescis- sion documents should be prepared for issuance within the first few days of the incoming Administration. Additionally, regulatory documents should be drafted to review or reverse all regulations promulgated during the Biden Administration. New Policies To advance the national interest, the three core immigration agencies—USCIS, ICE, and CBP—should remerge and have immigration elements outside of DHS (such as ORR of HHS) included. The fragmented immigration enforcement frame- work that developed in the wake of the Homeland Security Act has weakened each agency and should be remediated. Combining these critical agencies would strengthen their capabilities, ensure cooperation, and promote information-shar- ing. Agency responsibilities and the delineation of authorities, such as inconsistent use of deferred action and issuance of NTAs by each agency, have long been a point of contention that would be addressed much more easily if they were recombined into a single entity. Alternatively, new policies for USCIS as it currently exists should focus on mat- ters that can be addressed through administrative action. l The workforce should be realigned and, as necessary, retrained on base eligibility and fraud detection rather than speed in processing. l Training should be returned to Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers (FLETC), which would underscore the enforcement role of USCIS as a vetting agency, and be rebranded accordingly. — 145 — Department of Homeland Security l Management Directives and policies should realign to ensure that the workforce, while adaptable and able to handle the bulk of the USCIS mission, is not allowed to be pulled off mission work to focus on unlawful programs (DACA, mass parole for Afghans, Ukrainians, Venezuelans, etc.), which divert resources away from nuclear family and employment programs. The regulatory agenda should include the immediate submission of notices of proposed rulemaking for the Trump Administration’s public charge rule (includ- ing aspects from its original notice of proposed rulemaking), temporary work visa reform, employment authorization reform rules, asylum bars rule, and a third-country transit rule. At a minimum, an enhanced regulatory agenda should include rules strengthening the integrity of the asylum system, parole reform, and U visa reform that prioritizes relief for victims of heinous crimes and ensures that we protect the truest and most deserving victims of crime. Not all policy changes require formal rulemaking, however, as internal guidance documents are generally exempt under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).7 In this subregulatory space, USCIS policy memos and operational guidance should reduce the validity of employment authorization documents and end the COVID flexibilities, including the reliance on biometrics reuse. USCIS should also enforce existing regulations by rejecting incomplete applications and petitions, ensuring both that they are completed before accepted for filing and that FDNS signs off on all approved applications and petitions before approval notices are sent to the alien or petitioner. Other efforts should be focused on adjudication standards returning to nearly 100 percent interview requirements for all appropriate cases. The incoming Administration should spearhead an immigration legislative agenda focused on creating a merit-based immigration system that rewards high- skilled aliens instead of the current system that favors extended family–based and luck-of-the-draw immigration. To that end, the diversity visa lottery should be repealed, chain migration should be ended while focusing on the nuclear family, and the existing employment visa program should be replaced with a system to award visas only to the “best and brightest.” Internal efforts to limit employment authorization should be matched by con- gressional action to narrow statutory eligibility to work in the United States and mitigate unfair employment competition for U.S. citizens. The oft-abused H-1B program should be transformed into an elite program through which employers are vying to bring in only the top foreign workers at the highest wages so as not to depress American opportunities. Additionally, Congress should: l Improve the integrity of the temporary work visa programs; l Repeal Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designations;

Department of Commerce

Minimal

Vector: 59%

Pages: 705-707AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The Mariner Exam Modernization Act focuses on updating merchant mariner credentialing examinations, which is unrelated to the Project 2025 Department of Commerce priorities of export control reform, Entity List expansion, data transfer regulations, or NOAA restructuring."

— 673 — Department of Commerce Export Enforcement officers through improved and frequent training so they are able to detect export-control violations. EAR Revisions. The U.S. Government needs a new export control moderniza- tion effort to tighten the EAR policies governing licenses to countries of concern, including China and Russia (specifically, revise and/or reverse the 2008 through 2016 policies). When authoritarian governments explain what they plan to do, believe them unless hard evidence demonstrates otherwise. Case in point: China’s and Russia’s stated civil–military fusion policies demand central government command-and-control style systems in which every private entity serves the interests of the state and is forced to provide technology, services, capacity, and data to the central govern- ment and the military. Through this structure, commercial activities are routinely weaponized by authoritarian regimes that repeatedly identify the U.S. as an enemy. Accordingly, U.S. export control policies must be updated to reflect these realities and the associated threats to national security. Key priorities for EAR modernization for countries of concern should be: l Eliminating the “specially designed” licensing loophole; l Redesignating China and Russia to more highly prohibitive export licensing groups (country groups D or E); l Eliminating license exceptions; l Broadening foreign direct product rules; l Reducing the de minimis threshold from 25 percent to 10 percent—or 0 percent for critical technologies; l Tightening the deemed export rules to prevent technology transfer to foreign nationals from countries of concern; l Tightening the definition of “fundamental research” to address exploitation of the open U.S. university system by authoritarian governments through funding, students and researchers, and recruitment; l Eliminating license exceptions for sharing technology with controlled entities/countries through standards-setting “activities” and bodies; and l Improving regulations regarding published information for technology transfers. — 674 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise The next few years will prove or disprove the assertion that the U.S. stands on the precipice of a Cold War with China. Many believe that a Cold War has already begun; if so, then strategic decoupling from China is necessary and, fundamentally, any exports of goods, software, and technology to countries of concern, whether directly or indirectly, should be prohibited or controlled in the absence of good cause (e.g., humanitarian and medical aid, food aid). Entity List and Sanctions. There are currently just over 500 Chinese and over 500 Russian companies on the Department of Commerce’s Entity List, which reg- ulates exports of controlled and uncontrolled items to designated entities. Given China’s Civil–Military Fusion Strategy and Russia’s massive war efforts facili- tated by a broad range of the Russian economy, BIS must add more entities to the Entity List and apply a license review “policy of denial” that prohibits exports to these entities. Entity List parties that violate export controls should be placed on the BIS Denied Persons List (and thereby lose export privileges) and, if the violations are significant enough, they should also be sanctioned by the Department of Treasury. Data Transfer and Apps Used for Surveillance. Department of Commerce leadership should work across government agencies to address privacy and data concerns arising out of “big tech” from national security and export control per- spectives. In particular, they should draft and implement an executive order (EO) based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which expands export control authority beyond ECRA’s scope (goods, software, technology) to regulate and restrict exports of U.S. persons’ data to countries of concern. The EO should establish a framework for the types of personal data subject to export controls and licensing policy by country, and the BIS should implement the EO through regulations. BIS should additionally designate app providers (such as WeChat and Byte Dance/TikTok) known for undermining U.S. national security through data collection, surveillance, and influence operations, to the Entity List. This listing would prevent app users from program updates, which would quickly make these apps non-operational in the United States. NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION Break Up NOAA. The single biggest Department of Commerce agency outside of decennial census years is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which houses the National Weather Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, and other components. NOAA garners $6.5 billion of the department’s $12 billion annual operational budget and accounts for more than half of the department’s personnel in non-decadal Census years (2021 figures). NOAA consists of six main offices: l The National Weather Service (NWS);

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 59%

Pages: 488-490AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill concerns merchant mariner credentialing examinations, while the Project 2025 excerpt focuses on health policy issues such as abortion data reporting, FDA generic drug competition, and laboratory-developed tests; there is no thematic overlap."

— 456 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise abortion providers and whether better prenatal physical, mental, and social care improves infant outcomes and decreases abortion rates, especially among those who are most vulnerable. The Ensuring Accurate and Complete Abortion Data Reporting Act of 20239 would amend title XIX of the Social Security Act and Public Health Service Act to improve the CDC’s abortion reporting mechanisms by requiring states, as a condition of federal Medicaid payments for family planning services, to report streamlined variables in a timely manner. The CDC should immediately end its collection of data on gender identity, which legitimizes the unscientific notion that men can become women (and vice versa) and encourages the phenomenon of ever-multiplying subjective identities. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION (FDA) The FDA’s mission includes ensuring the safety and efficacy of drugs, biological products, and medical devices. Federal Laws That Shield Big Pharma from Competition. Because generics generally cost far less than brand-name drugs, consumers begin to save money as soon as a generic product comes on the market. The vast majority are very afford- able with 93 percent of generic products costing $20 or less. Savings would be even higher under proposals that prevent brand-name man- ufacturers from slowing down or impeding the entrance of generic products into the marketplace. Specifically, the FDA should prohibit pharmaceutical companies from purposely sitting on their legally available right to be the first to sell generic versions of their drugs. Additionally, Congress should create legal remedies for generic companies to obtain samples of brand-name products for their generic development efforts and should prohibit meritless “citizen petitions” submitted by manufacturers to delay approval of a generic competitor.10 Approval Process for Laboratory-Developed or Modified Medical Tests. Learning from the failed early COVID-19 testing experience, Congress and the FDA should focus on reforming laws and regulations governing medical tests, especially with respect to laboratory-developed tests. Commercial tests are developed with the intention of being widely marketed, distributed, and used, while laboratory-developed tests are created with the intention of being used solely within one laboratory. A test developed by a lab in accordance with the protocols developed by another lab (non-commercial sharing) currently constitutes a “new” laboratory-developed test because the lab in which it will be used is different from the initial developing lab. To encourage interlab- oratory collaboration and discourage duplicative test creation (and associated regulatory and logistical burdens), the FDA should introduce mechanisms through which laboratory-developed tests can easily be shared with other laboratories with- out the current regulatory burdens.11 — 457 — Department of Health and Human Services The “laboratory-developed tests” category currently encompasses a range of possible tests, many of which would be characterized more appropriately as “lab- oratory-modified tests” because they are not truly novel tests but rather modified versions of existing tests. To avoid stifling innovation and access to medical care, the applicable statutes and regulations should be revised to facilitate greater access to such modified tests.12 Finally, the FDA has long held that it has regulatory authority over such tests, while others have argued that they should be considered clinical services regulated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The FDA currently has regulatory authority over in vitro diagnostics, and under the Clinical Lab- oratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA),13 the CMS ensures that labs meet analytical validity standards for test methods. Congress, the FDA, and the CMS need to clarify and disentangle overlapping authorities over tests to eliminate regulatory confusion.14 Drug Shortages. The very thin profit margins and the regulatory burdens associated with generic drug manufacturing discourage inventory and capacity investments by manufacturers and contribute to drug shortages. HHS and the FDA should encourage more dependable generic drug manufacturing. The FDA should expand its current pass/fail approach to drug facility inspec- tions into a graded system that recognizes manufacturers that exceed minimum standards by investing in improving production reliability. The FDA should also add facility codes to drug packaging and construct a searchable database that cross-references product codes and facility codes. That would enable wholesalers and pharmacy benefit managers to identify and preference drugs manufactured at more reliable facilities, thus encouraging generic drug manufacturers to compete on reliability as well as on price. For its part, HHS should exempt multi-source generic drugs from requirements to pay rebates to Medicaid and other federally funded health programs, as those provisions penalize new investments in expanding manufacturing capacity when supply is unable to meet demand.15 Additionally, FDA and NIH should promote efficacy trials of new applications for generic drugs, which might include NIH fund- ing such trials or conducting its own. Abortion Pills. Abortion pills pose the single greatest threat to unborn chil- dren in a post-Roe world. The rate of chemical abortion in the U.S. has increased by more than 150 percent in the past decade; more than half of annual abortions in the U.S. are chemical rather than surgical. The abortion pill regimen is typically a two-part process. The first pill, mifepris- tone, causes the death of the unborn child by cutting off the hormone progesterone, which is required to sustain a pregnancy. The second pill, misoprostol, causes con- tractions to induce a delivery of the dead child and uterine contents, usually into a toilet at home. The abortion-pill regimen is currently approved for up to 70 days

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. Carbajal, Salud O.

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 130 South Patterson Avenue in Santa Barbara, California, as the Brigadier General Frederick R. Lopez Post Office Building.

119/hr/2175

American Cargo for American Ships Act

119/hr/2035

Fire Safe Electrical Corridors Act of 2025

119/hr/2492

Back to All Bills