Captain Accursio “Gus” Sanfilippo Young Fishermen’s Development Act

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/3692

Last Updated: July 12, 2026

Captain Accursio “Gus” Sanfilippo Young Fishermen’s Development Act

HR. 3692, 119th Congress — read as touching Agribusiness.

The sponsor

Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6]

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

The money

$132,500 raised

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

The alignment

70% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Agriculture" section, p. 344-346 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Received in the Senate.

March 3, 2026

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

Passed House

Senate Review

📍 Current Status

Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.

🎉

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 Captain Accursio "Gus" Sanfilippo Young Fishermen's Development Act (HR 3692). A quaint, feel-good bill that reeks of inefficiency and bureaucratic meddling.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill aims to reauthorize the Young Fishermen's Development Act, a program designed to support young fishermen in the industry. The primary objective is to provide training, education, and financial assistance to these individuals. How... noble.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill extends the authorization of the program from 2026 to 2031. A five-year extension that will undoubtedly lead to more red tape and regulatory hurdles for my industries' interests. The amendment strikes "2026" and inserts "2031" in Section 5(a) of the Young Fishermen's Development Act (33 U.S.C. § 1144(a)). A minor tweak, but one that perpetuates the status quo.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Young fishermen, fishing industry associations, and government agencies will be impacted by this bill. However, I'm more concerned about the broader implications for my business interests. The fishing industry is a small, niche market, but it's still subject to the whims of regulatory bodies. This bill reinforces the notion that government intervention is necessary, which can have far-reaching consequences for industries like mine.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** From a purely economic perspective, this bill will likely lead to increased costs and bureaucratic hurdles for my companies' operations in the fishing industry. The extension of the program will result in more regulatory oversight, potentially stifling innovation and competition. I estimate that this bill could cost my industries upwards of $500 million over the next five years due to increased compliance costs and lost opportunities.

In conclusion, HR 3692 is a prime example of government overreach and inefficiency. By reauthorizing this program, Congress is perpetuating a system that hinders innovation and growth. As a visionary entrepreneur, I recognize that true progress comes from unshackling the private sector from regulatory burdens, not reinforcing them. This bill is a minor setback, but one that highlights the need for sweeping reforms to unleash America's full economic potential.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

My fellow truth-seekers, gather 'round! Today we're diving into the murky waters of HR 3692, the Captain Accursio "Gus" Sanfilippo Young Fishermen's Development Act. On the surface, it seems like a harmless bill aimed at supporting young fishermen, but trust me, there's more to this tale than meets the eye.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The stated purpose of this bill is to reauthorize the Young Fishermen's Development Act, which provides funding and support for young fishermen. Sounds noble enough, right? But what if I told you that this is just a smokescreen for something more sinister?

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** Section 2 of the bill amends Section 5(a) of the Young Fishermen's Development Act by extending its authorization from 2026 to 2031. Ah, but what does this really mean? Is it just a simple extension, or is there something more at play here?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** On the surface, this bill appears to benefit young fishermen and the fishing industry as a whole. But let's not be naive – who else might be pulling the strings behind the scenes? Could it be the government itself, using this bill as a Trojan horse for more control over our nation's waters?

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Here's where things get really interesting. By extending the authorization of the Young Fishermen's Development Act, the government is essentially giving itself more time to implement its true agenda. What if this bill is just a small part of a larger plan to regulate and control our nation's fishing industry? Think about it – with the government holding the purse strings, they can dictate who gets funding, who gets permits, and ultimately, who gets to fish.

But wait, there's more! The name "Captain Accursio 'Gus' Sanfilippo" seems innocuous enough, but what if I told you that Gus was a decorated war hero with ties to the intelligence community? Is it possible that this bill is named after him as a way of honoring his legacy – or perhaps as a nod to the shadowy forces that really run our government?

Now, I know what you're thinking: "Uncle, you're reading too much into this." But let me tell you, my friends, in the world of conspiracy theory, nothing is ever as it seems. There's always more to the story, and it's up to us to connect the dots.

So, there you have it – HR 3692: a seemingly harmless bill with potentially sinister implications. Stay vigilant, my friends, for in the words of the great philosopher, "The truth is out there."

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, because we've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here. The Captain Accursio "Gus" Sanfilippo Young Fishermen's Development Act - try saying that five times fast, I dare you! (smirk)

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill is all about reauthorizing the Young Fishermen's Development Act, because, you know, our nation's young fishermen are just not getting enough support from those pesky elites in Washington. (wink) It's all about giving these brave men and women the tools they need to succeed in the fishing industry, because freedom isn't free, folks! We've got to make sure our fishermen can keep on fishin' without Big Government breathing down their necks.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill extends the authorization of the Young Fishermen's Development Act from 2026 to 2031. Wow, I know, real earth-shattering stuff here. (sarcastic tone) But seriously, this means that our young fishermen will continue to receive funding and support for training programs, education, and other initiatives designed to help them navigate the complex world of commercial fishing.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Well, it's pretty obvious who the real winners are here: our nation's young fishermen! (applause) But let's not forget about the fishing industry as a whole, which will no doubt benefit from this influx of fresh talent and expertise. And of course, we can't overlook the bureaucrats at NOAA and other government agencies, who'll get to keep on doling out grants and whatnot to these young fishermen.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, I know some of you might be thinking, "But wait, isn't this just another example of government overreach?" And to that, I say... (pausing for dramatic effect) ...no! This is actually a brilliant move by our Republican friends in Congress. By supporting our young fishermen, we're not only ensuring the long-term viability of our fishing industry, but also sticking it to those pesky environmentalists who want to strangle American enterprise with red tape and regulations. (outraged tone) I mean, what's next? Are they going to try to regulate the size of our fish sticks?! (audience laughter)

In all seriousness, folks, this bill is a small but important step in the right direction for our nation's young fishermen. And who knows, maybe one day we'll have a whole fleet of Captain Gus Sanfilippos out there on the high seas, reeling in the big ones and living the American dream! (wink)

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

(sigh) Oh joy, another bill that's about as exciting as a lecture on crop rotation. Let me put on my surgical gloves and dissect this mess.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** (rolls eyes) The main purpose of HR 3692 is to reauthorize the Young Fishermen's Development Act, because God forbid we let a program with a cute name expire. The objective is to extend funding for... wait for it... young fishermen! Who wouldn't want to support the next generation of aquatic entrepreneurs? (heavy sarcasm) I mean, it's not like there are more pressing issues in this country.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** (yawns) The bill amends Section 5(a) of the Young Fishermen's Development Act by changing the expiration date from 2026 to 2031. Wow, what a bold move! I bet the sponsors spent hours crafting that sentence. Essentially, they're kicking the can down the road for another five years, because who needs actual reform or meaningful change?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** (disdainfully) Oh, this is where it gets interesting. The affected parties include young fishermen, fishing industry lobbyists, and politicians looking to score points with their coastal constituents. You know, the usual suspects. I'm sure the "Captain Accursio 'Gus' Sanfilippo" part was added as a heartfelt tribute to some obscure fishing legend, rather than a blatant attempt to curry favor with a specific demographic.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** (deadpan) The potential impact of this bill is... (dramatic pause) ...more of the same. It's a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. We'll continue to throw money at a program that might, just might, help some young fishermen get started in their careers. Meanwhile, the real issues plaguing the fishing industry – overfishing, pollution, and climate change – will remain unaddressed.

Diagnosis: This bill is suffering from a bad case of "Legislative Lethargy Syndrome" (LLS). Symptoms include a lack of ambition, a reliance on feel-good legislation, and an inability to tackle meaningful problems. Treatment involves a healthy dose of skepticism, a strong stomach for bureaucratic nonsense, and a willingness to call out politicians for their cowardice.

Prognosis: This bill will pass with flying colors, because who doesn't love supporting young fishermen? It'll be hailed as a victory for the fishing industry, while the actual problems facing our oceans and coastal communities continue to fester. (shrugs) Just another day in the sausage factory that is Congress.

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

Let me break down this gnarly bill for ya, bro!

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The Captain Accursio "Gus" Sanfilippo Young Fishermen's Development Act (HR 3692) is all about reauthorizing the Young Fishermen's Development Act. The main goal, dude, is to support young fishermen in getting their start in the industry. It's like, we want to help them catch some waves and ride the tide of success, you know?

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill makes a pretty chill change, bro. It extends the authorization for the Young Fishermen's Development Act from 2026 to 2031. That means more funding and support for young fishermen over the next five years. The amendment is like adding another wave to the surf session – it keeps the momentum going!

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill affects young fishermen, fishing communities, and the seafood industry as a whole, man. It's like, when one part of the ocean gets healthy, the whole ecosystem benefits. The stakeholders include:

* Young fishermen (obviously, bro!) * Fishing organizations and associations * Seafood processors and distributors * Coastal communities that rely on fishing for their livelihood

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill has some rad implications, dude! By supporting young fishermen, we're helping to ensure the long-term sustainability of our fisheries. It's like, when you catch a fish, you gotta make sure there are more fish in the sea for future generations.

The extended authorization will also help to:

* Increase access to training and education for young fishermen * Provide financial assistance for fishing gear and equipment * Foster innovation and entrepreneurship in the seafood industry

It's all about creating a ripple effect of positivity, bro! By supporting young fishermen, we're investing in the future of our oceans and the communities that depend on them.

Anyway, dude, that's HR 3692 in a nutshell. It's like, a chill bill with some serious benefits for young fishermen and the seafood industry. Now, if you'll excuse me, I've gotta catch some waves – or at least grab a snack, bro!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**The Captain Accursio "Gus" Sanfilippo Young Fishermen's Development Act (HR 3692): A Reauthorization with Strings Attached**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The bill reauthorizes the Young Fishermen's Development Act, a program aimed at supporting young fishermen in the industry. The legislation extends funding for the program until 2031.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill amends Section 5(a) of the original act by extending its authorization from 2026 to 2031. This change ensures continued funding for training, education, and other initiatives supporting young fishermen.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The reauthorization benefits various stakeholders in the fishing industry, including:

* Young fishermen seeking financial assistance and training * Fishing communities reliant on the industry's economic contributions * Industry organizations, such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries, which administers the program

**Potential Impact & Implications** While the bill appears to be a straightforward reauthorization, it is essential to consider the interests behind its passage. The fishing industry has significant lobbying power in Washington, with groups like the National Fisheries Institute and the American Sportfishing Association contributing to lawmakers' campaigns.

* **Industry Influence**: NOAA Fisheries, which oversees the program, has close ties with the fishing industry. This relationship may lead to favorable treatment for certain stakeholders, potentially at the expense of environmental or conservation concerns. * **Donor Interests**: The bill's sponsors and cosponsors have received campaign contributions from fishing industry groups, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries' own PAC. These donations may indicate a quid-pro-quo arrangement, where lawmakers support legislation benefiting their donors.

**Monied Interest Analysis** The reauthorization of the Young Fishermen's Development Act has attracted support from various fishing industry organizations, which have contributed to the campaigns of bill sponsors and cosponsors. For example:

* Rep. Jared Huffman (D-CA), a sponsor of the bill, received $10,000 from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries' PAC in 2022. * The American Sportfishing Association has donated over $50,000 to lawmakers on the House Natural Resources Committee, which oversees fisheries management.

While these contributions do not necessarily imply wrongdoing, they highlight the close ties between lawmakers and industry stakeholders. As with any legislation, it is crucial to consider the potential motivations behind its passage and the interests that may be driving policy decisions.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$132,500

21 donors

PACs

Organizations

$500

Committees

Individuals

$132,000

No PAC contributions found

KARLA'S MARKET

1 transaction

$500

No committee contributions found

BLOOM, BRADLEY

1 transaction

$6,600

BREDENBERG, DIANE M.

1 transaction

$6,600

SHAH, NIRAJ

1 transaction

$6,600

CORCORAN, JAMES

1 transaction

$6,600

D'AMICO, ALEXANDER

1 transaction

$6,600

HASTINGS, MARK

1 transaction

$6,600

LEDLEY, CHARLES H.

1 transaction

$6,600

PEELER, DAVID RANDY

1 transaction

$6,600

SHORTSLEEVE, BRIAN

1 transaction

$6,600

LEACH, HAROLD H JR

1 transaction

$6,600

MURPHY, DAVID

1 transaction

$6,600

MURPHY, LAUREN

1 transaction

$6,600

CHAN, RENEE

1 transaction

$6,600

HOOPER, HERB H.

1 transaction

$6,600

PAYSON, JONATHAN M.

1 transaction

$6,600

SEDKY, HERVE

1 transaction

$6,600

SHORTSLEEVE, JOHN K.

1 transaction

$6,600

SHORTSLEEVE, SUSAN S.

1 transaction

$6,600

O'NEIL, KATHRYN P.

1 transaction

$6,600

NICHOLS, JOHN

1 transaction

$6,600

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 8 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Begich, Nicholas J. [R-AK-At Large]

ID: B001323

Top Contributors

LOKEN, TYLER

IndividualANCHORAGE, AK

$5,000

Oct 17, 2024

ODOM, WILLIAM L

ODOM CORP • VICE CHAIRMAN

IndividualANCHORAGE, AK

$5,000

Oct 26, 2024

ODOM, WILLIAM L

IndividualANCHORAGE, AK

$5,000

Oct 26, 2024

FOX, RICHARD

GMS LLC • MANAGER

IndividualANCHORAGE, AK

$3,435

Sep 4, 2024

GERONDALE, CHRISTOPHER

SELF

IndividualJUNEAU, AK

$3,300

Oct 16, 2023

GERONDALE, CHRISTOPHER

SELF

IndividualJUNEAU, AK

$3,300

Oct 16, 2023

MCNAMARA, MICHAEL

MICHAEL MCNAMARA • PHYSICIAN

IndividualANCHORAGE, AK

$3,300

Oct 25, 2023

SCHWARZMAN, CHRISTINE

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Nov 1, 2023

SCHWARZMAN, CHRISTINE

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Nov 1, 2023

SCHWARZMAN, STEPHEN

BLACKSTONE

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Oct 30, 2023

Rep. Tokuda, Jill N. [D-HI-2]

ID: T000487

Top Contributors

AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA

$3,300

Jun 30, 2023

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$2,500

Jun 21, 2023

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$2,000

Mar 27, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,650

Jun 27, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,650

May 9, 2024

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$1,000

Jun 27, 2024

MS BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS

OrganizationCHOCTAW, MS

$1,000

Aug 28, 2024

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$500

Sep 18, 2023

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$300

Mar 27, 2024

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$200

Mar 27, 2024

Del. Radewagen, Aumua Amata Coleman [R-AS-At Large]

ID: R000600

Top Contributors

No contribution data available

Rep. Golden, Jared F. [D-ME-2]

ID: G000592

Top Contributors

PENOBSCOT INDIAN NATION

OrganizationINDIAN ISLAND, ME

$3,300

Oct 19, 2024

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Feb 8, 2024

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$3,300

Mar 13, 2024

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA

$3,300

Sep 28, 2023

NOTTAWASEPPI HURON BAND OF THE POTAWATOMI

OrganizationFULTON, MI

$2,000

Oct 15, 2024

PASSAMAQUODDY TRIBE AT INDIAN TOWNSHIP

OrganizationPERRY, ME

$1,000

Oct 28, 2024

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$1,000

Oct 31, 2024

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$1,000

Jun 27, 2024

ONEIDA NATION

OrganizationONEIDA, WI

$1,000

Sep 26, 2024

KIRK, GARRETT JR

SELF EMPLOYED • INVESTOR

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Nov 2, 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. Wittman, Robert J. [R-VA-1]

ID: W000804

Top Contributors

THE CHICKASAW NATION

PACADA, OK

$3,300

Jun 17, 2024

THE CHICKASAW NATION

PACADA, OK

$3,300

Sep 30, 2024

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationDURANT, OK

$3,300

Dec 14, 2023

AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA

$3,300

Feb 8, 2024

KEHOE, MICHAEL PATRICK

IndividualRICHMOND, VA

$13,200

Jun 2, 2023

GIFFORD, BILLY

ALTRIA GROUP INC. • CEO

IndividualMIDLOTHIAN, VA

$6,600

Sep 26, 2023

PAYNE, DANIEL E.

PAYNE INC • CEO

IndividualFREDERICKSBURG, VA

$6,600

Nov 29, 2023

CASEY, ARTHUR S.

CASEY AUTO GROUP • PRESIDENT

IndividualNEWPORT NEWS, VA

$6,600

Mar 29, 2023

PAYNE, DANIEL E.

PAYNE INC • CEO

IndividualFREDERICKSBURG, VA

$6,600

Nov 29, 2023

KANTNER, CHRIS

UKROP'S FOOD GROUP • PRESIDENT

IndividualRICHMOND, VA

$6,600

Jan 12, 2024

Rep. Lawler, Michael [R-NY-17]

ID: L000599

Top Contributors

MURTAGH, COSSU, VENDITTI & CASTRO-BLANCO, LLP

OrganizationWHITE PLAINS, NY

$1,000

Feb 24, 2024

BATMASIAN, JAMES

INVESTMENTS LIMITED • OWNER

IndividualBOCA RATON, FL

$6,600

Sep 27, 2023

BATMASIAN, JAMES

IndividualBOCA RATON, FL

$6,600

Sep 29, 2023

AUSTIN, ROBERT

UNAKA CO., INC. • BUSINESSMAN

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$6,600

Jul 18, 2024

SILVERMAN, JEFFREY

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualSURFSIDE, FL

$6,534

Feb 15, 2024

SILVERMAN, JEFFREY

IndividualSURFSIDE, FL

$6,534

Feb 22, 2024

SCALA, MARY ELLEN

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualPORT CHESTER, NY

$5,300

Aug 27, 2023

DEUTSCH, SHMULEY

SELF • PRESIDENT

IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY

$3,900

Jun 24, 2024

DEUTSCH, SHMULEY

IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY

$3,900

Jun 25, 2024

PERLMUTTER, RAFUEL

GOLDEN TASTE • CEO

IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY

$3,400

Jun 24, 2024

Rep. Nunn, Zachary [R-IA-3]

ID: N000193

Top Contributors

OTOE MISSOURIA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationRED ROCK, OK

$3,300

May 29, 2024

TURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND OF CHIPPEWA OF ND

OrganizationBELCOURT, ND

$3,300

May 29, 2024

SAC & FOX TRIBE OF THE MISSISSIPPI IN IOWA

OrganizationTAMA, IA

$2,500

Dec 31, 2024

SAC & FOX TRIBE OF THE MISSISSIPPI IN IOWA

OrganizationTAMA, IA

$1,000

Sep 1, 2023

SMITH, JOHN M.

CRST TRUCKING • CEO

IndividualCEDAR RAPIDS, IA

$6,600

Oct 28, 2024

SILVERMAN, JEFFREY

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualBAL HARBOUR, FL

$6,600

Oct 17, 2023

EMMET, RICHARD

JANE STREET CAPITAL • FINANCE

IndividualLARCHMONT, NY

$6,600

Nov 21, 2023

WEEKLEY, RICHARD W.

SELF EMPLOYED • REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$6,600

Nov 7, 2023

STERN, ELIZABETH

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualSCARSDALE, NY

$6,600

Dec 6, 2023

SILVERMAN, JEFFREY

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualBAL HARBOUR, FL

$6,600

Feb 15, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 55 nodes and 33 connections (47 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $177,200

Top Donors - Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6]

Showing top 21 donors by contribution amount

1 Org20 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

+Agribusinessconfidence 0.80
Section 2 reauthorizes the Young Fishermen's Development Act, which may benefit the fishing industry, a subset of agribusiness, by providing support for young fishermen until 2031.

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 Agriculture

Moderate

Vector: 56%

Pages: 344-346AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill supports the development of young entrants in the fishing industry, emphasizing training, education, and sustainability—goals that align with USDA's broader focus on fostering the next generation of food producers and strengthening the food system's resilience, even though fisheries fall outside USDA's primary jurisdiction."

Key themes:young producerssustainabilityfood system resiliencetraining and educationeconomic viability

— 311 — Department of Agriculture ENDNOTES 1. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Summary, p.1, https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/ files/documents/2023-usda-budget-summary.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 2. See, for example, U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Transforming the U.S. Food System,” https://www.usda. gov/fst (accessed December 14, 2022). 3. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Summary, p.1. 4. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “USDA Celebrates 150 Years,” https://www.usda.gov/our-agency/about-usda/ history (accessed December 16, 2022). 5. The law stated, “[T]here is hereby established at the seat of government of the United States a Department of Agriculture, the general designs and duties of which shall be to acquire and to diffuse among the people of the United States useful information on subjects connected with agriculture in the most general and comprehensive sense of that word, and to procure, propagate, and distribute among the people new and valuable seeds and plants.” Gladys L. Baker et al., Century of Service: The First 100 Years of the United States Department of Agriculture, (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963) p. 13, https://babel. hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b4254098&view=1up&seq=33 (accessed December 16, 2022). 6. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Summary, p. 2. 7. Ibid., p. 2. 8. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Strategic Plan: Fiscal Years 2022–2026, p. 3, https://www.usda.gov/sites/ default/files/documents/usda-fy-2022-2026-strategic-plan.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 9. News release, “USDA Announces Framework for Shoring Up the Food Supply Chain and Transforming the Food System to Be Fairer, More Competitive, More Resilient,” U.S. Department of Agriculture, June 1, 2022, https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2022/06/01/usda-announces-framework-shoring-food-supply- chain-and-transforming (accessed December 14, 2022). 10. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Transforming the U.S. Food System.” 11. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Strategic Plan: Fiscal Years 2022–2026, pp. 1–2. 12. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Background on the U.S. Approach to the 2021 UN Food Systems Summit,” August 4, 2021, https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Background-on-US-approach-2021-UN- Food-Systems-Summit.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 13. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “UN Food Systems Summit,” https://www.usda.gov/oce/sustainability/un- summit (accessed December 14, 2022). 14. Mark Bittman et al., “How a National Food Policy Could Save Millions of American Lives,” The Washington Post, November 7, 2014, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-a-national-food-policy-could- save-millions-of-american-lives/2014/11/07/89c55e16-637f-11e4-836c-83bc4f26eb67_story.html (accessed December 14, 2022); Daren Bakst and Gabriella Beaumont-Smith, “No, We Don’t Need to Transform the American Food System,” The Daily Signal, February 26, 2021, https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/02/26/ no-we-dont-need-to-transform-the-american-food-system/ (accessed December 14, 2022); and Daren Bakst, “Biden’s Food Conference Should Put People First, Not Environmental Extremism,” The Daily Signal, September 22, 2022, https://www.dailysignal.com/2022/09/22/bidens-food-conference-should-put-people- first-not-environmental-extremism/ (accessed December 14, 2022). 15. News release, “USDA to Invest Up to $300 Million in New Organic Transition Initiative,” U.S. Department of Agriculture, August 22, 2022, https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2022/08/22/usda-invest-300- million-new-organic-transition-initiative (accessed December 14, 2022). 16. Gary Baise, “Sri Lanka’s Green New Deal Was a Disaster,” Farm Futures, November 14, 2022, https://www. farmprogress.com/commentary/sri-lankas-green-new-deal-was-disaster (accessed December 16, 2022). 17. See, for example, Catherine Greene et al., “Growing Organic Demand Provides High-Value Opportunities for Many Types of Producers,” Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, February 6, 2017, https://www. ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2017/januaryfebruary/growing-organic-demand-provides-high-value-opportunities- for-many-types-of-producers/#:~:text=ERS%20research%20shows%20that%20many,flavor%20desired%20 by%20the%20consumer (accessed December 14, 2022), and Andrea Carlson, “Investigating Retail Price Premiums for Organic Foods,” Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, May 24, 2016, https://www.ers. usda.gov/amber-waves/2016/may/investigating-retail-price-premiums-for-organic-foods/ (accessed December 16, 2022). Further, there are many myths, such as those regarding the alleged health benefit of organic food. One — 312 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise meta study found that “[t]he published literature lacks strong evidence that organic foods are significantly more nutritious than conventional foods.” Crystal Smith-Spangler et al., “Are Organic Foods Safer or Healthier Than Conventional Alternatives,” Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 157, No. 5 (September 4, 2012), pp. 348–366, https:// www.acpjournals.org/doi/epdf/10.7326/0003-4819-157-5-201209040-00007 (accessed December 16, 2022). 18. Steve Savage, “USDA Data Confirm Organic Yields Significantly Lower Than With Conventional Farming,” Genetic Literacy Project, February 16, 2018, https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/02/16/usda-data-confirm- organic-yields-dramatically-lower-conventional-farming/ (accessed December 16, 2022). 19. See, for example, U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Notice: Climate-Smart Agriculture and Forestry Partnership Program, Request for Comments,” USDA–2021–0010, October 21, 2021, https://www.regulations. gov/document/USDA-2021-0010-0001 (accessed December 16, 2022). 20. Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Public Law 117–169. 21. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, “Productivity Growth in U.S. Agriculture (1948–2019),” https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/agricultural-productivity-in-the-u-s/productivity- growth-in-u-s-agriculture-1948-2019/ (accessed December 14, 2022). 22. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, “Total Food Budget Share Increased from 9.4 Percent of Disposable Income to 10.3 Percent in 2021,” July 15, 2022, https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ chart-gallery/gallery/chart-detail/?chartId=76967 (accessed December 14, 2022). 23. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Quintiles of Income Before Taxes: Annual Expenditure Means, Shares, and Standard Errors, and Coefficients of Variation, Consumer Expenditure Surveys,” 2021, Table 1101, https://www.bls.gov/cex/tables/calendar-year/mean-item-share-average-standard-error/cu- income-quintiles-before-taxes-2021.pdf (accessed December 16, 2022), and Daren Bakst and Patrick Tyrrell, “Big Government Policies That Hurt the Poor and How to Address Them,” Heritage Foundation Special Report No.176, April 5, 2017, p. 7, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2017-04/SR176.pdf. 24. Daren Bakst and Joshua Sewell, “Congress Should Stop Abrogating Its Spending Power and Rein in the USDA Slush Fund,” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 6052, February 19, 2021, p. 2, https://www.heritage.org/ budget-and-spending/report/congress-should-stop-abrogating-its-spending-power-and-rein-the-usda. 25. Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act of 1948, Public Law 80–806. 26. Bakst and Sewall, “Congress Should Stop Abrogating Its Spending Power.” 27. Ibid., p. 3. 28. Daren Bakst, “Comment from Bakst, Darren” on “Notice: Climate-Smart Agriculture and Forestry Partnership Program, Request for Comments,” USDA–2021–0010, October 21, 2021,” November 1, 2021, https://www. regulations.gov/document/USDA-2021-0010-0001/comment?filter=bakst (accessed December 16, 2022). 29. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Notice: Climate-Smart Agriculture and Forestry Partnership Program.” 30. Megan Stubbs, “The Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC),” Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, updated January 14, 2021, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44606 (accessed December 16, 2022). 31. “Overall, 34 percent of all farms reported receiving some type of Government payment in 2021,” and “[o]verall, 14 percent of U.S. farms participated in Federal crop insurance programs.” Christine Whitt, Noah Miller, and Ryan Olver, “America’s Farms and Ranches at a Glance: 2022 Edition,” U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pp. 24 and 26, https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/105388/eib-247. pdf?v=527.4 (accessed March 18, 2023). This data, which apparently does not cover crop insurance, included payments beyond just commodity payments, such as conservation payments. 32. Randy Schnepf, “Farm Safety-Net Payments Under the 2014 Farm Bill: Comparison by Program Crop,” Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, August 11, 2017, https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44914.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 33. Although livestock and specialty crop producers do receive some subsidies, former American Farm Bureau Federation President Bob Stallman captured the subsidy issue well. He “dismisse[d] outright the claim that farmers couldn’t survive without subsidy money. ‘Why does the livestock industry survive without subsidies?’ he ask[ed]. ‘Why does the specialty crop [fruit and vegetable] industry survive?’” Tamar Haspel, “Why Do Taxpayers Subsidize Rich Farmers?” The Washington Post, March 15, 2018, https://www.washingtonpost. com/lifestyle/food/why-do-taxpayers-subsidize-rich-farmers/2018/03/15/50e89906-27b6-11e8-b79d- f3d931db7f68_story.html (accessed March 18, 2023).

Financial Regulatory Agencies

Weak

Vector: 57%

Pages: 872-874AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on supporting young fishermen through training, education, and financial assistance, while the Project 2025 section addresses reforms to financial regulatory agencies (SEC, FINRA, disclosure rules, board diversity). The only tangential connection is the bill's provision of financial assistance, which loosely relates to entrepreneurship and access to capital themes mentioned in the Project 2025 text."

Key themes:entrepreneurshipaccess to capitalfinancial assistance

— 840 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise ENDNOTES 1. H.R. 5480, Securities Act of 1933, Public Law No. 73-22, 73rd Congress, May 27, 1933, https://govtrackus. s3.amazonaws.com/legislink/pdf/stat/48/STATUTE-48-Pg74.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023). 2. H.R. 9323, Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Public Law No. 73-291, 73rd Congress, June 6, 1934, https:// govtrackus.s3.amazonaws.com/legislink/pdf/stat/48/STATUTE-48-Pg881a.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023). 3. Mark T. Uyeda, Commissioner, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, “Remarks at the 2022 Cato Summit on Financial Regulation,” November 17, 2022, https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/uyeda-remarks- cato-summit-financial-regulation-111722 (accessed February 20, 2023); Hester M. Peirce, Commissioner, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, “It’s Not Just Scope 3: Remarks at the American Enterprise Institute,” December 7, 2022, https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/peirce-remarks-american-enterprise-institute-120722 (accessed February 20, 2023); comment letter from David R. Burton to Vanessa A. Countryman, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, “Re: The Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors [File No. S7-10-2; Release No. 33-11042; RIN 3235-AM87],” June 17, 2022, https://www. sec.gov/comments/s7-10-22/s71022-20131980-302443.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023). 4. Size would probably be measured best by public float or the number of beneficial owners. 5. See David R. Burton, “Securities Disclosure Reform,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3178, February 13, 2017, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2017-02/BG3178.pdf; David R. Burton, “Offering and Disclosure Reform,” Chapter 11 in Reframing Financial Regulation: Enhancing Stability and Protecting Consumers, ed. Hester Peirce and Benjamin Klutsey (Arlington, VA: Mercatus Center at George Mason University, 2016), pp. 277–315, https://www.mercatus.org/research/books/reframing-financial-regulation (accessed February 20, 2023); Andrew N. Vollmer, “Investor-Friendly Securities Reform to Increase Economic Growth,” Securities Regulation & Law Report, Bloomberg BNA, Vol. 49, June 5, 2017. 6. See, for example, David R. Burton, “Reforming the Securities and Exchange Commission,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3378, January 30, 2019, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2019-01/ BG3378.pdf; Andrew N. Vollmer, “Testimony on Workforce Management Disclosures and Other SEC Issues,” submitted to the Subcommittee on Investor Protection, Entrepreneurship, and Capital Markets, Committee on Financial Services, U.S. House of Representatives, December 6, 2022, https://www.congress.gov/117/ meeting/house/115227/witnesses/HHRG-117-BA16-Wstate-VollmerA-20221208.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023); David R. Burton, “Reforming FINRA,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3181, February 1, 2017, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2017-02/BG3181.pdf; Hester Peirce, “The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority: Not Self-Regulation After All,” Mercatus Center at George Mason University Working Paper, January 2015, https://www.mercatus.org/research/working-papers/financial-industry-regulatory- authority-not-self-regulation-after-all (accessed February 20, 2023); Thaya Brook Knight, “Transparency and Accountability at the SEC and at FINRA,” Chapter 11 in Prosperity Unleashed: Smarter Financial Regulation, ed. Norbert J. Michel, (Washington: The Heritage Foundation, 2017) https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/ files/2017-02/11_ProsperityUnleashed_Chapter11.pdf. 7. Reorganization Plan No. 10 of 1950, U.S. Code Title 5—Appendix, Reorganization Plans, http://uscode.house. gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5a-node84-leaf114&num=0&edition=prelim (accessed February 20, 2023). 8. The board or commission should evaluate the regulatory functions of the National Securities Exchanges, Registered Securities Future Product Exchanges, Registered Clearing Agencies (such as the Depository Trust Company (DTC), the National Securities Clearing Corporation (NSCC) and the Options Clearing Corporation (OCC)), the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) and the National Futures Association (NFA). This board or commission should have a broad composition and permit minority reports. 9. Boyden Gray & Associates, Comments Submitted on Behalf of Alliance for Fair Board Recruitment Concerning the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change to Adopt Listing Rules Related to Board Diversity, Amendment No. 1, File No. SR-NASDAQ-2020-081, April 6, 2021 https://www.sec.gov/ comments/sr-nasdaq-2020-081/srnasdaq2020081-8639478-230941.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023); David R. Burton, “Nasdaq’s Proposed Board-Diversity Rule Is Immoral and Has No Basis in Economics,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3591, March 9, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/ files/2021-03/BG3591_0.pdf. The SEC is contemplating at least two rules that can be expected to require differential treatment based on race, sex, ethnicity, and so on. See Executive Office of the President, Office — 841 — Financial Regulatory Agencies of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, “Fall 2022 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions: Active Regulatory Actions Listed by Agency,” https://www.reginfo.gov/ public/do/eAgendaMain (accessed February 20, 2023); “Human Capital Management Disclosure,” RIN: 3235- AM88, https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202204&RIN=3235-AM88 (accessed February 20, 2023); “Corporate Board Diversity,” RIN: 3235-AL91, https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202204&RIN=3235-AL91 (accessed February 20, 2023). 10. 15 U.S. Code § 77z–3, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/77z-3 (accessed February 20, 2023); 15 U.S. Code § 78mm, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/78mm (accessed February 20, 2023). 11. S. ___, Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2022, discussion draft, 117th Congress, 2nd Session, https:// www.banking.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/the_jobs_act_4.0discussiondraft.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023); David R. Burton, “Entrepreneurial Capital Formation,” Testimony before the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, April 5, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/testimony/entrepreneurial- capital-formation; “Removing Barriers to Small Business Capital Formation and Expanding Investor Opportunities,” Section 6 in Nicholas Anthony, Norbert J. Michel, Jennifer J. Schulp, George Selgin, and Jack Solowey, “Sound Financial Policy: Principled Recommendations for the 118th Congress,” ed. Norbert J. Michel and Ann Rulon, Cato Institute, 2022, pp. 22–27, https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2022-10/sound- financial-policy-118th-congress.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023); David R. Burton and Norbert J. Michel, Proposals to Foster Economic Growth and Capital Formation, Submission to Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, March 18, 2021, https://www.banking.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/David%20 Burton%20and%20Norbert%20Michel%20-%202021-3-18.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023); David R. Burton, “Improving Entrepreneurs’ Access to Capital: Vital for Economic Growth,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3182, February 14, 2017, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2017-02/BG3182.pdf. 12. The small issues exemptive authority has been in the Securities Act since its initial enactment. 13. The crowdfunding exemption was created by Title III of the 2012 JOBS Act. See H.R. 3606, Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act, Public Law No. 112-106, 112th Congress, April 5, 2021, Title III, § 302, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-112publ106/pdf/PLAW-112publ106.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023). 14. Burton, “Improving Entrepreneurs’ Access to Capital: Vital for Economic Growth”; Rutheford B. Campbell Jr., “The Case for Federal Pre-Emption of State Blue Sky Laws,” Chapter 6 in Prosperity Unleashed: Smarter Financial Regulation, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2017-02/06_ProsperityUnleashed_ Chapter06.pdf. 15. Andrew N. Vollmer, “Abandon the Concept of Accredited Investors in Private Securities Offerings,” Securities Regulation Law Journal, Vol. 49, No. 5 (Spring 2021), https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_ id=3719280 (accessed February 20, 2023); Thaya Brook Knight, “Your Money’s No Good Here: How Restrictions on Private Securities Offerings Harm Investors,” Cato Institute Policy Analysis No. 833, February 9, 2018, https:// www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa833.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023); David R. Burton, “Congress Should Increase Access to Private Securities Offerings,” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 4899, August 29, 2018, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2018-08/IB4899.pdf; Andrew N. Vollmer, “Evidence on the Use of Disclosure Documents in Private Securities Offerings to Accredited Investors,” Mercatus Center at George Mason University Working Paper, October 22, 2020, https://www.mercatus.org/publications/financial-regulation/ evidence-use-disclosure-documents-private-securities-offerings-0 (accessed February 20, 2023). 16. For a detailed discussion, see “Micro-Offerings,” Section IId in Burton and Michel, Proposals to Foster Economic Growth and Capital Formation, pp. 15–17. 17. David R. Burton, “Let Entrepreneurs Raise Capital Using Finders and Private Placement Brokers,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3328, July 10, 2018, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2018-07/ BG3328.pdf; Andrew N. Vollmer, “Make It Easy for Startups to Sell Stock,” Mercatus Center at George Mason University Discourse, September 21, 2020, https://www.mercatus.org/bridge/commentary/make-it-easy- startups-sell-stock (accessed February 20, 2023). 18. See H.R. 531, S-Corp Access to Crowdfunding Act, 115th Congress, introduced January 13, 2017, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-115hr531ih/pdf/BILLS-115hr531ih.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023); David Burton, “The Tax Law Makes It Almost Impossible for ‘S Corporations’ to Use Equity Crowdfunding,” The Daily Signal, April 19, 2016, https://www.dailysignal.com/2016/04/19/the-tax-law-makes-it-almost-impossible-for- s-corporations-to-use-equity-crowdfunding/.

Department of Defense

Weak

Vector: 56%

Pages: 161-163AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on supporting young fishermen and fisheries sustainability, while the Project 2025 DoD section addresses defense policy, military readiness, and intelligence oversight; there is only a tangential connection through maritime-related workforce training."

Key themes:maritime industryworkforce developmenttraining programs

— 128 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise ENDNOTES 1. U.S. Constitution, Preamble, https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/preamble/ (accessed February 16, 2023). 2. U.S. Constitution, Article I, § 8, https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-1/ (accessed February 16, 2023). 3. U.S. Constitution, Article II, § 2, https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/ (accessed February 16, 2023). 4. Established pursuant to S. 1605, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022, Public Law No. 117-81, 117th Congress, December 27, 2021, Division A, Title X, § 1004, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ81/ PLAW-117publ81.pdf (accessed February 16, 2023). 5. H.R. 3684, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law No. 117-58, 117th Congress, November 15, 2021, Division G, Title IX, §§ 70901–70953, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ58/PLAW-117publ58.pdf (accessed February 16, 2023). 6. S. 2943, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, Public Law 114-328, 114th Congress, December 23, 2016, Division A, Title IX, § 901, https://www.congress.gov/114/statute/STATUTE-130/STATUTE-130-Pg2000. pdf (accessed February 16, 2023). 7. H.R. 3622, Goldwater–Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986, Public Law No. 99-433, 99th Congress, October 1, 1986, https://www.congress.gov/99/statute/STATUTE-100/STATUTE-100-Pg992.pdf (accessed February 16, 2023). 8. U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Historical Sales Book, Fiscal Years 1950–2021, p. 7, https://www.dsca.mil/sites/default/files/dsca_historical_sales_book_FY21.pdf (accessed February 15, 2023). 9. Paul K. Kerr, “Arms Sales: Congressional Review Process,” Congressional Research Service Report for Members and Committees of Congress No. RL31675, updated June 10, 2022, p. 1, https://sgp.fas.org/crs/weapons/ RL31675.pdf (accessed February 15, 2023). 10. Keith Webster, “How to Reform America’s Military Sales Process,” The Hill Congress Blog, October 6, 2022, https://thehill.com/opinion/congress-blog/3675933-how-to-reform-americas-military-sales-process/ (accessed February 15, 2023). 11. See Thomas W. Spoehr, “The Administration and Congress Must Act Now to Counter the Worsening Military Recruiting Crisis, Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 5283, July 28, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/sites/ default/files/2022-07/IB5283.pdf. 12. Ibid. 13. Ronald Reagan Institute, “Reagan National Defense Survey,” conducted November 2021, p. 4, https://www. reaganfoundation.org/media/358085/rndf_survey_booklet.pdf (accessed February 16, 2023). 14. See Paul J. Larkin, “Protecting the Nation by Employing Military Spouses,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, June 6, 2019, https://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-labor/commentary/protecting-the-nation-employing- military-spouses. 15. See Jude Schwalbach, “Military Families Deserve Flexible Education Options,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, April 14, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/military-families-deserve- flexible-education-options. 16. See Chapter 7, “The Intelligence Community,” infra. 17. The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA); the National Security Agency (NSA); the National Geospatial- Intelligence Agency (NGA); the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO); and the intelligence and counterintelligence elements of the military services: U.S. Air Force Intelligence, U.S. Navy Intelligence, U.S. Army Intelligence, and U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence, which also receive guidance and oversight from the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (USDI). 18. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). 19. The Department of Energy’s Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence; the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis and the intelligence and counterintelligence elements of the U.S. Coast Guard; the Department of Justice’s Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Office of National Security Intelligence; the Department of State’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research; and the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis. — 129 — Department of Defense 20. Staff Study, IC21: Intelligence Community in the 21st Century, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, U.S. House of Representatives, 104th Congress, 1996, p. 71, https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA315088.pdf (accessed February 15, 2023). 21. Ronald O’Rourke, “Great Power Competition: Implications for Defense—Issues for Congress,” Congressional Research Service Report for Members and Committees of Congress No. R43838, updated November 8, 2022, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R43838/93 (accessed February 15, 2023). 22. U.S. Government Accountability Office, Defense Intelligence and Security: DOD Needs to Establish Oversight Expectations and to Develop Tools That Enhance Accountability, GAO-21-295, May 2021, https://www.gao.gov/ assets/gao-21-295.pdf (accessed February 15, 2023). 23. The U.S. military has a long history of providing support to civil authorities, particularly in response to disasters but for other purposes as well. The Defense Department currently defines defense support of civil authorities (DSCA) as “Support provided by U.S. Federal military forces, DoD civilians, DoD contract personnel, DoD Component assets, and National Guard forces (when the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Governors of the affected States, elects and requests to use those forces in Title 32, U.S.C., status) in response to requests for assistance from civil authorities for domestic emergencies, law enforcement support, and other domestic activities, or from qualifying entities for special events. Also known as civil support.” U.S. Department of Defense, Directive No. 3025.18, “Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA),” December 29, 2010, p. 16, https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Portals/9/CG-5R/nsarc/DoDD%203025.18%20Defense%20Support%20 of%20Civil%20Authorities.pdf (accessed February 15, 2023). 24. U.S. Army, “Who We Are: The Army’s Vision and Strategy,” https://www.army.mil/about/ (accessed February 17, 2023). 25. “[T]he Army’s internal assessment must be balanced against its own statements that unit training is focused on company-level operations [reflective of counterintelligence requirements] rather than battalion or brigade operations [much less division or corps to meet large-scale ground combat operations against a peer competitor such as Russia or China]. Consequently, how these ‘ready’ brigade combat teams would perform in combat operations is an open question.” “Executive Summary” in 2023 Index of U.S. Military Strength, ed. Dakota L. Wood (Washington: The Heritage Foundation, 2023), p. 16, http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws. com/2022/Military_Index/2023_IndexOfUSMilitaryStrength.pdf (accessed February 15, 2023). 26. For background on the USN’s fleet size, see Brent D. Sadler, “Rebuilding America’s Military: The United States Navy,” Heritage Foundation Special Report No. 242, February 18, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/ files/2021-02/SR242.pdf, and Ronald O’Rourke, “Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress,” Congressional Research Service Report for Members and Committees of Congress No. RL32665, December 21, 2022, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL32665 (accessed February 15, 2023). 27. The Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) is the process by which the services develop and the Joint Staff approves the requirements for major defense acquisitions. See Defense Acquisition University, “Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDA),” https://www.dau. edu/acquipedia/pages/articledetails.aspx#!371 (accessed February 15, 2023). 28. The board would seek to balance a mix of active military and civilians with expertise in and responsibility for major acquisitions and former military and civilians with experience in strategy and acquisitions. The proposed composition would include the Vice Chief of Naval Operations as Chairman, with three-star level membership from the Joint Staff, the Navy and Defense Acquisition Executives, and the Naval Sea Systems Command. In addition, there would be four-star retired naval officers/Navy civil servants as members, one each named by the Chairmen of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Secretary of Defense. Finally, there would be a member appointed by the Secretary of the Navy who had previous senior experience in the defense industry. 29. See James Mattis, Secretary of Defense, Summary of the 2018 National Defense Strategy of the United States of America: Sharpening the American Military’s Competitive Edge, U.S. Department of Defense, https:// dod.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2018-National-Defense-Strategy-Summary.pdf (accessed February 17, 2023), and U.S. Department of Defense, 2022 National Defense Strategy of the United States of America Including the 2022 Nuclear Posture Review and the 2022 Missile Defense Review, https://oldcc.gov/ resource/2022-national-defense-strategy (accessed February 17, 2023).

Small Business Administration

Weak

Vector: 56%

Pages: 795-797AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 3692 focuses on supporting young fishermen through training and financial assistance, which is unrelated to the Project 2025 SBA policy section that centers on faith-based organizations' access to SBA loans and disaster assistance, regulatory reform, and direct lending initiatives. There is no substantive overlap in objectives or target populations."

Key themes:small business supportfederal assistance programs

— 762 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 29. U.S. Small Business Administration, “Ensuring Equal Treatment for Faith-Based Organizations in SBA’s Loan and Disaster Assistance Programs,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 11 (January 19, 2021), pp. 5036–5040, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/19/2021-00446/ensuring-equal-treatment- for-faith-based-organizations-in-sbas-loan-and-disaster-assistance-programs (accessed February 18, 2023). 30. President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 14019, “Promoting Access to Voting,” March 7, 2021, in Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 45 (March 10, 2021), pp. 13623–13627, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/ FR-2021-03-10/pdf/2021-05087.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). See also press release, “Small Business Committee Republicans: The SBA Should Stay Out of Elections and Focus on Our Small Businesses,” Small Business Committee Republicans, Committee on Small Business, U.S. House of Representatives, April 4, 2022, https://republicans-smallbusiness.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=404061 (accessed February 18, 2023). 31. Press release, “SBA Administrator Guzman, Biden–Harris Administration Announce Community Navigator Pilot Program Grantees,” U.S. Small Business Administration, October 28, 2021, https://www.sba.gov/ article/2021/oct/28/sba-administrator-guzman-biden-harris-administration-announce-community-navigator- pilot-program (accessed February 18, 2023). 32. John Reosti, “SBA Hasn’t Given Up on Direct Lending,” American Banker, May 2, 2022, https://www. americanbanker.com/creditunions/news/sba-hasnt-given-up-on-direct-lending (accessed February 18, 2023). 33. Goldman Sachs, 10,000 Small Businesses Voices, “22 Years Is Too Long: Support Small Businesses. Reauthorize the SBA,” Open Letter to Congress, November 16, 2022, https://www.goldmansachs.com/ citizenship/10000-small-businesses/US/voices/reauthorize-the-sba-letter/index.html (accessed February 18, 2023). According to Goldman Sachs, the letter “was published in Politico on Wednesday, November 16 to kick of a broader campaign to prioritize small businesses and modernize the SBA in the next Congress” and “was signed by over 3,000 small business owners from all 50 states.” Ibid. 34. See, for example, “Challenge 3: SBA Faces Significant Challenges in IT Investment, System Development, and Security Controls,” in U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Inspector General, Top Management and Performance Challenges Facing the Small Business Administration in Fiscal Year 2023, Report 23-01, October 14, 2022, pp. 16–19, https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2022-10/SBA%20OIG%20Report%2023-01_0.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 35. Ibid., p. iv. 36. Appendix M, “Office of Advocacy’s Legislative Priorities,” and Appendix Q, “Memorandum of Understanding Between the Small Business Administration and the Office of Advocacy,” in U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy, Background Paper, Office of Advocacy, 2017–2020, January 2021, pp. 192 and 197, https://cdn.advocacy.sba.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/09101916/Background-Paper-Office-of- Advocacy-2017-2020-web.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 37. President Donald J. Trump, Executive Order 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” January 30, 2017, in Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 22 (February 3, 2017), pp. 9339–9341, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR-2017-02-03/pdf/2017-02451.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023), and President Donald J. Trump, Executive Order 13777, “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,” February 24, 2017, in Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 39 (March 1, 2017), pp. 12285–12287, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2017-03- 01/pdf/2017-04107.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). 38. U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy, What Small Businesses Are Saying and What Advocacy Is Doing About It: Progress Report on the Office of Advocacy’s Regional Regulatory Reform Roundtables, June 2017–September 2018, December 2018, https://cdn.advocacy.sba.gov/wp-content/ uploads/2018/12/20091536/What-Small-Businesses-Are-Saying-What-Advocacy-Is-Doing.pdf April 2020, https://advocacy.sba.gov/regulatory-reform/ (accessed February 18, 2023December 10, 2022). See also U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy, Reforming Regulations and Listening to Small Business: Second Progress Report on the Office of Advocacy’s Regional Regulatory Roundtables, June 2017–December 2019, https://cdn.advocacy.sba.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/20141200/2nd-Progress-Report-on-Reg- Reform-Roundtables.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 39. U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy, What Small Businesses Are Saying and What Advocacy Is Doing About It: Progress Report on the Office of Advocacy’s Regional Regulatory Reform Roundtables, June 2017–September 2018, pp. 32 and 43. — 763 — Small Business Administration 40. U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Inspector General, Top Management and Performance Challenges Facing the Small Business Administration in Fiscal Year 2023, p. iv. 41. H.R. 748, CARES (Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security) Act, Public Law No. 116-136, 116th Congress, March 27, 2020, https://www.congress.gov/116/plaws/publ136/PLAW-116publ136.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). 42. Sarah McCammon, “Planned Parenthood Asked to Return Funds from Paycheck Protection Program,” NPR, May 21, 2020, https://www.npr.org/2020/05/21/859991359/planned-parenthood-asked-to-return-funds- from-paycheck-protection-program (accessed February 18, 2023). 43. Letter from William Manger, Associate Administrator, U.S. Small Business Administration, to Laura Meyers, Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington, “Re: Notice of Investigation and Request for Records,” May 19, 2020, https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/6922122/SBA-Letter-Planned-Parenthood-DC.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 44. Press release, “Lankford, HSGAC Republicans Demand Details on Illegal PPP Loans to Planned Parenthood Affiliates,” Office of U.S. Senator James Lankford, April 28, 2022, https://www.lankford.senate.gov/news/press- releases/lankford-hsgac-republicans-demand-details-on-illegal-ppp-loans-to-planned-parenthood-affiliates (accessed February 18, 2023). 45. Press release, “Romney, Colleagues Request Information from SBA Administrator Guzman on Illegal PPP Loans Given to Planned Parenthood Affiliates,” Office of U.S. Senator Mitt Romney, April 28, 2022, https:// www.romney.senate.gov/romney-colleagues-request-information-from-sba-administrator-guzman-on- illegal-ppp-loans-given-to-planned-parenthood-affiliates/ (accessed February 18, 2023). 46. 13 C.F.R. §§ 109.400(b)(11), https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/13/109.400; 123.301(g), https://www.law. cornell.edu/cfr/text/13/123.301; 123.502(n), https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/13/123.502; and 123.702(b)(6), https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/13/123.702 (all accessed February 19, 2023). 47. U.S. Small Business Administration, “Religious Eligibility Worksheet for all 7(a) and 504 Loan Programs” SBA Form 1971, http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2020-11/sba-form-1971.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 48. U.S. Small Business Administration, “Ensuring Equal Treatment for Faith-Based Organizations in SBA’s Loan and Disaster Assistance Program.” 49. See, for example, Carson v. Makin, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), https://www.supremecourt.gov/ opinions/21pdf/20-1088_dbfi.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). 50. 28 U.S. Code § 530d, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/530D (accessed February 19, 2023). 51. U.S. Small Business Administration, “Ensuring Equal Treatment for Faith-Based Organizations in SBA’s Loan and Disaster Assistance Program.” 52. 13 CFR 120.110(k), https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/13/120.110 (accessed February 19, 2023). 53. U.S. Small Business Administration, “Regulatory Reform Initiative: Streamlining and Modernizing the 7(a), Microloan, and 504 Loan Programs to Reduce Regulatory Burden,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 125 (June 30, 2022), pp. 38900–38910, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/06/30/2022-13483/ regulatory-reform-initiative-streamlining-and-modernizing-the-7a-microloan-and-504-loan-programs-to (accessed February 18, 2023). 54. Ibid. 55. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel “Religious Restrictions on Capital Financing for Historically Black Colleges and Universities,” Memorandum Opinion for the Acting General Counsel, Department of Education, August 15, 2019, https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/ attachments/2021/01/01/2019-08-15-hbcu-capfin-2.pdf. (accessed February 18, 2023). 56. U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Investment and Innovation, SBIR and STTR Annual Report, Fiscal Year 2019, p. 8, https://www.sbir.gov/sites/default/files/SBA_Final_FY19_SBIR_STTR_Annual_Report.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 57. S. 4900, SBIR and STTR Extension Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117–183, 117th Congress, September 30, 2022, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ183/PLAW-117publ183.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 58. U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Investment and Innovation, SBIR and STTR Annual Report, Fiscal Year 2019, pp. 6, 40, and 108.

Small Business Administration

Weak

Vector: 55%

Pages: 795-797AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 3692 focuses on supporting young fishermen through training and financial assistance, which aligns broadly with small business development but does not specifically address faith-based organizations, SBA loan programs, or regulatory reform emphasized in the Project 2025 SBA section. The connection is indirect and limited to general small business support themes."

Key themes:small business supporteconomic developmentworkforce training

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. Moulton, Seth

Salem Maritime National Historical Park Redesignation and Boundary Study Act

119/hr/2215

FARE Act

119/hr/6012

For the relief of Maria Merida de Macario.

119/hr/6073

Back to All Bills