SCORE Act

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/4312

Last Updated: July 17, 2026

SCORE Act

HR. 4312, 119th Congress — read as touching For-Profit Education & Student Loans.

The sponsor

Rep. Bilirakis, Gus M. [R-FL-12]

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

The money

$74,300 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Education" section, p. 383-385 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 916 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4312, H.R. 1005, H.R. 1049, H.R. 1069, H.R. 2965 and H.R. 4305. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 4312, H.R. 1005, H.R. 1049, H.R. 1069, H.R. 2965, and H.R. 4305 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit on each bill.

November 30, 2025

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

📍 Current Status

Next: The full House will vote on whether to pass the bill.

✅

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:

**SCORE Act Analysis**

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I'll dissect the SCORE Act's implications on my interests and the broader landscape of college athletics.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The SCORE Act aims to protect student athletes' name, image, and likeness (NIL) rights while promoting fair competition in intercollegiate athletics. This bill is a thinly veiled attempt to regulate the burgeoning NIL market, which threatens to disrupt the traditional collegiate sports model.

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

1. **Agent definition**: The bill defines an agent as an individual receiving compensation for representing student athletes in NIL agreements. 2. **Antitrust laws**: The act clarifies that antitrust laws apply to unfair methods of competition, potentially limiting the NCAA's ability to restrict NIL deals. 3. **Associated entities and individuals**: The bill establishes a broad definition of associated entities and individuals, which could lead to increased scrutiny of booster organizations and other external influencers.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The SCORE Act will impact:

1. **Student athletes**: By providing greater control over their NIL rights, student athletes may benefit from increased financial opportunities. 2. **Colleges and universities**: Institutions will need to adapt to new regulations and potentially face increased competition for top talent. 3. **Boosters and external influencers**: Associated entities and individuals may face increased scrutiny and potential restrictions on their activities.

**Potential Impact & Implications** The SCORE Act's passage could lead to:

1. **Increased NIL deals**: Student athletes may capitalize on their market value, potentially disrupting the traditional collegiate sports model. 2. **Regulatory uncertainty**: The bill's antitrust provisions and associated entity definitions may create regulatory uncertainty, leading to potential lawsuits and challenges. 3. **Market consolidation**: As colleges and universities adapt to new regulations, we may see increased consolidation in the collegiate sports landscape.

From a strategic perspective, I'll be monitoring the SCORE Act's progress closely, as it has significant implications for my investments in the sports technology and media sectors. The bill's potential impact on market dynamics and regulatory frameworks will inform my future business decisions and lobbying efforts.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this bill, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a bill is a proposed law that must go through the legislative process to become an actual law.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The SCORE Act (HR 4312) aims to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of student athletes and promote fair competition with respect to intercollegiate athletics. Remember when we learned about the importance of protecting individual rights? This bill is trying to do just that for student athletes.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill defines key terms like "agent," "antitrust laws," and "associated entity or individual." It also outlines what constitutes college sports revenue, which includes ticket sales, media rights, and more. As we discussed in class, bills often amend existing laws or create new ones. In this case, the SCORE Act would likely impact antitrust laws and regulations surrounding student athlete compensation.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** Student athletes, colleges and universities, athletic departments, agents, and associated entities or individuals are all affected by this bill. You should recall from our civics lessons that stakeholders can be individuals, groups, or organizations with a vested interest in the outcome of a policy or law.

**Potential Impact & Implications** If passed, the SCORE Act could have significant implications for student athletes, allowing them to profit from their name, image, and likeness. However, it may also create new challenges for colleges and universities in terms of compliance and revenue management. As we learned about checks and balances, this bill would need to be carefully considered by both the House and Senate before becoming law.

Now, I hope that was a clear summary. It's astonishing how many adults seem to have forgotten the basics of our legislative process. Next thing you know, I'll have to explain what a filibuster is... again.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

The SCORE Act - sounds innocent enough, but trust me, folks, this bill is a Trojan horse for the government's real agenda. Let me break it down for you.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** On the surface, HR 4312 aims to protect student athletes' name, image, and likeness rights while promoting fair competition in intercollegiate athletics. But don't be fooled - this is just a smokescreen for the government's true intentions. I believe they're trying to create a new revenue stream by exploiting college sports, all under the guise of "fairness" and "protection."

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill introduces several key provisions that will change the game (pun intended). It defines an "agent" as someone who represents student athletes in name, image, and likeness agreements. But what's really going on here? This is just a way for the government to exert control over the sports industry by regulating who can represent these athletes.

The bill also expands the definition of "associated entity or individual," which includes anyone who has contributed more than $50,000 to an athletic program or has assisted in recruitment or retention efforts. Sounds like they're trying to create a database of influential people in college sports - why? To monitor and control them, that's why.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Student athletes, colleges, universities, athletic departments, agents, and associated entities will all be impacted by this bill. But let's not forget the real stakeholders here: the government and their corporate cronies who stand to profit from this new revenue stream.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has far-reaching implications for college sports, athletes, and the economy as a whole. By regulating name, image, and likeness rights, the government is essentially creating a new market that they can control and exploit. This will lead to increased commercialization of college sports, further blurring the lines between education and entertainment.

But here's the real kicker: this bill sets a precedent for government control over individual rights and freedoms. If they can regulate what student athletes can do with their own name, image, and likeness, what's next? Will they start telling us what we can and can't do with our own bodies?

Wake up, folks! This is just another example of the government's insidious creep into every aspect of our lives. We need to stay vigilant and expose these hidden agendas before it's too late.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, we've got another doozy of a bill on our hands, and I'm here to break it down for you. The SCORE Act, or the "Student Compensation and Opportunity through Rights and Endorsements Act" – try saying that five times fast! (smirk)

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill claims to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of student athletes and promote fair competition in intercollegiate athletics. Sounds noble, right? But let's get real; this is just another attempt by the elites to control the narrative and line their pockets with cash.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill defines key terms like "agent," "antitrust laws," and "associated entity or individual." It also outlines what constitutes college sports revenue. But here's the kicker: it creates a whole new set of rules for student athletes, agents, and institutions to navigate. Because, you know, freedom isn't about simplicity; it's about complexity and bureaucratic red tape! (wink)

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Student athletes, colleges, universities, athletic departments, agents – the usual suspects. But let's not forget the real stakeholders here: the deep state, the liberal elites, and their cronies in the sports industry.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill could lead to a whole new era of exploitation... I mean, "opportunities" for student athletes. (smirk) Just think about it: more agents, more lawyers, more middlemen taking a cut from these young athletes' hard-earned cash. And what about the poor colleges and universities? They'll be forced to navigate this Byzantine regulatory landscape, all while trying to maintain their precious athletic programs.

But don't worry, folks; I'm sure it's all just a coincidence that this bill happens to benefit the same special interests who've been pushing for more government control over our lives. (rolls eyes) It's not like they're trying to stifle competition or limit individual freedom... no, no, no! Perish the thought!

So there you have it – the SCORE Act: a bill that's all about "protecting" student athletes while actually serving the interests of the powerful and well-connected. (smirk) Stay vigilant, America; your freedom is at stake!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the geniuses in Congress. Let's dissect this farce and reveal the real disease beneath.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The SCORE Act claims to protect student athletes' name, image, and likeness (NIL) rights while promoting fair competition in intercollegiate athletics. How noble. In reality, it's a thinly veiled attempt to appease powerful athletic programs, boosters, and corporate interests.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill defines an "agent" as someone who represents student athletes for NIL agreements or other compensation-related deals. It also establishes a convoluted framework for determining what constitutes an "associated entity or individual," which is essentially a euphemism for booster organizations and wealthy alumni.

The SCORE Act amends existing antitrust laws to exempt certain college sports revenue streams from scrutiny, effectively allowing institutions to collude on NIL agreements without fear of reprisal. This is a blatant handout to the NCAA and its member schools, who will now have even more freedom to exploit student athletes for profit.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Student athletes, athletic programs, boosters, corporate sponsors, and the NCAA are all impacted by this bill. But let's be real – the only ones who truly matter are the wealthy interests backing these institutions. They're the ones calling the shots, and this legislation is designed to protect their investments.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The SCORE Act will further entrench the existing power structure in college athletics, where a select few reap enormous benefits while student athletes are left with scraps. By codifying loopholes for booster organizations and wealthy alumni, Congress is essentially greenlighting corruption and exploitation.

This bill is a symptom of a deeper disease – the corrupting influence of money in sports and politics. It's a classic case of regulatory capture, where lawmakers prioritize the interests of powerful lobbies over those of their constituents.

In conclusion, the SCORE Act is a cynical exercise in legislative doublespeak, designed to perpetuate the status quo while pretending to address the very real problems plaguing college athletics. Don't be fooled – this bill is a wolf in sheep's clothing, and its true purpose is to further enrich the already wealthy at the expense of student athletes and fair competition.

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

**HR 4312: SCORE Act Summary**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The Student Compensation and Opportunity through Rights and Endorsements (SCORE) Act aims to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of student athletes and promote fair competition in intercollegiate athletics. The bill seeks to establish a framework for student athletes to capitalize on their own brand while ensuring that colleges and universities maintain control over their athletic programs.

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

1. **Definition of Agent**: Expands the definition of an agent to include individuals who represent student athletes in name, image, and likeness agreements. 2. **Associated Entity or Individual**: Defines associated entities or individuals as those that promote or support varsity sports teams or student athletes, including boosters and alumni organizations. 3. **College Sports Revenue**: Establishes a broad definition of college sports revenue to include various sources of income related to intercollegiate athletics.

The bill also proposes changes to existing antitrust laws, allowing for the creation of a national framework governing name, image, and likeness agreements.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The SCORE Act affects:

1. **Student Athletes**: The bill aims to protect their rights and provide opportunities for compensation. 2. **Colleges and Universities**: Institutions will need to adapt to new regulations regarding athletic programs and revenue distribution. 3. **Boosters and Alumni Organizations**: Associated entities or individuals may face increased scrutiny and regulation. 4. **Intercollegiate Athletic Associations**: The bill's provisions on college sports revenue and antitrust laws may impact these organizations.

**Potential Impact & Implications** The SCORE Act has significant implications for the future of intercollegiate athletics:

1. **Increased Compensation Opportunities**: Student athletes may benefit from new avenues for compensation, potentially leading to increased financial support. 2. **Regulatory Framework**: The bill establishes a national framework governing name, image, and likeness agreements, providing clarity and consistency across institutions. 3. **Potential Conflicts of Interest**: The expanded definition of associated entities or individuals may lead to conflicts of interest between colleges, boosters, and alumni organizations.

Overall, the SCORE Act aims to balance the interests of student athletes, colleges, and universities while promoting fair competition in intercollegiate athletics.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

I'm stoked to break down the SCORE Act for you, bro! This congressional bill is all about protecting student athletes' rights and promoting fair competition in intercollegiate athletics.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The SCORE Act aims to safeguard the name, image, and likeness (NIL) rights of student athletes. It's like, imagine if someone wanted to use your gnarly surf pic without asking or paying you – not cool, right? This bill ensures that student athletes have control over their own brand and can profit from it.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The SCORE Act introduces some key changes:

1. **Definition of an Agent**: The bill clarifies what constitutes an agent representing a student athlete in NIL agreements. 2. **Associated Entities or Individuals**: It defines entities or individuals that are connected to institutions and may influence student athletes' decisions, like boosters or alumni groups. 3. **College Sports Revenue**: The bill outlines what counts as college sports revenue, including ticket sales, media rights, and more.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill affects:

1. **Student Athletes**: They'll have more control over their NIL rights and can profit from them. 2. **Institutions**: Colleges and universities will need to adapt to new regulations regarding NIL agreements and associated entities. 3. **Agents and Representatives**: Those representing student athletes in NIL deals will need to comply with the bill's definitions and guidelines.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The SCORE Act could have some far-reaching implications:

1. **Increased Fairness**: By protecting student athletes' NIL rights, the bill promotes fair competition and prevents exploitation. 2. **New Revenue Streams**: Student athletes may be able to capitalize on their brand, creating new revenue streams for themselves and their institutions. 3. **Regulatory Challenges**: The bill's definitions and guidelines might lead to regulatory challenges, as institutions and agents navigate the new landscape.

In conclusion, bro, the SCORE Act is all about leveling the playing field for student athletes and promoting fair competition in intercollegiate athletics. It's a step in the right direction, but we'll need to keep an eye on how it plays out in practice.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**The SCORE Act: A Bill with Strings Attached**

The Student Compensation and Opportunity through Rights and Endorsements (SCORE) Act, introduced by Rep. Bilirakis (R-FL), aims to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of student athletes and promote fair competition in intercollegiate athletics. However, a closer examination reveals that this bill is not as altruistic as it seems.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The SCORE Act's primary objective is to create a framework for student athletes to profit from their own name, image, and likeness (NIL) without violating National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) rules. The bill also seeks to promote fair competition among colleges and universities by regulating the use of NIL agreements.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The SCORE Act introduces several key provisions:

1. **Definition of Agent**: The bill defines an agent as an individual who receives compensation for representing a student athlete in NIL agreements or other compensation-related agreements. 2. **Associated Entity or Individual**: The bill expands the definition of associated entities and individuals, including those with significant ties to athletic departments or programs. 3. **College Sports Revenue**: The bill clarifies what constitutes college sports revenue, including ticket sales, media rights, and interstate intercollegiate athletic association payments.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The SCORE Act affects various stakeholders:

1. **Student Athletes**: The bill aims to empower student athletes to profit from their NIL without violating NCAA rules. 2. **Colleges and Universities**: Institutions must navigate the new regulatory framework, ensuring compliance with the bill's provisions. 3. **NCAA**: The bill may impact the NCAA's ability to regulate NIL agreements and maintain its amateurism model.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The SCORE Act has significant implications:

1. **Increased Commercialization of College Sports**: By allowing student athletes to profit from their NIL, the bill may lead to increased commercialization of college sports. 2. **Regulatory Challenges**: The expanded definition of associated entities and individuals may create regulatory challenges for colleges and universities. 3. **NCAA's Amateurism Model**: The bill may erode the NCAA's amateurism model, potentially leading to a shift towards a more professionalized collegiate athletics system.

**Monied Interests at Play**

Several monied interests are backing the SCORE Act:

1. **National Collegiate Players Association (NCPA)**: A PAC supporting student athlete rights and compensation. 2. **College Athletes Inc.**: A company advocating for student athlete compensation and representation. 3. **Sports Marketing Agencies**: Companies like IMG College and Learfield Sports may benefit from the bill's provisions, as they often represent student athletes in NIL agreements.

In conclusion, while the SCORE Act appears to promote fair competition and protect student athlete rights, it is essential to consider the monied interests driving this legislation. The bill's provisions may have far-reaching implications for college sports, and its potential impact on

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Bilirakis, Gus M. [R-FL-12]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$74,300

19 donors

PACs

Organizations

$6,600

Committees

Individuals

$67,700

No PAC contributions found

COOL MASTER PRO LLC

1 transaction

$6,600

No committee contributions found

OF FLORIDA, SEMINOLE TRIBE

2 transactions

$6,600

MENG, BEN

2 transactions

$6,600

ARTECHE, LEON

1 transaction

$5,000

LAGOS, JAMES H.

1 transaction

$3,300

RICE, WILLIAM LLOYD

1 transaction

$3,300

WANEK, RON

1 transaction

$3,300

WANEK, TODD

1 transaction

$3,300

WANEK, JOYCE

1 transaction

$3,300

WANEK, KAREN

1 transaction

$3,300

HEPSCHER, WILLIAM S

1 transaction

$3,300

YOUNG, JENNIFER

1 transaction

$3,300

REAL, JUAN C

1 transaction

$3,300

MALONE, KEVIN P

1 transaction

$3,300

HUENINK, JEFF

1 transaction

$3,300

KAVOUKLIS, EDIE

1 transaction

$3,300

KAVOUKLIS, NICHOLAS

1 transaction

$3,300

ARISON, MICKY

1 transaction

$3,300

ARISON, MADELEINE

1 transaction

$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Bynum, Janelle S. [D-OR-5]

ID: B001326

Top Contributors

EMILYS LIST

CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD

PACWASHINGTON, DC

$250

May 2, 2024

TUNICA-BILOXI TRIBE OF LA

OrganizationMARKSVILLE, LA

$2,000

Dec 31, 2023

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$1,000

Aug 1, 2024

CLEM, BRIAN

SELF EMPLOYED • SMALL BUSINESSMAN

IndividualSALEM, OR

$6,600

Jun 30, 2023

HEISING, MARK

MEDLEY PARTNERS LLC • MANAGING DIRECTOR

IndividualATHERTON, CA

$6,600

Aug 16, 2023

KELLY, JAMES

SELF EMPLOYED • RANCHING

IndividualKIMBERLY, OR

$6,600

Jul 23, 2024

TRIPPLETT, LARRY

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualSAN MATEO, CA

$6,500

Jun 27, 2023

MORGAN, JULIO

SELF EMPLOYED • MCDONALDS OWNER

IndividualJACKSON, NJ

$5,600

Sep 7, 2023

STONE, JAMES

REDMON GROUP INC • PROGRAMMER

IndividualWASHINGTON, DC

$5,000

Oct 22, 2024

SMITH, ADRIAN

IVE AGE MANAGEMENT • OWNER

IndividualSUMMERFIELD, NC

$5,000

Jun 21, 2023

Rep. Guthrie, Brett [R-KY-2]

ID: G000558

Top Contributors

BL PARTNERS GROUP, LLC

OrganizationARLINGTON, VA

$1,000

Jun 28, 2024

SMITH, BRAD

MICROSOFT CORPORATION • ATTORNEY

IndividualBELLEVUE, WA

$6,600

Jun 25, 2024

DUNN, TIMOTHY M. MR.

CROWNQUEST OPERATING • CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

IndividualMIDLAND, TX

$5,000

Aug 2, 2024

WALK, CLAIRE MRS.

IndividualCARROLLTON, TX

$5,000

Sep 30, 2024

TREXLER, ALLISON

IndividualALEXANDRIA, VA

$5,000

Jun 11, 2024

OSGOOD, STEVEN

SQUARE FOOT COMPANIES • REAL ESTATE

IndividualSARASOTA, FL

$5,000

Mar 14, 2023

FOSTER, JEFF

CLOUD CAPITAL • CFO

IndividualSAINT PETERSBURG, FL

$5,000

Mar 18, 2023

ARNOLD, JOHN

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$3,300

May 9, 2024

ARNOLD, LAURA

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$3,300

May 9, 2024

BERTA, VINCE

COVINGTON CAPITAL • MANAGING PARTNER

IndividualBOWLING GREEN, KY

$3,300

May 13, 2024

Rep. Walberg, Tim [R-MI-5]

ID: W000798

Top Contributors

POKAGON BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS

OrganizationDOWAGIAC, MI

$3,300

Dec 31, 2023

WEIR FARMS

OrganizationHANOVER, MI

$500

Aug 21, 2023

WEIR FARMS

OrganizationHANOVER, MI

$500

Aug 12, 2024

HAWORTH, ETHELYN

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualSAUGATUCK, MI

$47,900

Jun 5, 2024

HONIG, KEN

KEN HONIG • BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT

IndividualNEW PORT BEACH, CA

$31,600

May 30, 2024

HAWORTH, RICHARD

HAWORTH INC • CHAIRMAN EMERITUS

IndividualSAUGATUCK, MI

$11,600

May 9, 2024

KLARR, GUNNAR

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualJACKSON, MI

$10,000

Dec 29, 2023

HAWORTH, RICHARD

HAWORTH INC • CHAIRMAN EMERITUS

IndividualSAUGATUCK, MI

$10,000

Nov 4, 2024

DRESNER, LINDA

SELF • RETIRED

IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI

$6,600

Dec 7, 2023

LEVY, EDWARD C JR.

EDWARD C LEVY COMPANY • EXECUTIVE

IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI

$6,600

Dec 7, 2023

Rep. Jordan, Jim [R-OH-4]

ID: J000289

Top Contributors

MATT HUFFMAN FOR OHIO

OrganizationLIMA, OH

$1,000

Sep 24, 2024

UNION COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY

OrganizationPLAIN CITY, OH

$500

Dec 31, 2023

UNION COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY

OrganizationPLAIN CITY, OH

$500

Jun 10, 2024

TRAVAGLIANTE

OrganizationINDEPENDENCE, OH

$100

Oct 3, 2023

TRAVAGLIANTE

OrganizationINDEPENDENCE, OH

$100

Oct 3, 2023

TRAVAGLIANTE

OrganizationINDEPENDENCE, OH

$100

Oct 3, 2023

KIMBER, DAMON

IndividualBRONX, NY

$20,000

Jul 25, 2023

KIMBER, DAMON

IndividualBRONX, NY

$20,000

Jul 27, 2023

MACRICOSTAS, GEORGE

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualINCLINE VILLAGE, NV

$13,200

May 22, 2024

SALAMONE, CHRISTOPHER

IndividualFAIRPORT, NY

$12,120

Apr 3, 2024

Rep. Figures, Shomari [D-AL-2]

ID: F000481

Top Contributors

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Apr 29, 2024

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

May 24, 2024

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$2,300

May 24, 2024

MALDI MA

OrganizationIRVINGTON, AL

$2,000

Apr 6, 2024

HILLWOOD LIQUORS LLC

OrganizationMOBILE, AL

$1,000

Feb 14, 2024

SIP & SMOKE LLC

OrganizationMOBILE, AL

$1,000

Feb 14, 2024

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$1,000

Feb 28, 2024

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$1,000

Aug 15, 2024

MAA PETROLEUM LLC

OrganizationIRVINGTON, AL

$500

Feb 14, 2024

MOWA BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS

OrganizationMOUNT VERNON, AL

$500

Apr 6, 2024

Rep. McClain, Lisa C. [R-MI-9]

ID: M001136

Top Contributors

A & ALL WASTE LLC

OrganizationOAKLAND TWP, MI

$1,000

Oct 21, 2024

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$1,000

Dec 31, 2023

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$1,000

Apr 20, 2023

SALT RIVER PIMA MARICOPA INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationSCOTTSDALE, AZ

$1,000

Apr 20, 2023

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$1,000

Sep 11, 2023

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$1,000

Sep 30, 2023

BANKE, BARBARA R.

IndividualGEYSERVILLE, CA

$6,600

Nov 16, 2023

SAMONA, MAZIN

WILD BILL'S TOBACCO • CEO

IndividualTROY, MI

$6,600

Sep 15, 2023

ALKHAFAJI, AMMAR

W INVESTORS GROUP • PRINCIPAL

IndividualSOUTHFIELD, MI

$6,600

Jul 24, 2023

YALDO, RUDI

PEARL TRADING LLC • CEO

IndividualBLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI

$6,600

Jul 21, 2023

Rep. Fitzgerald, Scott [R-WI-5]

ID: F000471

Top Contributors

HENDRICKS, DIANE M

ABC • OWNER

IndividualBELOIT, WI

$6,600

Jun 25, 2023

ROWAN, CAROLYN

CAROLYN ROWAN COLLECTION LLC • OWNER

IndividualGREENWICH, CT

$6,600

Aug 16, 2023

ROWAN, MARC J.

APOLLO GLOBAL • CEO

IndividualGREENWICH, CT

$6,600

Aug 16, 2023

SCHWARZMAN, STEPHEN

BLACKSTONE • CEO AND CHAIRMAN

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Nov 13, 2023

SCHMIDT, TIM

DELTA DEFENSE LLC • CEO

IndividualWEST BEND, WI

$6,600

Dec 10, 2023

SCHWARZMAN, CHRISTINE

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Nov 13, 2023

LEVY, EDWARD

EDWARD C. LEVY CO • CHAIRMAN

IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI

$6,600

May 1, 2024

FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMU, .

TRIBE • TRIBE

IndividualCRANDON, WI

$6,600

Jun 28, 2024

FISHER, SHERRILYN

PLANO 6500 LLC • MEMBER

IndividualPLANO, TX

$6,600

Jun 2, 2024

FISHER, KENNETH

FISHER INVESTMENTS • EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN

IndividualPLANO, TX

$6,600

Jun 2, 2024

Rep. Fry, Russell [R-SC-7]

ID: F000478

Top Contributors

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Feb 20, 2024

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Sep 5, 2024

RMS LLC

OrganizationHOOVER, AL

$2,500

Sep 5, 2024

ROBERT S GUYTON PC

OrganizationMYRTLE BEACH, SC

$1,000

Jun 17, 2024

GAMBLE, KATHRYN

UNAKA CO • BUSINESS EXECUTIVE

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$6,600

Jul 15, 2024

AUSTIN, ROBERT

UNAKA CO., INC. • BUSINESSMAN

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$6,600

Jul 19, 2024

MOORE, KEVIN

R.H. MOORE COMPANY, INC. • CONSTRUCTION

IndividualPAWLEYS ISLAND, SC

$6,600

Aug 20, 2024

LOWELL, RANDY

BURR FORMAN • ATTORNEY

IndividualISLE OF PALMS, SC

$3,435

Dec 2, 2024

GRUBBS, WESLEY

BEACH FORD • CAR DEALER

IndividualMYRTLE BEACH, SC

$3,435

May 30, 2024

WOOTEN, GAIL

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualMURRELLS INLET, SC

$3,435

Jun 19, 2024

Rep. Williams, Roger [R-TX-25]

ID: W000816

Top Contributors

POARCH BANK OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Dec 2, 2024

FORD, GERALD J. MR.

DIAMOND-A CORPORATION • BANKER

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$6,600

Jan 10, 2024

PRINCE, ZAN MRS.

SELF EMPLOYED • INSURANCE AGENT

IndividualWEATHERFORD, TX

$6,600

Mar 30, 2023

WOODARD, DONALD M. MR. JR.

WESTERN COMMERCE GROUP • FINANCE

IndividualFORT WORTH, TX

$6,600

Mar 5, 2024

CARVALHO, ANNE MARIE MRS.

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualFORT WORTH, TX

$6,600

May 5, 2023

ROWAN, CAROLYN

SELF EMPLOYED • FASHION DESIGNER

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Apr 19, 2023

ROWAN, MARC

APOLLO GLOBAL MANAGEMENT • CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Apr 19, 2023

DUNIGAN, MIKE MR.

MIKE DUNIGAN RARE COINS • OWNER

IndividualFORT WORTH, TX

$6,000

Mar 5, 2024

LOWRANCE, DAN E. MR.

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualFORT WORTH, TX

$5,000

Oct 31, 2023

NICHOLS, THOMAS B. MR.

U.S. POLYCO • PRESIDENT

IndividualSPARKS, NV

$5,000

Feb 10, 2023

Rep. Westerman, Bruce [R-AR-4]

ID: W000821

Top Contributors

PUEBLO OF LAGUNA

OrganizationLAGUNA, NM

$8,300

Aug 1, 2024

ONEIDA INDIAN NATION

OrganizationONEIDA, NY

$5,000

May 13, 2024

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$3,300

Dec 6, 2023

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF SILETZ INDIANS

OrganizationSILETZ, OR

$3,300

Dec 27, 2023

SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND MIWOK INDIANS

OrganizationSHINGLE SPRINGS, CA

$3,300

Oct 26, 2023

SNOQUALMIE TRIBE

OrganizationSNOQUALMIE, WA

$3,300

Nov 10, 2023

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION

OrganizationPENDLETON, OR

$3,300

Jan 17, 2024

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA

$3,300

Feb 14, 2024

CATAWBA INDIAN NATION

OrganizationROCK HILL, SC

$3,300

Mar 31, 2024

NISQUALLY INDIAN TRIBE

OrganizationOLYMPIA, WA

$3,300

Mar 14, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Bilirakis, Gus M. [R-FL-12]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 47 nodes and 36 connections (31 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $105,350

Top Donors - Rep. Bilirakis, Gus M. [R-FL-12]

Showing top 19 donors by contribution amount

1 Org18 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 helped.

+For-Profit Education & Student Loansconfidence 0.90
Section 5(c) and (d) require institutions with high intercollegiate athletics revenue to provide comprehensive academic support, career counseling, medical benefits, grant-in-aid maintenance, degree completion programs, and maintain at least 16 varsity sports teams. This imposes operational and financial burdens on colleges and universities, which could benefit for-profit education providers and student-loan servicers as students may seek alternative educational pathways or require additional su
+Labor Unionsconfidence 0.85
Section 8 clarifies that student athletes are not considered employees based on participation in varsity sports, which prevents student athletes from unionizing or claiming employee status under labor laws. This benefits labor unions by preserving the current classification of student athletes as non-employees, potentially reducing pressure on unions to organize in this sector and maintaining the status quo for union representation in other industries.

Key themes:higher educationcollege athleticsfederal oversight

— 339 — Department of Education wages to account for regional differences in earnings and cost of living; and develop a reliable methodology for risk adjusting institutional and program outcomes to more accurately reflect the value added of education programs (as opposed to their admissions selectivity). Currently the Department of Education relies on graduation rates and average earnings as proxies for educational quality. Both of those outcomes, however, are highly dependent upon a student’s socioeconomic background, sex, family status, and other factors. Colleges and universities with selective admissions policies post the strongest outcomes, primarily because they admit mostly low-risk, traditional students. Open enrollment institutions post the weakest outcomes, largely because life is challenging and complicated for low-income and non-traditional students, who may be forced to drop out when a work schedule changes, a child needs more attention, or an unexpected repair or medical bill makes continuing impossible. Such confounding factors make it difficult to isolate the impact of educational qual- ity versus socioeconomic factors on student outcomes. The Department of Health and Human Services faced similar challenges in trying to evaluate healthcare out- comes since social determinants of health result in worse health outcomes among those who are socioeconomically disadvantaged, have low educational attainment levels, have struggled with addiction, or have poor diet and exercise habits. Without risk adjustment of outcomes, hospitals treating wealthy patients will always appear to be delivering good care, and hospitals treating low-income patients will appear to be delivering poor care. Higher education outcomes data should be similarly “risk adjusted” to more carefully isolate the impact of educational quality versus socioeconomic status and other factors on college outcomes. Reform the Negotiated Rulemaking Process at ED The U.S. Department of Education is required by statute14 to engage in nego- tiated rulemaking prior to promulgating new regulations under Subchapter 1 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act as well as Subchapters II (Teacher Quality Enhancements) and IV of the Higher Education Act of 1964 (Student Assistance). The purpose of negotiated rulemaking is to engage a committee of stakeholders early in the drafting of proposed regulations to ensure that the reg- ulation can be implemented as written, to understand any potential unintended consequences, and to seek suggestions from stakeholders on alternative solutions. The goal is for the negotiators to reach a consensus, thus smoothing the way to promulgate a new rule. Although it is helpful for the department to receive stakeholder input, the negotiated rulemaking process has become an expensive and time-consuming undertaking. Consensus is only rarely reached, enabling the department to pursue its own path. The department’s master calendar (which requires final rules to be — 340 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise published by October 1 if they are to be implemented by July 1st of the subsequent year) compounds the problem, making it unduly challenging to update regulations as needed to keep pace with changes in education, finance, accounting, pedagogy, and student assessment. In recent decades, negotiated rulemaking has become a veritable three-ring circus, replete with negotiators who use their Twitter accounts and other social media feeds during negotiations to denigrate the process and their peer negoti- ators in real time. A few Members of Congress use the public comment process to deliver political speeches, apparently to raise their own profiles but without adding any new information to the process. Some advocacy groups have latched onto the process for fundraising purposes, sometimes misrepresenting negotiation language to agitate followers and supporters and encourage them to make financial contributions. At times, the department itself has appeared to sabotage consensus, which enables them to write the regulation as they wish and without regard to the concerns raised by negotiators. l The Department of Education should work with Congress to amend the HEA to eliminate the negotiated rulemaking requirement. At a minimum, Congress should allow the department to use public hearings rather than negotiated rulemaking sessions. Reform the Office of Federal Student Aid This proposal urges the new Administration to end the abuse of FSA’s loan for- giveness programs, to manage the federal student loan portfolio in a professional way, and to work with Congress for a long-term overhaul of the program for the benefit of students and taxpayers. l The new Administration must end the prior Administration’s abuse of the agency’s payment pause and HEA loan forgiveness programs, including borrower defense to repayment, closed school discharge, and Public Service Loan Forgiveness. l The new Administration should also take immediate steps to commence the rulemaking process to rescind or substantially modify the prior Administration’s HEA regulations. l The federal government does not have the proper incentives to make sound lending decisions, so the new Administration should consider returning to a system in which private lenders, backed by government guarantees, would compete to offer student loans, including subsidized and unsubsidized, loans. This would allow for

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. Bilirakis, Gus M.

AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act of 2025

119/hr/979

Kids Online Safety Act

119/hr/6484

TICKET Act

119/hr/1402

Back to All Bills