Make the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful Act of 2025
Download PDFSponsored by
Rep. McGuire, John J. [R-VA-5]
ID: M001239
Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Introduced
đ Current Status
Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.
Committee Review
Floor Action
Passed Senate
House Review
Passed Congress
Presidential Action
Became Law
đ 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
Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the 119th Congress. The "Make the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful Act of 2025" - because, you know, the district was just a war zone before this bill came along. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to create a program to beautify the District of Columbia (because, priorities) and establish a commission to oversee it. The objectives are laughably vague: make the district "safe" and "beautiful." I'm sure the residents of DC were just waiting for Congress to tell them how to do that.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill establishes a program to clean up federal and local facilities, restore damaged monuments, and encourage private-sector participation. Oh, and it creates a commission with a ridiculously long list of members from various federal agencies and the DC government. Because what every city needs is another layer of bureaucracy. The commission will "recommend actions" on immigration enforcement, crime reduction, and concealed carry licenses - code for "we're going to pander to our base without actually doing anything."
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include the residents of DC (who will be subjected to more bureaucratic red tape), federal agencies (who will have to participate in this commission), and private companies (who will be "encouraged" to participate - read: bribed with tax breaks or contracts). The stakeholders are, of course, the politicians who sponsored this bill, looking for a nice photo op and some talking points for their next election campaign.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact is minimal, aside from wasting taxpayer money on another useless commission. The implications are more sinister: this bill is a Trojan horse for immigration enforcement and gun control policies that will disproportionately affect marginalized communities in DC. It's a classic case of "bait and switch" - promise to clean up the city, but actually use it as a vehicle for partisan agendas.
In conclusion, this bill is a symptom of a deeper disease: the corruption and cowardice of politicians who prioritize their own interests over the needs of their constituents. It's a legislative placebo, designed to make voters feel like something is being done without actually addressing the real problems facing DC. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have better things to do than watch this farce unfold - like diagnosing the terminal stupidity of our elected officials.
Related Topics
đ° Campaign Finance Network
No campaign finance data available for Rep. McGuire, John J. [R-VA-5]
Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance
This bill has 4 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3]
ID: H001077
Top Contributors
43
Rep. Calvert, Ken [R-CA-41]
ID: C000059
Top Contributors
58
Rep. Collins, Mike [R-GA-10]
ID: C001129
Top Contributors
102
Rep. Guest, Michael [R-MS-3]
ID: G000591
Top Contributors
26
Project 2025 Policy Matches
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.
Introduction
â 527 â Department of the Interior Bay in Alaska; to expand recreation across BLMâs vast, diverse, and unique land- scapes; or to manage timber and rangelands to prevent wildfires, would all journey to Grand Junction. Convention opportunities on Coloradoâs western slope would abound for BLMâs disparate constituencies to congregate and meet with BLM leadership. The Western States Sheriffsâ Association, for example, whose annual gathering attracts hundreds of law enforcement officers from 17 western and plains states might have moved its event to Grand Junction. Law Enforcement Officers. In 2002, at the direction of the Secretary of the Interior in the days following the 9/11 attack, the Inspector General (IG) for DOI made a series of department-wide recommendations regarding law enforcement. Then-Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton ordered adoption of those recom- mendations, which drew strong bipartisan support from Congress. Over the years, most were implemented. One, however, remained undone: placing all BLM law enforcement officers (LEOs), that is, its 212 Law Enforcement Rangers and 76 Special Agents, in an exclusively law enforcement chain of command. This was not just the IGâs recommendation in 2002, but that of every IG who fol- lowed. It is also the strong recommendation of the departmentâs top LEO. Moreover, it has been the urgent recommendation of law enforcement professionals across the country, especially in the West, for decades, including the Western States Sher- iffs Association. Unfortunately, over time, BLM leadership stonewalled, adhering to a haphazard system in which LEOs reported to non-LEO superiors, including not only state directors, but also district and field managers with expertise in other fieldsârange management or petroleum engineering, for exampleâwith only 24 hours of law enforcement study. Obviously, those managers lack a comprehensive understanding of law enforcement issuesâconstitutional, legal, and tactical. In addition, they do not uniformly apply or enforce rules of conduct or ethical stan- dards for LEOs and special agents, leading to weakened esprit de corps and morale. Worse yet, because of their duties as managers of the multiple-use lands under their jurisdiction, they are exposed to conflicts of interests and may intentionally or unintentionally prevent LEOs from investigating violations or applying the law. In the final days of the Trump Administration, Secretary David L. Bernhardt ordered, and Deputy Director William Perry Pendley implemented, the IGâs recom- mendation. Of course, leadership heads exploded; they were furious with their loss of authority, not to mention subordinates and budgets. Unfortunately, in the first days of the Biden Administration, BLM Deputy Director Mike Nedd suspended Pendleyâs order. Nonetheless, LEOs, the BLM, and westerners want LEOsâwho make life-and- death decisionsâto be as well-trained and well-equipped as possible. They should report to a professional, expert, and knowledgeable chain of command. After all, they protect visitors to BLM lands and the natural and cultural resources of those lands, as well as the employees who manage those lands. â 528 â Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise BLMâs LEOs must keep in touch, work closely, and coordinate with fellow fed- eral, state, and local law enforcement officers. In the Trump Administration, they joined state and local law enforcement in arresting dangerous suspects in Cortez, Colorado; responded to a request from a rural sheriff in Arizona to rescue a family stuck in freezing temperatures; and, teamed up in an all-hands-on-deck effort to locate a missing American Indian teenager in rural Montana. More important, western LEOs need the assurance that the BLM LEOs with whom they work are professionals who report through a professional chain of command. Wild Horses and Burros. In 1971, Congress ordered the BLM to manage wild horses and burros to ensure their iconic presence never disappeared from the western landscape. For decades, Congress watched as these herds overwhelmed the landâs ability to sustain them, crowded out indigenous plant and other animal species, threatened the survival of species listed under the Endangered Species Act, invaded private and permitted public land, disturbed private property rights, and turned the sod into concrete. BLM experts said in 2019 that some affected land will never recover from this unmitigated damage. There are 95,000 wild horses and burros roaming nearly 32 million acres in the Westâtriple what scientists and land management experts say the range can sup- port. These animals face starvation and death from lack of forage and water. The population has more than doubled in just the past 10 years and continues to grow at a rate of 10 to 15 percent annually. This number includes the more than 47,000 animals the BLM has already gathered from public lands, at a cost to the American taxpayer of nearly $50 million annually to care for them in off-range corrals. This is not a new issueâit is not just a western issueâit is an American issue. What is happening to these once-proud beasts of burden is neither compassionate nor humane, and what these animals are doing to federal lands and fragile ecosys- tems is unacceptable. In 2019, the American Association of Equine Practitioners and the American Veterinary Medication Associationâtwo of the largest organi- zations of professional veterinarians in the worldâissued a joint policy calling for further reducing overpopulation to protect the health and well-being of wild horses and burros on public lands. The National Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board, a panel of nine experts and professionals convened to advise the BLM, endorsed the joint policy. Furthermore, animal welfare organizations such as the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the Humane Society of the United States recognize that the prosperity of wild horses and burros on public lands is threatened if herds continue to grow unabated. The BLMâs multi-pronged approach in its 2020 Report to Congress46 included expanded adoptions and sales of horses gathered from overpopulated herds; increased gathers and increased capacity for off-range holding facilities and pas- tures; more effective use of fertility control efforts; and improved research, in concert with the academic and veterinary communities, to identify more effective
Introduction
â 527 â Department of the Interior Bay in Alaska; to expand recreation across BLMâs vast, diverse, and unique land- scapes; or to manage timber and rangelands to prevent wildfires, would all journey to Grand Junction. Convention opportunities on Coloradoâs western slope would abound for BLMâs disparate constituencies to congregate and meet with BLM leadership. The Western States Sheriffsâ Association, for example, whose annual gathering attracts hundreds of law enforcement officers from 17 western and plains states might have moved its event to Grand Junction. Law Enforcement Officers. In 2002, at the direction of the Secretary of the Interior in the days following the 9/11 attack, the Inspector General (IG) for DOI made a series of department-wide recommendations regarding law enforcement. Then-Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton ordered adoption of those recom- mendations, which drew strong bipartisan support from Congress. Over the years, most were implemented. One, however, remained undone: placing all BLM law enforcement officers (LEOs), that is, its 212 Law Enforcement Rangers and 76 Special Agents, in an exclusively law enforcement chain of command. This was not just the IGâs recommendation in 2002, but that of every IG who fol- lowed. It is also the strong recommendation of the departmentâs top LEO. Moreover, it has been the urgent recommendation of law enforcement professionals across the country, especially in the West, for decades, including the Western States Sher- iffs Association. Unfortunately, over time, BLM leadership stonewalled, adhering to a haphazard system in which LEOs reported to non-LEO superiors, including not only state directors, but also district and field managers with expertise in other fieldsârange management or petroleum engineering, for exampleâwith only 24 hours of law enforcement study. Obviously, those managers lack a comprehensive understanding of law enforcement issuesâconstitutional, legal, and tactical. In addition, they do not uniformly apply or enforce rules of conduct or ethical stan- dards for LEOs and special agents, leading to weakened esprit de corps and morale. Worse yet, because of their duties as managers of the multiple-use lands under their jurisdiction, they are exposed to conflicts of interests and may intentionally or unintentionally prevent LEOs from investigating violations or applying the law. In the final days of the Trump Administration, Secretary David L. Bernhardt ordered, and Deputy Director William Perry Pendley implemented, the IGâs recom- mendation. Of course, leadership heads exploded; they were furious with their loss of authority, not to mention subordinates and budgets. Unfortunately, in the first days of the Biden Administration, BLM Deputy Director Mike Nedd suspended Pendleyâs order. Nonetheless, LEOs, the BLM, and westerners want LEOsâwho make life-and- death decisionsâto be as well-trained and well-equipped as possible. They should report to a professional, expert, and knowledgeable chain of command. After all, they protect visitors to BLM lands and the natural and cultural resources of those lands, as well as the employees who manage those lands.
Introduction
â 524 â Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Rulemaking. The following policy reversals require rulemaking: l Rescind the Biden rules and reinstate the Trump rules regarding: 1. BLM waste prevention; 2. The Endangered Species Act rules defining Critical Habitat and Critical Habitat Exclusions;41 3. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act;42 and 4. CEQ reforms to NEPA.43 l Reinstate President Trumpâs plan for opening most of the National Petroleum Reserve of Alaska to leasing and development. Personnel Changes. The new Administration should be able to draw on the enormous expertise of state agency personnel throughout the country who are capable and knowledgeable about land management and prove it daily. States are better resource managers than the federal government because they must live with the results. President Trumpâs Schedule F proposal44 regarding accountability in hiring must be reinstituted to bring success to these reforms. Consistent with the theme of bringing successful state resource management examples to the forefront of federal policy, DOI should also look for opportunities to broaden stateâfederal and tribalâfederal cooperative agreements. IMMEDIATE ACTIONS BLM Headquarters. BLM headquarters belongs in the American West. After all, the overwhelming majority of the 245 million surface acres (10 percent of the nationâs landmass) managed by the agency lies in the 11 western states and Alaska: A mere 50,000 surface acres lie elsewhere. Moreover, 97 percent of BLM employees are located in the American West. Thus, the Trump Administrationâs decision to relocate BLM headquarters from Washington, D.C., to the West was the epitome of good governance: That is, it was not only well-informed, but it was also implemented efficiently, effectively, and with an eye toward affected career civil servants. Plus, despite overblown chatter from the inside-the-Beltway media, Congress, with bipartisan support, approved funding the move. Meanwhile, state, tribal, and local officials, the diverse collection of stakehold- ers who use public lands and western neighbors became accustomed to having top BLM decision-makers in Grand Junction, Colorado, rather than up to four â 525 â Department of the Interior time zones away. All of them also appreciated that the BLMâs top subject matter experts were located not in the District of Columbia, but in the western states that most need their knowledge and expertise. Westerners no longer had to travel cross country to address BLM issues. Neither did officials in the West, closest to the resources and people they manage. On July 16, 2019, Secretary of the Interior David L. Bernhardt delivered to Con- gress the proposal for the relocation of nearly 600 BLM headquarters employees. On August 10, 2020, Secretary Bernhardt formally established the Robert F. Burford headquartersânamed after the longest-serving BLM director, a Grand Junction nativeâwith a staff of 41 senior officials and assistants. Another 76 positions were assigned to BLM state offices in western communities such as Billings, Montana; Boise, Idaho; Reno, Nevada; Salt Lake City, Utah; and Cheyenne, Wyoming, to meet critical needs. Scores of other positions were assigned to the states that required BLM expertise. For example, wild horse and burro professionals were relocated to Nevada, home to nearly 60 percent of these western icons. Sixty-one positions were retained in Washington, D.C., to address public, congressional, and regulatory affairs, Freedom of Information Act compliance, and budget development. Despite the dislocating impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the BLM success- fully filled hundreds of long-vacant positions, as well as those that opened because of the move West. The BLM saw notable numbers of applicants for these positionsâ so numerous that the BLM capped the number of eligible applicants to no more than 50. Obviously, reduced commuting times (often from hours to mere minutes), lower cost of living, and opportunity to access vast public lands for recreation made these jobs attractive to potential employees. Many, if not most, applicants stated they would not have applied had the positions been based in Washington, D.C. At the same time, western positions attracted those with the skills needed to meet the BLMâs multiple-use, sustained-yield mandate, disproving the claim that the BLM was suffering a âbrain drain.â The Trump Administration recognized that, despite its attractions, not every- one employed by BLM in Washington, D.C., could move West. The Administration applied a hands-on approach, with all-employee briefing and question-and-answer sessions, regular email communications, and a website devoted to frequently asked questions. Two human resources teams aided employees wishing to remain in federal jobs in the D.C. area: All received new opportunities. The BLMâs move West incurred no legal challenges, no formal Equal Employ- ment Opportunity or U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board complaints, and no adverse union activity. It is hard to please everyone, but the Trump Administra- tionâs BLM did just that, putting the lie to assertions, by some, that the BLM was trying to âfireâ federal employees. The total cost of $17.9 million for relocation incentives, permanent change-of- station moves, temporary labor, travel, printing, rent, supplies, equipment, and
Showing 3 of 5 policy matches
About These Correlations
Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.