To provide for the management authorities of the Department of State.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/5245

Last Updated: September 7, 2026

To provide for the management authorities of the Department of State.

HR. 5245, 119th Congress — read as touching Cybersecurity.

The sponsor

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

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

The money

$86,668 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 State" section, p. 226-228 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 46 - 0.

September 17, 2025

Introduced

📍 Current Status

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

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

HR 5245, a bill that reeks of bureaucratic inefficiency. Let's dissect the financials and identify opportunities for consolidation.

**Total Funding Amounts and Budget Allocations:** The bill authorizes appropriations for the Department of State, but the exact amount is not specified. I estimate it to be around $50-60 billion, considering previous years' allocations. The Under Secretary for Management will receive a significant portion of these funds to fulfill their responsibilities.

**Key Programs and Agencies Receiving Funds:** The bill focuses on management authorities within the Department of State, including:

1. Consular services (visa adjudication, passport issuance, etc.) 2. Human resources and personnel management 3. Information technology and communications systems 4. Security for personnel, facilities, and equipment 5. Medical services for employees

**Notable Increases or Decreases from Previous Years:** Without specific funding amounts, it's difficult to determine increases or decreases. However, I expect a moderate increase in funding for IT and security programs, given the growing importance of digital diplomacy and cybersecurity.

**Riders or Policy Provisions Attached to Funding:** The bill includes provisions related to the management of historic and artistic furnishings in reception areas of the Harry S. Truman Federal Building. This is a minor concern, but it may create opportunities for private companies to provide conservation services.

**Fiscal Impact and Deficit Implications:** As with most government spending, this bill will contribute to the national deficit. I estimate an additional $5-10 billion in annual expenditures, depending on the final funding amounts. This is a drop in the bucket compared to our nation's overall debt, but it's still a concern.

In conclusion, HR 5245 is a typical example of government inefficiency, with too much focus on bureaucratic management and not enough on innovation and private sector partnerships. As a visionary entrepreneur, I would propose streamlining these programs, reducing waste, and introducing more privatization opportunities to increase efficiency and reduce costs.

Recommendation: Consider attaching riders that promote public-private partnerships in areas like IT, security, and medical services. This could lead to cost savings and improved outcomes for the Department of State.

💰 Campaign Finance Network

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

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$86,668

18 donors

PACs

Organizations

$1,000

Committees

Individuals

$85,668

No PAC contributions found

MURTAGH, COSSU, VENDITTI & CASTRO-BLANCO, LLP

1 transaction

$1,000

No committee contributions found

BATMASIAN, JAMES

2 transactions

$13,200

SILVERMAN, JEFFREY

2 transactions

$13,068

DEUTSCH, SHMULEY

2 transactions

$7,800

AUSTIN, ROBERT

1 transaction

$6,600

SCALA, MARY ELLEN

1 transaction

$5,300

PERLMUTTER, RAFUEL

1 transaction

$3,400

BANKE, BARBARA

1 transaction

$3,300

BERTUSSI, THOMAS P. MR.

1 transaction

$3,300

BOONE, DAN

1 transaction

$3,300

CHRISTIE, CHRIS

1 transaction

$3,300

CLAUGUS, THOMAS

1 transaction

$3,300

DUBITSKY, ALEX

1 transaction

$3,300

FORCHHEIMER, JODY

1 transaction

$3,300

GINSBURG, MARTIN

1 transaction

$3,300

GROSSMAN, JAY

1 transaction

$3,300

HARRIS, JOSH

1 transaction

$3,300

HUGIN, KATHLEEN

1 transaction

$3,300

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

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 51 connections

Total contributions: $51

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

Showing top 18 donors by contribution amount

1 Org17 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 5 helped.

+Cybersecurityconfidence 0.85
Subtitle C (Diplomatic Technology) includes cybersecurity and risk management as responsibilities of the Chief Information Officer for Diplomatic Technology, and Subtitle E (Diplomatic Security) includes implementation of technical, physical, and cybersecurity programs, creating opportunities for cybersecurity firms.
+Telecommunicationsconfidence 0.80
Subtitle C (Diplomatic Technology) establishes a Chief Information Officer for Diplomatic Technology and a Bureau of Diplomatic Technology responsible for information technology, cybersecurity, and communications infrastructure, which benefits telecommunications industry through potential contracts and technology modernization.
+Construction & Engineeringconfidence 0.75
Subtitle F (Asset Management) includes planning, acquisition, design, construction, maintenance, and disposal of United States diplomatic facilities abroad, and management of Department-owned or leased facilities within the United States, benefiting construction and engineering firms.
+Defense Contractorsconfidence 0.70
Subtitle E (Diplomatic Security) references the Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986 and includes protective operations, law enforcement, security programs, and investigations, which may involve defense contractors for security services and equipment.
+Law Enforcement & Surveillance Techconfidence 0.70
Subtitle E (Diplomatic Security) includes protective operations and law enforcement, investigations and counterintelligence, and training, which may benefit law enforcement and surveillance technology vendors through contracts and technology use.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Lawler, Michael [R-NY-17])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HELPS

Telecommunications$10,255
from 18 contributions
- REID, THOMAS$3,300
- BUONO, FRANCIS$1,000
- CONNORS, BILL$1,000
- DONNELLY, THOMAS$1,000
- MCDONALD, CHRISTOPHER$1,000
Defense Contractors$650
from 2 contributions
- PEDDIBHOTLA, SRIRAM$500
- YAGEL, BRETT MR.$150
Law Enforcement & Surveillance Tech$250
from 1 contribution
- NORTON, JAMES$250

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 State

Weak

Vector: 67%

Pages: 226-228AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill provides appropriations for State Department management and consular services but does not include the structural reforms, foreign assistance consolidation, or international organization funding adjustments advocated in Project 2025."

Key themes:Department of State fundingManagement and administrationAppropriations

— 193 — Department of State the supply of federal dollars to the WHO and other health-focused international organizations pending adjustment of their policies. The United States must return to treating international organizations as vehi- cles for promoting American interests—or take steps to extract itself from those organizations. SHAPING THE FUTURE Development of a grand foreign policy strategy is key to the next Administra- tion’s success, but without addressing structural and related issues of the State Department, this strategy will be at risk. The Hart–Rudman Commission called for a significant restructuring of the State Department specifically and foreign assis- tance programs generally, stating that funding increases could only be justified if there was greater confidence that institutions would use their funding effectively.22 Sadly, the exact opposite has occurred. The State Department has metastasized in structure and resources, but neither the function of the department nor the use of taxpayer dollars has improved. The next Administration can take steps to remedy these deficiencies. The State Department’s greatest problem is certainly not an absence of resources. As noted, the department boasts tens of thousands of employees and billions of dollars of funding—including significant amounts of discretionary fund- ing. It also exists among a broader array of federal agencies that are duplicative, particularly when it comes to the provision of direct and indirect foreign assistance. Realistically, meaningful reform of the State Department will require significant streamlining. Below are some key structural and operational recommendations that will be essential for the next Administration’s success, and which will lay crucial founda- tions for other necessary reforms. l Develop a reorganization strategy. Despite periodic attempts by previous Administrations (including the Trump Administration) to make more than cosmetic changes to the State Department, its structure has remained largely unchanged since the 20th century.23 The State Department will better serve future Administrations, regardless of party, if it were to be meaningfully streamlined. The next Administration should develop a complete hypothetical reorganization of the department—one which would tighten accountability to political leadership, reduce overhead, eliminate redundancy, waste fewer taxpayer resources, and recommend additional personnel-related changes for improvement of function. Such reorganization could be creative, but also carefully review specific structure-related problems that have been documented over the years. This reorganization effort would necessarily assess what office closures — 194 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise can be carried out with and without congressional approval. Timelines for action on these fronts should be developed accordingly, but speed should be a priority. l Consolidate foreign assistance authorities. Foreign assistance is a critical foreign policy tool that is too often disconnected from the federal government’s practice of foreign policy. Bureaucrats spend significant energy resisting the use of non-emergency foreign assistance to leverage positive results for the United States, even though it is a perfectly reasonable proposition. The coordination of foreign assistance dollars is also difficult because the foreign assistance budget and foreign loan issuance authorities are divided across numerous Cabinet departments, smaller agencies, and other offices. The next Administration should take steps to ensure that future foreign assistance clearly and unambiguously supports the President’s foreign policy agenda. For example, the next administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, which is technically subordinate to the State Department, should be authorized to take on the additional role of Director of Foreign Assistance with the rank of Deputy Secretary and oversee all foreign assistance. This role—which existed briefly during the George W. Bush Administration before it was eliminated by the Obama Administration—would empower the dual-hatted official to better align and coordinate with the manifold foreign assistance programs across the federal government. The next Administration should also evaluate whether these multiple sources of foreign assistance are in the national interest and, if not, develop a plan to consolidate foreign assistance authorities. l Make public diplomacy and international broadcasting serve American interests. A key part of U.S. foreign policy is the ability to communicate with not only governments but with the peoples of the world. Indeed, in some ways, communicating directly with the public is more important than communicating with governments, particularly in times of governmental conflict or disagreement. Public diplomacy has historically been, and remains, vital to American foreign policy success. Unfortunately, U.S. public diplomacy, which largely relies on taxpayer-funded international broadcasting outlets, has been deeply ineffective in recent years. The U.S. government’s first foray into international broadcasting started with the Voice of America radio broadcast in 1942, which was intended as

Department of State

Weak

Vector: 66%

Pages: 226-228AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on funding State Department management and consular services, while the Project 2025 policy emphasizes restructuring the State Department for efficiency, reducing redundancy, and reevaluating participation in international health organizations like the WHO. There is minimal direct alignment, as the bill does not address reorganization, accountability to political leadership, or WHO funding conditions."

Key themes:State Department reformmanagement efficiencyforeign operations funding

Agency for International Development

Weak

Vector: 65%

Pages: 303-305AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill addresses Department of State management appropriations and does not reference USAID or the specific reforms outlined in Project 2025, resulting only in tangential themes like general management improvement and resource allocation."

Key themes:management reformpolitical appointeesresource management

— 271 — Agency for International Development should reorient the bulk of F staff from focusing on the formulation of the annual President’s budget proposal to the execution of already appropriated resources. This should include eliminating the duplicative Mission and Bureau Resource Requests; speeding up the availability of appropriations by delivering to Congress within 60 days the report required by Section 653(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA); and fast-tracking the approval of Congressional Notifications (CNs) and other pre-obligation requirements. Management Bureau. As indicated previously, the next conservative Admin- istration should name a political appointee as USAID’s Senior Procurement Executive and Director of the agency’s Office of Acquisition and Assistance (M/ OAA). Political appointees with the appropriate credentials (including warrants) should be placed within M/OAA, and the agency should exercise its authority to engage qualified experts from other federal departments and agencies and outside of government (if they are free of conflicts of interest) on the Technical Commit- tees that review applications for USAID’s contract and grant competitions. The Administration should change the designation of USAID’s Competition Advocate to an individual favorable to innovative types of contracts that can reduce the aid oligopoly’s grip on the agency. Office of Human Capital and Talent Management. As soon as possible after Inauguration Day, the next conservative Administration should name a political appointee as USAID’s Chief Human Capital Officer (CHCO) and Director of the Office of Human Capital and Talent Management. USAID’s White House Liaison must be an individual with substantial experience with federal personnel sys- tems. The White House Office of Presidential Personnel should allow the USAID Administrator to explore with counterparts at the Office of Personnel Management whether the agency could hire personnel under both the Administratively Deter- mined authority and Schedule C of the Excepted Service of the Federal Civil Service. USAID should be one of the agencies to pilot-test a reinstated Executive Order 13957,16 which created a Schedule F within the Excepted Service, and should aggres- sively recruit and place candidates into term-limited positions under Schedule A of the Excepted Service (especially veterans). The new CHCO should examine how the existing members of the Senior Executive Service (SES) at USAID should be reworked throughout the agency and should institute an SES Mobility Program to encourage the regular rotation of senior career leaders, including through details to other departments and agencies. Bureau for Policy, Planning, and Learning. The next conservative Admin- istration should shift the policy functions of the Bureau for Policy, Planning, and Learning (PPL) to the Office of Budget and Resource Management (BRM), located in the Office of the Administrator. It should rename BRM the Office of Budget, Policy, and Resource Management (BPRM) and staff the policy team with political appointees. The Administration should also move the responsibility for reviewing — 272 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise and processing proposed changes in USAID’s policy bible, the Automated Direc- tives System (ADS), from the Management Bureau to the new BPRM. Even before these changes, the Assistant Administrator for PPL should decree an immediate freeze on changes in the ADS and agencywide policy documents to allow for the priority publication of amendments to reflect the new Administra- tion’s viewpoint. All major agency policies should be reviewed and amended or withdrawn within the new Administration’s first calendar year in office. Bureau for Legislative and Public Affairs. The next conservative Admin- istration should invest no more than 10 percent of USAID’s allocation of Administratively Determined politically appointed positions in the Bureau for Legislative and Public Affairs. A priority for these positions (combined with hires under Schedule A) should be the review and editing of the agency’s public-facing web pages and social media accounts to eliminate material that does not conform to the new Administration’s policies. The agency should accelerate the review of Con- gressional Notifications within LPA and publish all CNs and congressional reports. To ensure consistency and clarity of public messaging, LPA should gain direct authority over the communications staff scattered through USAID’s various Bureaus and Offices. LPA should expand its public-facing efforts to include con- servative allies that are active in global development and humanitarian aid work, including industry groups, nonprofits, trade associations, foundations, and advo- cacy organizations, and correspondingly reduce the aid industrial complex’s grip on USAID’s corporate relationships. Office of General Counsel. Along with the Director of M/OAA, the General Counsel is one of the two or three most important positions at USAID and should be a priority for immediate appointments. Because proper legal interpretation of executive orders and internal USAID policy is crucial, the next conservative Administration should recruit and appoint a commanding team of Schedule C attorneys in the Office of the General Counsel (OGC). Within weeks of Inau- guration Day, OGC should issue clear guidance on the eligibility of faith-based organizations for USAID funding. Office of Budget Resources and Management. The Director of Budget Resources and Management should be a political appointee empowered as part of the Administrator’s senior management team. BRM’s highest priorities should be to prepare the report required by Section 653(a) according to the Administrator’s guidance, institute a fast-track process for the submission of Congressional Notifica- tions, and identify already appropriated resources to reprogram immediately to fund the new Administration’s priorities. The next conservative Administration should consider prioritizing the placing of young political appointees in BRM over LPA. Bureau for Democracy, Development, and Innovation. A key outcome of the transformation of USAID undertaken during the Trump Administration, the Bureau for Democracy, Development, and Innovation (DDI) is the home for most

Department of State

Weak

Vector: 63%

Pages: 208-210AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on funding and administrative provisions for the Department of State's management authorities, while the Project 2025 policy emphasizes treaty review, constitutional alignment, and strategic redirection of diplomatic efforts—particularly regarding China and interagency coordination. There is minimal direct overlap, as the bill does not address treaty ratification, enforcement of unratified agreements, or China policy initiatives."

Key themes:Department of Statemanagement and administrationinteragency coordination

— 175 — Department of State numerous logistical challenges in negotiating, approving, and implementing trea- ties and agreements. This is particularly true under the Biden Administration. For example, under the Biden Administration, the State Department was considered sufficiently unreliable in terms of alignment and effectiveness such that its political leadership invoked its Circular 175 (C-175) authority to delegate its diplomatic capacity to other agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security. At time of publication, the State Department is negotiating (or seeking to nego- tiate) large-scale, sovereignty-eroding agreements that could come at considerable economic and other costs to the American people. Although such agreements should be evaluated and approved as are treaties, the Biden Administration is likely to simply call them “agreements.” The Biden State Department not only approves but also enforces treaties that have not been ratified by the U.S. Senate. This practice must be thoroughly reviewed—and most likely jettisoned. The next President should recalibrate how the State Department handles trea- ties and agreements, primarily by restoring constitutionality to these processes. He or she should direct the Secretary of State to freeze any ongoing treaty or inter- national agreement negotiations and assess whether those efforts align with the new President’s foreign policy direction. The next Administration should also direct the secretary to order an immediate stand-down on enforcement of any treaties that have not been ratified by the Senate, and order a thorough review of the degree to which such enforcement has impacted the department’s functions, policies, and use of resources. The Secretary of State, in cooperation with the Office of the Attorney General and the White House Counsel’s Office, should also conduct a review to identify “agreements” that are really treaty commitments within the ordinary public mean- ing of the Constitution,6 and suspend compliance pending presidential transmittal of those agreements to the Senate for advice and consent. The next Administration should also move to withdraw from treaties that have been under Senate consider- ation for 20 years or more, with the understanding that those treaties are unlikely to be ratified. Under circumstances in which ratification of a stale treaty before the Senate still serves national interests, the treaty letter of transmittal and sub- mission should be updated for current circumstances. The Secretary of State must revoke most outstanding C-175 authorities that have been granted to other agen- cies during previous Administrations, although such revocations should be closely coordinated with the White House for logistical reasons. Coordinate with Other Agencies. Interagency engagement in this new environment must be similarly adjusted to mirror presidential direction. Indeed, coordination among federal agencies is challenging even in the most well-oiled Administrations. Although such coordination is inescapable and sometimes produc- tive, agencies tend to leverage each other’s resources in ways that occasionally have off-mission consequences for the agency or agencies with the resources. Ideally, the — 176 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Secretary of State should work as part of an agile foreign policy team along with the National Security Advisor, the Secretary of Defense, and other agency heads to flesh out and advance the President’s foreign policy. Bureaucratic stovepipes of the past should be less important than commitment to, and achievement of, the President’s foreign policy agenda. The State Department’s role in these interagency discussions must reflect the President’s clear direction and disallow resources and tools to be used in any way that detracts from the presidentially directed mission. Coordinate with Congress. Congress has both the statutory and appropri- ations authority to impact the State Department’s operations and has a strong interest in key aspects of American foreign policy. The department must therefore take particular care in its interaction with Congress, since poor interactions with Congress, regardless of intentions, could trigger congressional pushback or have other negative impacts on the President’s agenda. This will require particularly strong leadership of the Department of State’s Bureau of Legislative Affairs. The Secretary of State and political leadership should ensure full coordination with the White House regarding congressional engage- ment on any State Department responsibility. This may lead to, for example, the President authorizing the State Department to engage with Members of Congress and relevant committees on certain issues (including statutorily designated con- gressional consultations), but to remain “radio silent” on volatile or designated issues on which the White House wants to be the primary or only voice. All such authorized department engagements with Congress must be driven and handled by political appointees in conjunction with career officials who have the relevant expertise and are willing to work in concert with the President’s political appoin- tees on particularly sensitive matters. Respond Vigorously to the Chinese Threat. The State Department recently opened the Office of China Coordination, or “China House.” This office is intended to bring together experts inside and outside the State Department to coordinate U.S. government relations with China “and advance our vision for an open, inclu- sive international system.”7 Whether China House will streamline U.S. government communication, consensus, and action on China policy—given the presence of other agencies with strong competing or adverse interests—remains to be seen. The unit is dependent on adequate and competent staff being assigned by other bureaus within the State Department. Nonetheless, the concept is one a Republican Administration should support mutatis mutandis. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has been “at war” with the U.S. for decades. Now that this reality has been accepted throughout the gov- ernment, the State Department must be prepared to lead the U.S. diplomatic effort accordingly. The centralization of efforts in one place is critical to this end. Review Immigration and Domestic Security Requirements. Arguably, the department’s most noteworthy challenge on the global stage has been its handling

Department of Homeland Security

Weak

Vector: 63%

Pages: 205-207AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on funding and administrative provisions for the Department of State, including management authorities and consular services, but does not address political appointee placement, leadership transitions, or ambassadorial reviews as emphasized in the Project 2025 policy. While both concern State Department operations, the bill lacks the personnel and ideological alignment mechanisms central to the policy objective."

Key themes:Department of Statemanagement authoritiespersonnel oversight

— 173 — Department of State service and civil service personnel who share the President’s vision and policy agendas—to run the department. This can be done by taking these steps at the outset of the next Administration. Exert Leverage During the Confirmation Process. Notwithstanding the challenges and slowness of the modern U.S. Senate confirmation process, the next President can exert leverage on the Senate if he or she is willing to place State Department appointees directly into those roles, pending confirmation. Doing so would both ensure that the department has immediate senior political leadership and would force the Senate to act on nominees’ appointments instead of being allowed to engage in dilatory tactics that cripple the State Department’s function- ality for weeks, months, or even years. Assert Leadership in the Appointment Process. The next Administration should assert leadership over, and guidance to, the State Department by placing political appointees in positions that do not require Senate confirmation, including senior advisors, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretaries, and Deputy Assistant Sec- retaries. Given the department’s size, the next Administration should also increase the number of political appointees to manage it. To the extent possible, all non-confirmed senior appointees should be selected by the President-elect’s transition team or the new President’s Office of Presiden- tial Personnel (depending on the timing of selection) and be in place the first day of the Administration. No one in a leadership position on the morning of January 20 should hold that position at the end of the day. These recommendations do not imply that foreign service and civil service officials should be excluded from key roles: It is hard to imagine a scenario in which they are not immediately relevant to the transition of power. The main suggestion here is that as many political appoin- tees as possible should be in place at the start of a new Administration. Support and Train Political Appointees. The Secretary of State should use his or her office and its resources to ensure regular coordination among all political appointees, which should take the form of strategy meetings, trainings, and other events. The secretary should also take reasonable steps to ensure that the State Department’s political appointees are connected to other departments’ political appointees, which is critical for cross-agency effectiveness and morale. The sec- retary should capitalize on the more experienced political appointees by using them as the foundation for a mentorship program for less experienced political appointees. The interaction of political appointees must be routine and operational rather than incidental or occasional, and it must be treated as a crucial dimension for the next Administration’s success. Maximize the Value of Career Officials. Career foreign service and civil service personnel can and must be leveraged for their expertise and commit- ment to the President’s mission. Indeed, the State Department has thousands of employees with unparalleled linguistic, cultural, policy, and administrative skills, — 174 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise and large numbers of them have been an enormous resource to the Secretaries of State under which they have served. The secretary must find a way to make clear to career officials that despite prior history and modes of operation, they need not be adversaries of a conservative President, Secretary of State, or the team of political appointees. Reboot Ambassadors Worldwide. All ambassadors are required to submit letters of resignation at the start of a new Administration. Previous Republican Administrations have accepted the resignations of only the political ambassadors and allowed the foreign service ambassadors to retain their posts, sometimes for months or years into a new Administration.5 The next Administration must go further: It should both accept the resignations of all political ambassadors and quickly review and reassess all career ambassadors. This review should commence well before the new Administration’s first day. Ambassadors in countries where U.S. policy or posture would substantially change under the new Administration, as well as any who have evinced hostility toward the incoming Administration or its agenda, should be recalled immediately. The priority should be to put in place new ambassadors who support the Presi- dent’s agenda among political appointees, foreign service officers, and civil service personnel, with no predetermined percentage among these categories. Political ambassadors with strong personal relationships with the President should be pri- oritized for key strategic posts such as Australia, Japan, the United Kingdom, the United Nations, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). RIGHTING THE SHIP Ensuring the State Department is accountable for serving American citi- zens first will require—at a minimum—that the following steps be implemented immediately: Review Retroactively. Before inauguration, the President-elect’s department transition team should assess every aspect of State Department negotiations and funding commitments. Upon inauguration, the Secretary of State should order an immediate freeze on all efforts to implement unratified treaties and international agreements, allocation of resources, foreign assistance disbursements, domestic and international contracts and payments, hiring and recruiting decisions, etc., pending a political appointee-driven review to ensure that such efforts comport with the new Administration’s policies. The quality of this review is more import- ant than speed. The posture of the department during this review should be an unwavering desire to prioritize the American people—including a recognition that the federal government must be a diligent steward of taxpayer dollars. Implement Repair. The State Department must change its handling of international agreements to restore constitutional governance. Under prior Administrations, unnecessary institutional factors in the department caused

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. Lawler, Michael

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 298 Route 292 in Holmes, New York, as the Sheriff Adrian Butch Anderson Post Office Building.

119/hr/1008

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 86 Main Street in Haverstraw, New York, as the Paul Piperato Post Office Building.

119/hr/1009

Northeast Lobsterman Protection Act of 2026

119/hr/9436

To provide for the management authorities of the Department of State.