The bill
To provide for the public diplomacy authorities of the Department of State, and for other purposes.
HR. 5251, 119th Congress — read as touching Print & Broadcast Media.
To provide for the public diplomacy authorities of the Department of State, and for other purposes.
Download PDFBill ID: 119/hr/5251
Last Updated: December 14, 2025
Sponsored by
Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]
ID: H001058
Follow the money
The sponsor
Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
$323,650 raised
28 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
The alignment
62% match to Project 2025
This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 724-726 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: 48 - 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
Another masterpiece of bureaucratic doublespeak, courtesy of the esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this monstrosity and uncover the real disease beneath the legislative theater.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's primary objective is to establish an Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy within the Department of State, because what we really need is another layer of bureaucratic red tape to "coordinate" our public diplomacy efforts. The Under Secretary will oversee global public diplomacy, information operations, and educational/cultural exchange programs. In other words, they'll be responsible for spinning America's image abroad while pretending to promote cultural understanding.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill creates a new Under Secretary position, which is essentially a power grab by the State Department to centralize control over public diplomacy efforts. It also establishes an Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, because we clearly need more bureaucrats to administer exchange programs. The bill authorizes appropriations for fiscal years 2026 and 2027, ensuring that our tax dollars will be wasted on "public diplomacy" initiatives that will likely achieve nothing but perpetuate the status quo.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects are involved: the State Department, the Department of Defense, the intelligence community, and various other government agencies. Oh, and let's not forget the private sector, which will be "partnering" with the government to share the costs (and profits) of these public diplomacy efforts.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** The real impact of this bill will be to further entrench the State Department's bureaucratic machinery, ensuring that our public diplomacy efforts remain mired in inefficiency and ineffectiveness. The Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs will likely become a dumping ground for cronies and sycophants, while the Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy will be too busy attending interagency meetings to actually accomplish anything meaningful.
In short, this bill is a classic case of "legislative lip service," designed to create the illusion of action while maintaining the status quo. It's a perfect example of how our government excels at creating bureaucratic monstrosities that serve only to perpetuate their own power and influence.
Diagnosis: Terminal Bureaucratic Disease (TBD), characterized by an excessive growth of redundant agencies, pointless initiatives, and a complete disregard for actual effectiveness. Prognosis: Poor. Treatment: None available; the patient is beyond salvation.
Related Topics
Foreign Aid & DiplomacyFederal Budget & AppropriationsState & Local Government Affairs
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)
💰 Campaign Finance Network
Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
Total Contributions
$323,650
24 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$8,550
Committees
$0
Individuals
$315,100
No PAC contributions found
1
POKAGON BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS
$3,300
2
THALOP LLC
$2,000
3
BARREL DOG, LLC
$1,000
4
NOAH HOMES LLC
$1,000
5
B&B DAIRY
$1,000
6
STRAIGHT LINE RED ANGUS
$250
No committee contributions found
1
VAN ANDEL, AMY
$75,000
2
VAN ANDEL, STEPHEN
$75,000
3
HAWORTH, RICHARD G
$47,900
4
SCHWARZMAN, CHRISTINE H.
$11,600
5
SCHWARZMAN, STEPHEN A
$11,600
6
HAWORTH, MATT R
$11,600
7
QUINTILIAN, JOSEPH
$11,600
8
HIBMA, DANIEL
$11,600
9
SHINELDECKER, SHAR
$10,200
10
KLINSKY, STEVEN B.
$6,600
11
DIPRISCO, GREGORY
$6,600
12
PAYNE, ROBERT
$5,800
13
BAKER, JEFFREY
$5,000
14
CARMICHAEL, CATHRYN B
$5,000
15
PETERS, JAMES
$5,000
16
LANTING, ARLYN
$5,000
17
LANTING, MARCIA
$5,000
18
WORKMAN, JOHN
$5,000
Donor Network - Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]
PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Loading...
Showing 46 nodes and 28 connections (47 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $323,650
Top Donors - Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]
Showing top 24 donors by contribution amount
6 Orgs18 Individuals
Industry Impact
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 1 helped, 2 harmed.
- +Print & Broadcast Mediaconfidence 0.90
Section 702 authorizes appropriations for public diplomacy, including support for United States-funded media, which could benefit print and broadcast media outlets
- −Big Tech Platformsconfidence 0.80
Section 721(b)(8) mentions opposing censorship by foreign governments, which could impact big tech platforms' operations in certain countries
- −Telecommunicationsconfidence 0.70
Section 721(b)(6) talks about advancing circumvention and access tools, which might affect telecommunications companies' business models
Project 2025 Policy Matches
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.
Introduction
Moderate61.7%
Pages: 724-726
— 691 — 22 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY William L. Walton, Stephen Moore, and David R. Burton INTRODUCTION The U.S. Treasury Department has a broad regulatory and policy reach. The next Administration should make major policy changes to: (1) reduce regulatory impediments to economic growth that reduce living standards and endanger pros- perity; (2) reduce regulatory compliance costs that increase prices and cost jobs; (3) promote fiscal responsibility; (4) promote the international competitiveness of U.S. businesses; and (5) better respect the American people’s due process and privacy rights. These goals should be accomplished through: executive action (primar- ily treasury orders and treasury directives) and departmental reorganization; rulemakings; promoting constructive policies in Congress; actions in international organizations; and treaties. The primary subject matter focus of the incoming Administration’s Treasury Department should be: l Tax policy and tax administration; l Fiscal responsibility; l Improved financial regulation; l Addressing the economic and financial aspects of the geopolitical threat posed by China and other hostile countries;
Introduction
Moderate61.3%
Pages: 724-726
— 691 — 22 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY William L. Walton, Stephen Moore, and David R. Burton INTRODUCTION The U.S. Treasury Department has a broad regulatory and policy reach. The next Administration should make major policy changes to: (1) reduce regulatory impediments to economic growth that reduce living standards and endanger pros- perity; (2) reduce regulatory compliance costs that increase prices and cost jobs; (3) promote fiscal responsibility; (4) promote the international competitiveness of U.S. businesses; and (5) better respect the American people’s due process and privacy rights. These goals should be accomplished through: executive action (primar- ily treasury orders and treasury directives) and departmental reorganization; rulemakings; promoting constructive policies in Congress; actions in international organizations; and treaties. The primary subject matter focus of the incoming Administration’s Treasury Department should be: l Tax policy and tax administration; l Fiscal responsibility; l Improved financial regulation; l Addressing the economic and financial aspects of the geopolitical threat posed by China and other hostile countries; — 692 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Reform of the anti-money laundering and beneficial ownership reporting systems; l Reversal of the racist “equity” agenda of the Biden Administration; and l Reversal of the economically destructive and ineffective climate-related financial-risk agenda of the Biden Administration. BIDEN ADMINISTRATION TREASURY DEPARTMENT The Biden Administration Treasury Department has failed badly in achieving every one of the agency’s core objectives. The financial affairs of the nation have seldom been in worse condition, with the national debt expanding by more than $4 trillion in Biden’s first two years in office. No President in modern times—perhaps ever—has been more fiscally reckless than has the Biden Administration. The soundness and stability of U.S. currency, the dollar, has been put at risk because of the worst inflation in four decades. American families have been made poorer by Biden’s economic strategy of taxing, spending, borrowing, regulating, and printing money. The average family has seen real annual earn- ings fall about $6,000 during the Biden Administration.1 In 2022, the average American’s 401(k) plan dropped in value from $130,700 to $103,900—more than 20 percent.2 Why has the Biden Administration failed to achieve virtually all components of its mission? Under the leadership of Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, the depart- ment has made “equity” and “climate change” among its top five priorities. The next Administration must act decisively to curtail activities that fall outside Trea- sury’s mandate and primary mission. Treasury must refocus on its core missions of promoting economic growth, prosperity, and economic stability. For a clear statement of Treasury’s mission drift, one need look no further than Secretary Yellen’s introduction in the Treasury Department’s Fiscal Year 2022–2026 Strategic Plan: We will have to address the structural problems that have plagued our economy for decades: the decline in labor force participation, income and racial inequality, and serious underinvestment in crucial public goods like childcare, education, and physical infrastructure. And then there are rising challenges, like climate change, which, left unchecked, will undermine every aspect of our economy from supply chains to the financial system.3 Treasury’s mission drift into a “woke” agenda, is exemplified in a comparison of Domestic Finance’s changed responsibilities from 2015 to 2023:
Introduction
Moderate60.6%
Pages: 208-210
— 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 — 177 — Department of State of immigration and domestic security issues, which are inextricably related. The State Department’s apparent posture toward these two issues, which are of para- mount importance to the American people, has historically been that they are of lesser importance than other issues and that they can be treated as concessions in broader diplomatic engagements. In other instances in which access to the U.S. in the form of immigrant (permanent) and nonimmigrant (temporary) visas could potentially serve as diplomatic leverage, it is almost never used. To some degree, the State Department and many of its personnel appear to view the U.S. immigra- tion system less as a tool for strengthening the United States and more as a global welfare program. To ensure the safety, security, and prosperity of all Americans, this must change. Below are several key areas in which the department’s formal and informal postures must adjust to reflect the current immigration and domestic security environment: l Visa reciprocity. The United States should strictly enforce the doctrine of reciprocity when issuing visas to all foreign nationals. For too long, the U.S. has provided virtually unfettered access to foreign nationals from countries that do not respond in kind—including countries that are actively hostile to U.S. interests and nationals. Mandatory reciprocity will convey the necessary reality that other countries do not have an unfettered right to U.S. access and must reciprocally offer favorable visa-based access to U.S. nationals. The State Department’s reaction time to other countries’ changes in visa policies with respect to the U.S. must be streamlined to ensure it can be updated in real time. l Section 243(d) visa sanctions. Visa sanctions under section 243(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA),8 enacted into law to motivate countries to accept the return of any nationals who have been ordered removed from the U.S., should be quickly and fully enforced. Recalcitrant countries that do not accept receipt of their returned nationals will risk the suspension of issuance of all immigrant visas, all nonimmigrant visas, or all visas. These country-specific sanctions should remain in place until the sanctioned country accepts the return of all its removal-pending nationals and formally commits to future, regular acceptance of its nationals. Black- letter implementation of this law will demonstrate a heretofore lacking seriousness to the international community that other nations must respect U.S. immigration laws and work with federal authorities to accept returning nationals—or lose access to the United States. l Rightsizing refugee admissions. The Biden Administration has engineered what is nothing short of a collapse of U.S. border security and
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.
Related Bills
Other Bills by Rep. Huizenga, Bill
Similar Topics
To track taxpayer dollars sent to adversarial countries and foreign entities of concern, and for other purposes.
119/hr/29172 shared topics
A bill to require a briefing on increasing procurement of strategic and critical materials from sources in the United States.
119/s/31642 shared topics
Enhancing Stakeholder Support and Outreach for Preparedness Grants Act
119/hr/40582 shared topics