Post-Disaster Reforestation and Restoration Act

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/528

Last Updated: September 7, 2026

Post-Disaster Reforestation and Restoration Act

HR. 528, 119th Congress — read as touching Construction & Engineering.

The sponsor

Rep. Pettersen, Brittany [D-CO-7]

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

The money

$88,000 raised

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

The alignment

70% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of the Interior" section, p. 566-568 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

March 16, 2026

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

Passed House

Senate Review

📍 Current Status

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

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

**Bill Analysis: HR 528 - Post-Disaster Reforestation and Restoration Act**

As a visionary entrepreneur, I'll cut through the bureaucratic jargon and distill this bill's essence.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of HR 528 is to establish a program for post-disaster reforestation and restoration on federal lands. The bill aims to restore ecosystems damaged by unplanned disturbances, such as wildfires or insect infestations, and promote natural regeneration.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:**

* Creates a new program within the Department of the Interior to identify and prioritize areas for reforestation and restoration. * Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to award grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements to support priority projects. * Establishes a reporting requirement for the Secretary to submit annual reports on program progress and recommendations.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

* Federal agencies (e.g., National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management) * Indian Tribes * States, territories, and local governments * Institutions of higher education * Private companies involved in reforestation and restoration efforts

**Potential Impact & Implications:** From a business perspective, this bill presents both opportunities and challenges. On one hand, the program's focus on reforestation and restoration could create new markets for innovative technologies and services, such as drone-based seed dispersal or advanced forest monitoring systems.

On the other hand, the bill's emphasis on federal land management and environmental protection may lead to increased regulatory hurdles for private companies operating in these areas. The reporting requirements and potential funding allocations could also divert resources away from more pressing economic priorities.

As a forward-thinking entrepreneur, I would advise my fellow business leaders to closely monitor this bill's progress and prepare to adapt to any changes in the regulatory landscape. By doing so, we can capitalize on emerging opportunities while minimizing potential disruptions to our operations.

**Projected Impact on My Empire:** Based on preliminary estimates, I project that HR 528 could lead to a moderate increase in demand for reforestation and restoration services, potentially generating an additional $500 million to $1 billion in revenue for companies operating in this space. However, the bill's regulatory implications may offset some of these gains, resulting in a net impact of +$200 million to -$300 million on my empire's bottom line.

**Recommendation:** To maximize returns and minimize risks, I recommend that business leaders engage with policymakers to shape the program's implementation and ensure that it aligns with our industry's needs. By doing so, we can create a more favorable regulatory environment and capitalize on emerging opportunities in the reforestation and restoration sector.

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Pettersen, Brittany [D-CO-7]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$88,000

22 donors

PACs

Organizations

$28,600

Committees

Individuals

$59,400

No PAC contributions found

HABEMATOLEL POMO OF UPPER LAKE TRIBE OF CALIFORNIA

2 transactions

$6,600

OTOE-MISSOURIA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA

2 transactions

$6,600

TURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND OF CHIPPEWA OF NORTH DAKOTA

2 transactions

$6,600

THE CHICKASAW NATION

4 transactions

$4,500

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

BGR GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, LLC

1 transaction

$1,000

No committee contributions found

POWERS, JOHN PRENTICE

2 transactions

$6,600

ROBINSON ASARCH, K. NICOLE

2 transactions

$6,600

CHAMBERS, MERLE C.

1 transaction

$3,300

ERGEN, CANTEY M

1 transaction

$3,300

ERGEN, CHARLES W

1 transaction

$3,300

FISHER, CYNTHIA

1 transaction

$3,300

JURVETSON, KARLA

1 transaction

$3,300

KWAN, KATHY

1 transaction

$3,300

CASCARILLA, MARISSA

1 transaction

$3,300

DWYER, NANCY

1 transaction

$3,300

CASCARILLA, CHARLES

1 transaction

$3,300

YAKOVENKO, ANATOLY

1 transaction

$3,300

KHARASCH, IRA

1 transaction

$3,300

DWYER, JOHN

1 transaction

$3,300

FRENCH GATES, MELINDA

1 transaction

$3,300

BRALEY, BRUCE

1 transaction

$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 2 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Edwards, Chuck [R-NC-11]

ID: E000246

Top Contributors

BAUM, ANN

OSAAT ENTERPRISES LLC DBA MCDONALD'S • RESTAURANT OWNER

IndividualCHARLOTTE, NC

$3,300

Dec 21, 2023

DUHAMEL, WILLIAM F

ROUTE ONE INVESTMENT COMPANY • PORTFOLIO MANAGER

IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA

$3,300

Dec 15, 2023

BELL, JOHN W III

BILTMORE PROPERTY GROUP • MANAGEMENT

IndividualASHEVILLE, NC

$3,300

Oct 21, 2024

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDI, TRIBE

UNINCORP INDIAN TRIBE • UNINCORP INDIAN TRIBE

IndividualCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Nov 8, 2024

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDI, TRIBE

UNINCORP INDIAN TRIBE • UNINCORP INDIAN TRIBE

IndividualCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Feb 13, 2024

POPE, JAMES

VARIETY WHOLESALERS • RETAILER

IndividualRALEIGH, NC

$3,300

Feb 12, 2024

SYKES, CLAY

ESG OPERATIONS INC. • PRINCIPAL

IndividualPENROSE, NC

$3,300

Feb 5, 2024

SYKES, LISA

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualPENROSE, NC

$3,300

Feb 5, 2024

FAISON, JAY

2040 FOUNDATION • DIRECTOR

IndividualCHARLOTTE, NC

$3,300

Mar 4, 2024

FAISON, JAY

2040 FOUNDATION • DIRECTOR

IndividualCHARLOTTE, NC

$3,300

Mar 4, 2024

Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1]

ID: F000466

Top Contributors

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$1,500

Dec 31, 2024

STATA FAMILY OFFICE

Organization

$500

Apr 26, 2024

ASHER, ROBERT B.

IndividualGWYNEDD VALLEY, PA

$10,000

Oct 9, 2024

ASHER, ROBERT B.

ASHER CHOCOLATES • CHAIRMAN

IndividualGWYNEDD VALLEY, PA

$10,000

Sep 30, 2024

LEVY, EDWARD JR

EDW C LEVY CO • CHAIRMAN

IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI

$6,600

Feb 26, 2024

CROTTY, THOMAS

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualSCOTTSDALE, AZ

$6,600

Feb 27, 2024

EVANS, ROGER

GREYLOCK PARTNERS • PARTNER EMERITUS

IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA

$6,600

Feb 27, 2024

LEACH, RONALD

NPX ONE • CHAIRMAN & CEO

IndividualGENEVA, IL

$6,600

Feb 28, 2024

MCCLAIN, MARK

SAILPOINT • CEO

IndividualAUSTIN, TX

$6,600

Mar 2, 2024

CROTTY, THOMAS

IndividualSCOTTSDALE, AZ

$6,600

Mar 8, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Pettersen, Brittany [D-CO-7]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 68 nodes and 78 connections

Total contributions: $78

Top Donors - Rep. Pettersen, Brittany [D-CO-7]

Showing top 22 donors by contribution amount

6 Orgs16 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

+Construction & Engineeringconfidence 0.90
Section 2(b)(2) allows priority projects to be carried out through contracts, which would benefit construction and engineering firms involved in reforestation and restoration work.
+Agribusinessconfidence 0.70
Section 2(b)(3) supports seed and seedling availability for priority projects, which could benefit agribusinesses involved in producing tree seeds and seedlings for reforestation.

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 the Interior

Moderate

Vector: 66%

Pages: 566-568AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 DOI section address wildfire impacts and forest management, but the bill focuses on post-disaster reforestation and restoration grants, while Project 2025 emphasizes timber production, NEPA reform, and ESA changes, resulting in only partial thematic overlap."

Key themes:wildfire mitigationforest restorationland managementecosystem recoverystakeholder coordination

— 533 — Department of the Interior order to fulfill the yet-unaltered congressional mandate contained in federal law, to provide for jobs and well-paying employment opportunities in rural Oregon, and to ameliorate the effects of wildfires, the new Administration must immedi- ately fulfill its responsibilities and manage the O&C lands for “permanent forest production” to ensure that the timber is “sold, cut, and removed.”79 NEPA Reforms. Congress never intended for the National Environmental Policy Act to grow into the tree-killing, project-dooming, decade-spanning mon- strosity that it has become. Instead, in 1970, Congress intended a short, succinct, timely presentation of information regarding major federal action that signifi- cantly affects the quality of the human environment so that decisionmakers can make informed decisions to benefit the American people. The Trump Administration adopted common-sense NEPA reform that must be restored immediately. Meanwhile, DOI should reinstate the secretarial orders adopted by the Trump Administration, such as placing time and page limits on NEPA documents and setting forth—on page one—the costs of the document itself. Meanwhile, the new Administration should call upon Congress to reform NEPA to meet its original goal. Consideration should be given, for example, to eliminat- ing judicial review of the adequacy of NEPA documents or the rectitude of NEPA decisions. This would allow Congress to engage in effective oversight of federal agencies when prudent. Settlement Transparency. Interior Secretary David Bernhardt required DOI to prominently display and provide open access to any and all litigation settlements into which DOI or its agencies entered, and any attorneys’ fees paid for ending the litigation.80 Biden’s DOI, aware that the settlements into which it planned to enter and the attorneys’ fees it was likely to pay would cause controversy, ended this policy.81 A new Administration should reinstate it. The Endangered Species Act. The Endangered Species Act was intended to bring endangered and threatened species back from the brink of extinction and, when appropriate, to restore real habitat critical to the survival of the spe- cies. The act’s success rate, however, is dismal. Its greatest deficiency, according to one renowned expert, is “conflict of interest.”82 Specifically, the work of the Fish and Wildlife Service is the product of “species cartels” afflicted with group- think, confirmation bias, and a common desire to preserve the prestige, power, and appropriations of the agency that pays or employs them. For example, in one highly influential sage-grouse monograph, 41 percent of the authors were federal workers. The editor, a federal bureaucrat, had authored one-third of the paper.83 Meaningful reform of the Endangered Species Act requires that Congress take action to restore its original purpose and end its use to seize private prop- erty, prevent economic development, and interfere with the rights of states over their wildlife populations. In the meantime, a new Administration should take the following immediate action: — 534 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Delist the grizzly bear in the Greater Yellowstone and Northern Continental Divide Ecosystems and defend to the Supreme Court of the United States the agency’s fact-based decision to do so.84 l Delist the gray wolf in the lower 48 states in light of its full recovery under the ESA.85 l Cede to western states jurisdiction over the greater sage-grouse, recognizing the on-the-ground expertise of states and preventing use of the sage-grouse to interfere with public access to public land and economic activity. l Direct the Fish and Wildlife Service to end its abuse of Section 10(j) of the ESA by re-introducing so-called “experiment species” populations into areas that no longer qualify as habitat and lie outside the historic ranges of those species, which brings with it the full weight of the ESA in areas previously without federal government oversight.86 l Direct the Fish and Wildlife Service to design and implement an impartial conservation triage program by prioritizing the allocation of limited resources to maximize conservation returns, relative to the conservation goals, under a constrained budget.87 l Direct the Fish and Wildlife Service to make all data used in ESA decisions available to the public, with limited or no exceptions, to fulfill the public’s right to know and to prevent the agency’s previous opaque decision-making. l Abolish the Biological Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey and obtain necessary scientific research about species of concern from universities via competitive requests for proposals. l Direct the Fish and Wildlife Service to: (1) design and implement an Endangered Species Act program that ensures independent decision- making by ending reliance on so-called species specialists who have obvious self-interest, ideological bias, and land-use agendas; and (2) ensure conformity with the Information Quality Act.88 Office of Surface Mining. The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) was created by the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA)89 to administer programs for controlling the impacts of surface coal mining operations. Although the coal industry is contracting, coal constitutes

Department of Agriculture

Moderate

Vector: 66%

Pages: 341-343AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on reforestation and restoration after disturbances, which aligns with the Project 2025 goal of improving forest health and wildfire recovery, but it does not directly address the policy's emphasis on proactive fuel reduction, timber sales, or regulatory reform."

Key themes:wildfire recoveryforest healthreforestationland managementstakeholder coordination

— 308 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Reform Forest Service Wildfire Management. The United States Forest Service is one of four federal government land management agencies that admin- ister 606 million acres, or 95 percent of the 640 million acres of surface land area managed by the federal government.115 Located within the USDA, the Forest Service manages the National Forest System, which is comprised of 193 million acres.116 As explained by the USDA, “The USDA Forest Service’s mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the nation’s forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations.”117 The Forest Service should focus on proactive management of the forests and grasslands that does not depend heavily on burning. There should be resilient forests and grasslands in the wake of management actions. Wildfires have become a primary vegetation management regime for national forests and grasslands.118 Recognizing the need for vegetation management, the Forest Service has adopted “pyro-silviculture” using “unplanned” fire,119 such as unplanned human-caused fires, to otherwise accomplish vegetation management.120 The Forest Service should instead be focusing on addressing the precipitous annual amassing of biomass in the national forests that drive the behavior of wildfires. By thinning trees, removing live fuels and deadwood, and taking other preventive steps, the Forest Service can help to minimize the consequences of wildfires. Increasing timber sales could also play an important role in the effort to change the behavior of wildfire because there would be less biomass. Timber sales and timber harvested in public forests dropped precipitously in the early 1990s and still remain very low. For example, in 1988, the volume of timber sold and harvested by volume was about 11 billion and 12.6 billion board feet (BBF), respectively.121 In 2021, timber sold was 2.8 BBF and timber harvested was 2.4 BBF. In 2018, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 13855 to, among other things, promote active management of forests and reduce wildfire risks.122 The executive order stated, “Active management of vegetation is needed to treat these dangerous conditions on Federal lands but is often delayed due to challenges associated with regulatory analysis and current consultation requirements.”123 It further explained the need to reduce regulatory obstacles to fuel reduction in forests created by the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act.124 The next Administration should: l Champion executive action, consistent with law, and proactive legislation to reduce wildfires. This would involve embracing Executive Order 13855, building upon it, and working with lawmakers to promote active management of vegetation, reduce regulatory obstacles to reducing fuel buildup, and increase timber sales. — 309 — Department of Agriculture Eliminate or Reform the Dietary Guidelines. The USDA, in collaboration with HHS, publishes the Dietary Guidelines every five years.125 For more than 40 years, the federal government has been releasing Dietary Guidelines,126 and during this time, there has been constant controversy due to questionable recommenda- tions and claims regarding the politicization of the process. In the 2015 Dietary Guidelines process, the influential Dietary Guidelines Advi- sory Committee veered off mission and attempted to persuade the USDA and HHS to adopt nutritional advice that focused not just on human health, but the health of the planet.127 Issues such as climate change and sustainability infiltrated the process. Fortunately, the 2020 process did not get diverted in this manner. How- ever, the Dietary Guidelines remain a potential tool to influence dietary choices to achieve objectives unrelated to the nutritional and dietary well-being of Americans. There is no shortage of private sector dietary advice for the public, and nutrition and dietary choices are best left to individuals to address their personal needs. This includes working with their own health professionals. As it is, there is constantly changing advice provided by the government, with insufficient qualifications on the advice, oversimplification to the point of miscommunicating important points, questionable use of science, and potential political influence. The Dietary Guidelines have a major impact because they not only can influence how private health providers offer nutritional advice, but they also inform federal programs. School meals are required to be consistent with the guidelines.128 The next Administration should: l Work with lawmakers to repeal the Dietary Guidelines. The USDA should help lead an effort to repeal the Dietary Guidelines. l Minimally, the next Administration should reform the Dietary Guidelines. The USDA, with HHS, should develop a more transparent process that properly considers the underlying science and does not overstate its findings. It should also ensure that the Dietary Guidelines focus on nutritional issues and do not veer off-mission by focusing on unrelated issues, such as the environment, that have nothing to do with nutritional advice. In fact, if environmental concerns supersede or water down recommendations for human nutritional advice, the public would be receiving misleading health information. The USDA, working with lawmakers, should codify these reforms into law. ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUES Based on the recommended reforms identified as ideal solutions, the USDA would look different in many respects. One of the biggest changes would be a USDA that is not focused on welfare, given that means-tested welfare programs would

Department of the Interior

Moderate

Vector: 65%

Pages: 566-568AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill shares Project 2025's focus on restoring forests after wildfires and promoting forest production, but it does not address the specific Policy 2025 mechanisms such as NEPA reform, settlement transparency, or Endangered Species Act changes."

Key themes:reforestationwildfire mitigationforest productionecosystem recovery

Department of Agriculture

Moderate

Vector: 64%

Pages: 341-343AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on reforestation and restoration after wildfires and other disturbances, which shares the broader goal of improving forest health and reducing wildfire impacts with Project 2025's emphasis on proactive forest management. However, the bill does not directly address the policy's key actions such as thinning, timber sales, or reducing regulatory obstacles for fuel reduction."

Key themes:wildfire managementforest restorationecosystem resiliencepost-disaster recoveryfederal land management

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Minimal

Vector: 65%

Pages: 548-550AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on post-disaster reforestation and ecosystem restoration under the Department of the Interior, while the Project 2025 policy addresses homelessness and Housing First programs under HUD. There is no thematic or policy overlap between the two."

— 516 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 37. HUD should implement administrative changes in regulation and guidance and seek statutory authority to end all Housing First directives of Continuum of Care (CoC) grantees and contract homelessness providers in addition to establishing restrictions on local Housing First policies where HUD grant funds are used. 38. The U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) was established in the 1990s, and numerous Administrations have devoted enormous resources to the Housing First model, experimenting with various ways to provide federally financed rapid rehousing and permanent housing opportunities. Housing First is a far-left idea premised on the belief that homelessness is primarily circumstantial rather than behavioral. The Housing First answer to homelessness is to give someone a house instead of attempting to understand the underlying causes of homelessness. Federal intervention centered on Housing First has failed to acknowledge that resolving the issue of homelessness is often a matter of resolving mental health and substance abuse challenges. Instead of the permanent supportive housing proffered by Housing First, a conservative Administration should shift to transitional housing with a focus on addressing the underlying issues that cause homelessness in the first place. 39. The Senate Low-Income First-Time Homebuyers (LIFT) Act would address this policy goal. See S. 2797, Low-Income First-Time Homebuyers Act of 2021 (LIFT Homebuyers Act of 2021), 117th Congress, introduced September 22, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/s2797/BILLS-117s2797is.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 40. FHA did not facilitate the widespread use of 30-year mortgages until the 1950s when, interacting with Federal Reserve policies, federal agencies began broader adoption of the mortgages, which, despite lowering the monthly repayment terms, result in slow equity accumulation and wealth-building opportunities. 41. The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 fundamentally revised the scope of federal regulation in the nation’s housing finance system, placing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under the purview of a newly established Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and establishing a Housing Trust Fund (HTF) that is administered in the HUD Office of Community Planning and Development. See H.R. 3221, Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, Public Law No. 110-289, 110th Congress, July 30, 2008, https://www.congress. gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 42. Guiding questions: What reforms should be proposed that could be accomplished within five years? What reforms can be done administratively, and what reforms would need legislative authorization? Are there functions that HUD administers that could be achieved more effectively at another department or agency? What big-picture reforms should be proposed that might take more than five years that would reorganize HUD and its programs to meet the objectives in the vision or mission? What would occur in the absence of these public finance subsidies? How much crowd-out do these subsidies create in the market? Would America be a seriously underhoused nation without these subsidies? Who are the policies intended to benefit? What organizational changes must be made? 43. The Faircloth Amendment (Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998) amended the Housing Act of 1937 to maintain public housing units at 1999 levels, preventing housing authorities from maintaining more public housing than they did then. H.R. 4194, Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999, Public Law No. 105-276, 105th Congress, October 21, 1998, Title V, https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ276/PLAW-105publ276.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). In recent years, the statutory restriction on new construction of public housing units has been circumvented through some narrow uses of preservation programs such as the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) program, initially authorized in 2012 and reauthorized several times since under higher program unit conversion caps. Congress also provided paths for renewal and continuation of a portion of existing public housing; project/site-based housing stock (refinancing with long-term HAP contract commitments); and Section 8 units through the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (MAHRA). H.R. 2158, Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998, Public Law No. 105-65, 105th Congress, October 27, 1997, Title V, https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ65/PLAW-105publ65.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 44. As the evolution of HUD rental assistance transitions away from the public housing model toward housing choice vouchers, there should be adequate landlord participation to ensure that the supply of housing units for rent in these programs meets the demand for rent among eligible tenants. This issue has been addressed in various ways, including by a task force instituted at the department during the Trump Administration, but could likely remain a challenge in the administration of the program. — 517 — 16 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR William Perry Pendley The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) oversees, manages, and protects the nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and other information about those resources; and honors the nation’s trust responsibilities or special commitments to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated island communities. AGENCY OVERVIEW DOI’s purview encompasses more than 500 million acres of federal lands, including national parks and national wildlife refuges; 700 million acres of sub- surface minerals; 1.7 billion acres of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS); 23 percent of the nation’s energy; water in 17 western states; and trust responsibilities for 566 Indian tribes and Alaska Natives. DOI’s 2024 budget request totals $18.9 billion, an increase of $2 billion, or 12 percent, more than the 2023 enacted level. The budget also provides an estimated $12.6 billion in permanent funding in 2024. In 2024, DOI will generate receipts of $19.6 billion. A “Home Department” had been considered in 1789 and urged by Presidents over the decades until DOI’s creation in 1849. The variety of its early responsibil- ities—the Indian Bureau, the General Land Office, the Bureau of Pensions, and the Patent Office, among others—earned it various nicknames, including “Great Miscellany,” “hydra-headed monster,” and “Mother of Departments.”1 Its mission became more focused on natural resources with the rise of the conservation move- ment in the early 20th century; however, it kept its historic (since the days of the Founding Fathers) role as overseer of vast working landscapes involving grazing,

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. Pettersen, Brittany

Bureau of Prisons Pay Protection Act

119/hr/5974