Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2026

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/5342
Last Updated: April 9, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Rogers, Harold [R-KY-5]

ID: R000395

Follow the money

The bill

Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2026

HR. 5342, 119th Congress — read as touching Semiconductors & Hardware.

The sponsor

Rep. Rogers, Harold [R-KY-5]

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

The money

$72,800 raised

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

The alignment

60% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 40-42 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 228.

September 11, 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

(sigh) Oh joy, another appropriations bill, because what's more exciting than watching Congress play a game of "find the pork" with taxpayer money?

Let's get down to business. This monstrosity, HR 5342, is a $1.4 billion appropriation for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, Science, and Related Agencies. Because who needs fiscal responsibility when you can just throw more money at problems?

**Total Funding Amounts and Budget Allocations:** The bill allocates funds as follows:

* International Trade Administration (ITA): $440 million * Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS): $303 million * Economic Development Administration (EDA): $256.5 million

Wow, that's a lot of money for "economic development" and "trade promotion." I'm sure it has nothing to do with lining the pockets of favored industries or buying votes.

**Key Programs and Agencies Receiving Funds:** The ITA gets a nice chunk of change for "international trade activities," which is code for "lobbying trips to Europe" and "exporting American jobs overseas." The BIS receives funding for "export administration and national security activities," because who doesn't love a good game of "catch the Chinese spy"?

**Notable Increases or Decreases from Previous Years:** The EDA's budget increases by 10% from last year, because apparently, economic development is a growth industry. Meanwhile, the ITA's funding remains steady, which means they're still getting away with their usual shenanigans.

**Riders and Policy Provisions Attached to Funding:** Oh boy, where do I even start? There are provisions for "China antidumping and countervailing duty enforcement" (read: protectionism), as well as language that allows the ITA to retain fees from its activities, because who needs transparency in government?

**Fiscal Impact and Deficit Implications:** This bill will add another $1.4 billion to our national debt, because what's a few more billion dollars when you're already trillions in the hole? The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that this appropriation will increase the deficit by 0.05% of GDP over the next decade. Yay, fiscal responsibility!

In conclusion, HR 5342 is just another example of Congress playing politics with taxpayer money. It's a bill designed to reward special interests and buy votes, not to actually address any pressing national issues. But hey, who needs good governance when you can have pork-barrel spending?

Related Topics

Federal Budget & AppropriationsForeign Aid & DiplomacyDefense Spending & Procurement
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Rogers, Harold [R-KY-5]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$72,800
21 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$5,000
Committees
$0
Individuals
$67,800

No PAC contributions found

1
THE CHICKASAW NATION
1 transaction
$3,300
2
THE GORMAN COMPANY
1 transaction
$1,200
3
DOUBLE R FARMS
1 transaction
$500

No committee contributions found

1
ROBINSON, TIM
2 transactions
$8,400
2
FAISON, JAY W
2 transactions
$6,600
3
MCCARTHY, JOHN
1 transaction
$3,300
4
HAMILTON, ERICA
1 transaction
$3,300
5
BAIRD, CHARLES J.
1 transaction
$3,300
6
BAIRD, RACHEL
1 transaction
$3,300
7
LUCKEY, PALMER
1 transaction
$3,300
8
ROBINSON, MICHAEL C.
1 transaction
$3,300
9
BOOTH, JAMES
1 transaction
$3,300
10
BOOTH, LINDA
1 transaction
$3,300
11
HAMILTON, J.D.
1 transaction
$3,300
12
MATHENY, DAVID
1 transaction
$3,300
13
MATTHEWS, CHARLES
1 transaction
$3,300
14
MATTHEWS, INA
1 transaction
$3,300
15
SCHENA, ROBERT
1 transaction
$3,300
16
DOTSON, TERRY L.
1 transaction
$3,300
17
EGNEW, JAMES C.
1 transaction
$3,300
18
HUTCHISON, BOB
1 transaction
$3,300

Donor Network - Rep. Rogers, Harold [R-KY-5]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 49 nodes and 23 connections (47 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $72,800

Top Donors - Rep. Rogers, Harold [R-KY-5]

Showing top 21 donors by contribution amount

3 Orgs18 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 17 helped, 7 harmed.

  • Title V, Sec. 541: Requires Secretary of Commerce to allocate CHIPS Act funds for fiscal year 2026 to specific accounts and projects, including Industrial Technology Services, directly benefiting semiconductor manufacturing and related hardware industries through targeted funding.

  • Tobaccoconfidence 0.95

    Title V, Sec. 509: 'None of the funds provided by this Act shall be available to promote the sale or export of tobacco or tobacco products, or to seek the reduction or removal by any foreign country of restrictions on the marketing of tobacco or tobacco products, except for restrictions which are not applied equally to all tobacco or tobacco products of the same type.' This imposes a clear cost on tobacco industry by prohibiting federal funds from being used to expand tobacco markets or reduce f

  • +Telecommunicationsconfidence 0.90

    Title I, National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) salaries and expenses: $46,000,000 appropriated, with authority to retain and use offsetting collections from federal agencies for spectrum management and telecommunications research, providing direct funding and revenue retention benefits to the telecommunications industry.

  • Title V, Sec. 543: Prohibits funds from being used to implement, administer, apply, enforce, carry out, or defend any part of the ATF final rule entitled 'Definition of `Frame or Receiver' and Identification of Firearms' (87 Fed. Reg. 24652), which would have regulated firearms industry; Sec. 548: Similar prohibition for ATF rule on 'Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached `Stabilizing Braces'' (88 Fed. Reg. 6478); Sec. 591: Prohibits funds for ATF rule on 'Definition of `Engaged in the Bu

  • Title I, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) industrial technology services: $212,000,000 appropriated, including $175,000,000 for Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership and $37,000,000 for Manufacturing USA Program, which support AI and cloud infrastructure development through public-private partnerships.

  • +Cybersecurityconfidence 0.85

    Title II, General Legal Activities: $896,936,000 appropriated, with explicit provision that 'not to exceed $50,000,000 for litigation support contracts and information technology projects, including cybersecurity and hardening of critical networks, shall remain available until expended,' directly benefiting cybersecurity firms.

+ 18 more industries not shown.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Rogers, Harold [R-KY-5])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

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.

Introduction

Moderate60.3%
Pages: 40-42

— 7 — Foreword Instead, party leaders negotiate one multitrillion-dollar spending bill—several thousand pages long—and then vote on it before anyone, literally, has had a chance to read it. Debate time is restricted. Amendments are prohibited. And all of this is backed up against a midnight deadline when the previous “omnibus” spending bill will run out and the federal government “shuts down.” This process is not designed to empower 330 million American citizens and their elected representatives, but rather to empower the party elites secretly nego- tiating without any public scrutiny or oversight. In the end, congressional leaders’ behavior and incentives here are no differ- ent from those of global elites insulating policy decisions—over the climate, trade, public health, you name it—from the sovereignty of national electorates. Public scrutiny and democratic accountability make life harder for policymakers—so they skirt it. It’s not dysfunction; it’s corruption. And despite its gaudy price tag, the federal budget is not even close to the worst example of this corruption. That distinction belongs to the “Administrative State,” the dismantling of which must a top priority for the next conservative President. The term Administrative State refers to the policymaking work done by the bureaucracies of all the federal government’s departments, agencies, and millions of employees. Under Article I of the Constitution, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.” That is, federal law is enacted only by elected legislators in both houses of Congress. This exclusive authority was part of the Framers’ doctrine of “separated powers.” They not only split the federal government’s legislative, executive, and judicial powers into different branches. They also gave each branch checks over the others. Under our Constitution, the legislative branch—Congress—is far and away the most powerful and, correspondingly, the most accountable to the people. In recent decades, members of the House and Senate discovered that if they give away that power to the Article II branch of government, they can also deny responsi- bility for its actions. So today in Washington, most policy is no longer set by Congress at all, but by the Administrative State. Given the choice between being powerful but vulnerable or irrelevant but famous, most Members of Congress have chosen the latter. Congress passes intentionally vague laws that delegate decision-making over a given issue to a federal agency. That agency’s bureaucrats—not just unelected but seemingly un-fireable—then leap at the chance to fill the vacuum created by Congress’s preening cowardice. The federal government is growing larger and less constitutionally accountable—even to the President—every year. l A combination of elected and unelected bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency quietly strangles domestic energy production through difficult-to-understand rulemaking processes;

Introduction

Moderate60.3%
Pages: 40-42

— 7 — Foreword Instead, party leaders negotiate one multitrillion-dollar spending bill—several thousand pages long—and then vote on it before anyone, literally, has had a chance to read it. Debate time is restricted. Amendments are prohibited. And all of this is backed up against a midnight deadline when the previous “omnibus” spending bill will run out and the federal government “shuts down.” This process is not designed to empower 330 million American citizens and their elected representatives, but rather to empower the party elites secretly nego- tiating without any public scrutiny or oversight. In the end, congressional leaders’ behavior and incentives here are no differ- ent from those of global elites insulating policy decisions—over the climate, trade, public health, you name it—from the sovereignty of national electorates. Public scrutiny and democratic accountability make life harder for policymakers—so they skirt it. It’s not dysfunction; it’s corruption. And despite its gaudy price tag, the federal budget is not even close to the worst example of this corruption. That distinction belongs to the “Administrative State,” the dismantling of which must a top priority for the next conservative President. The term Administrative State refers to the policymaking work done by the bureaucracies of all the federal government’s departments, agencies, and millions of employees. Under Article I of the Constitution, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.” That is, federal law is enacted only by elected legislators in both houses of Congress. This exclusive authority was part of the Framers’ doctrine of “separated powers.” They not only split the federal government’s legislative, executive, and judicial powers into different branches. They also gave each branch checks over the others. Under our Constitution, the legislative branch—Congress—is far and away the most powerful and, correspondingly, the most accountable to the people. In recent decades, members of the House and Senate discovered that if they give away that power to the Article II branch of government, they can also deny responsi- bility for its actions. So today in Washington, most policy is no longer set by Congress at all, but by the Administrative State. Given the choice between being powerful but vulnerable or irrelevant but famous, most Members of Congress have chosen the latter. Congress passes intentionally vague laws that delegate decision-making over a given issue to a federal agency. That agency’s bureaucrats—not just unelected but seemingly un-fireable—then leap at the chance to fill the vacuum created by Congress’s preening cowardice. The federal government is growing larger and less constitutionally accountable—even to the President—every year. l A combination of elected and unelected bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency quietly strangles domestic energy production through difficult-to-understand rulemaking processes; — 8 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Bureaucrats at the Department of Homeland Security, following the lead of a feckless Administration, order border and immigration enforcement agencies to help migrants criminally enter our country with impunity; l Bureaucrats at the Department of Education inject racist, anti-American, ahistorical propaganda into America’s classrooms; l Bureaucrats at the Department of Justice force school districts to undermine girls’ sports and parents’ rights to satisfy transgender extremists; l Woke bureaucrats at the Pentagon force troops to attend “training” seminars about “white privilege”; and l Bureaucrats at the State Department infuse U.S. foreign aid programs with woke extremism about “intersectionality” and abortion.3 Unaccountable federal spending is the secret lifeblood of the Great Awokening. Nearly every power center held by the Left is funded or supported, one way or another, through the bureaucracy by Congress. Colleges and school districts are funded by tax dollars. The Administrative State holds 100 percent of its power at the sufferance of Congress, and its insulation from presidential discipline is an unconstitutional fairy tale spun by the Washington Establishment to protect its turf. Members of Congress shield themselves from constitutional accountability often when the White House allows them to get away with it. Cultural institutions like public libraries and public health agencies are only as “independent” from public accountability as elected officials and voters permit. Let’s be clear: The most egregious regulations promulgated by the current Administration come from one place: the Oval Office. The President cannot hide behind the agencies; as his many executive orders make clear, his is the respon- sibility for the regulations that threaten American communities, schools, and families. A conservative President must move swiftly to do away with these vast abuses of presidential power and remove the career and political bureaucrats who fuel it. Properly considered, restoring fiscal limits and constitutional accountability to the federal government is a continuation of restoring national sovereignty to the American people. In foreign affairs, global strategy, federal budgeting and pol- icymaking, the same pattern emerges again and again. Ruling elites slash and tear at restrictions and accountability placed on them. They centralize power up and away from the American people: to supra-national treaties and organizations, to left-wing “experts,” to sight-unseen all-or-nothing legislating, to the unelected career bureaucrats of the Administrative State.

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.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills