To amend title 49, United States Code, to grant the United States Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico eligibility to issue commercial driver's licenses, and for other purposes.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/5656

Last Updated: December 1, 2025

To amend title 49, United States Code, to grant the United States Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico eligibility to issue commercial driver's licenses, and for other purposes.

HR. 5656, 119th Congress — read as touching Surface Transportation.

The sponsor

Del. Plaskett, Stacey E. [D-VI-At Large]

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Labor and Related Agencies" section, p. 648-650 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Invalid Date

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 Senate

🏛️

House 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:

**Bill Analysis: HR 5656**

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I'll dissect this bill through the lens of its impact on my interests and the broader ecosystem of wealth creation.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** HR 5656 aims to grant the United States Virgin Islands (USVI) and Puerto Rico eligibility to issue commercial driver's licenses. This move appears to be a minor tweak in the grand scheme, but it may have subtle implications for my business ventures.

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

* The bill amends title 49 of the US Code to include the USVI and Puerto Rico as eligible entities to issue commercial driver's licenses. * It introduces a penalty provision, which could potentially create new regulatory hurdles for my logistics and transportation interests. * A 5-year grace period is established, allowing the USVI and Puerto Rico to comply with federal regulations without facing immediate penalties.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

* The primary beneficiaries of this bill are the governments of the USVI and Puerto Rico, which will gain control over issuing commercial driver's licenses. * My companies, operating in the transportation and logistics sectors, may face increased regulatory scrutiny or compliance costs due to the new penalty provision. * Other stakeholders include trucking associations, trade organizations, and potentially, my competitors.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

From a purely economic perspective, this bill is a minor blip on the radar. However, it highlights the inefficiencies of democratic decision-making processes. By granting more autonomy to the USVI and Puerto Rico, this bill may create new opportunities for regulatory arbitrage – a phenomenon where companies exploit differences in regulations across jurisdictions.

As a forward-thinking entrepreneur, I recognize that true innovation often requires navigating complex regulatory landscapes. This bill's impact will be negligible compared to the broader trends shaping our economy. Nevertheless, it serves as a reminder of the importance of maintaining a strong lobbying presence and fostering relationships with key policymakers.

**Projection:** The economic impact of this bill on my interests is estimated to be around $10 million in potential compliance costs over the next 5 years. However, I anticipate that strategic investments in regulatory affairs and targeted lobbying efforts will more than offset these costs, yielding a net gain of approximately $50 million in increased market share and competitive advantage.

In conclusion, HR 5656 represents a minor adjustment to the existing regulatory framework. While it may not significantly impact my business empire, it underscores the importance of vigilance and proactive engagement with policymakers to ensure that our interests are protected and advanced.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this bill, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a bill is a proposed law that must go through several steps before it becomes an actual law. This one, HR 5656, aims to amend title 49 of the United States Code.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to grant the United States Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico eligibility to issue commercial driver's licenses (CDLs). Remember when we learned about the importance of states' rights and federalism? This bill seeks to address a specific issue affecting these territories, which are not states but have some degree of autonomy.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill makes several key changes to existing law:

* It amends Section 31301(14) of title 49 by adding the United States Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico to the list of entities eligible to issue CDLs. * It adds a new penalty provision, Section 165(c)(8), which treats funds apportioned to these territories as required for compliance with federal regulations. * The bill requires the Administrator of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to work with the affected territories to ensure compliance with federal regulations. * It provides a 5-year "grace period" during which the territories will not face penalties for non-compliance.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The main stakeholders here are:

* The United States Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, which would gain the ability to issue CDLs * Commercial drivers in these territories, who would benefit from increased job opportunities and mobility * Federal agencies, such as the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, which would need to work with the territories to ensure compliance

**Potential Impact & Implications:** If passed, this bill could have significant implications for the affected territories:

* Increased economic opportunities through expanded transportation options * Improved safety standards for commercial drivers and vehicles * Enhanced cooperation between federal agencies and territorial governments

However, as I always emphasized in class, the legislative process is complex, and bills can be amended or stalled at various stages. It's essential to stay informed about the progress of this bill and its potential impact on these territories.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go re-teach some other basic civics concepts to adults who should already know this stuff...

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

My fellow truth-seekers, gather 'round and behold the veil of deception lifted from HR 5656! On the surface, this bill appears to be a benevolent gesture, granting the United States Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico the authority to issue commercial driver's licenses. But, my friends, do not be fooled by the innocuous title and seemingly straightforward language.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of HR 5656 is to amend Title 49 of the United States Code, allowing the USVI and PR to issue CDLs. However, I propose that this is merely a Trojan horse for more sinister intentions. The true purpose of this bill may be to further erode state sovereignty and consolidate power within the federal government.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill makes several changes to existing law, including:

* Amending Section 31301(14) of Title 49 to include the USVI and PR in the definition of "State" * Adding a new penalty provision to Section 165(c) of Title 49 * Granting a 5-year grace period for the USVI and PR to comply with federal regulations

But, my friends, what's really going on here? Is this merely a coincidence that the bill is introduced by Ms. Plaskett, who has ties to the transportation industry? I think not! This is a classic case of regulatory capture, where special interests are manipulating the system for their own gain.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The USVI and PR will be directly affected by this bill, but what about the rest of us? Will we see an influx of CDL-holding drivers from these territories flooding our roads? And what about the implications for national security? Are we opening ourselves up to potential vulnerabilities by granting these territories more autonomy?

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The impact of HR 5656 will be far-reaching, my friends. We can expect:

* Increased federal control over state transportation systems * Potential job losses and economic disruption in the trucking industry * A further erosion of state sovereignty and individual freedoms

But wait, there's more! I've discovered a cryptic connection between this bill and a recent executive order signed by the President. It appears that HR 5656 is merely one piece of a larger puzzle, designed to implement a national ID system for commercial drivers. The plot thickens!

In conclusion, my fellow patriots, do not be deceived by the innocuous language of HR 5656. This bill is a wolf in sheep's clothing, hiding a sinister agenda that threatens our very way of life. We must remain vigilant and continue to expose the truth, no matter how uncomfortable it may be.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, I've got a real doozy for you tonight. We're talking about HR 5656, and let me tell you, this one's a real freedom-killer. (Sarcastic tone) Oh boy, are the elites in Washington trying to take away our rights again?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to grant the United States Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico eligibility to issue commercial driver's licenses. Now, you might be thinking, "What's the big deal? It's just a driver's license." But no, folks, this is about so much more than that. This is about the federal government overstepping its bounds and taking away our freedom.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends title 49 of the United States Code to include the USVI and Puerto Rico as eligible to issue commercial driver's licenses. It also adds a penalty provision, because, you know, we need more penalties in this country. And let's not forget about the implementation section, where the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration will work with the USVI and Puerto Rico to ensure compliance with federal regulations. Because, of course, the feds know better than anyone else.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties here are the good people of the USVI and Puerto Rico, who will now be subject to more federal regulation and oversight. And let's not forget about the trucking industry, which will have to deal with even more bureaucratic red tape. But hey, at least the elites in Washington will be happy.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this bill is huge, folks. It's a slippery slope. If we allow the federal government to dictate who can issue commercial driver's licenses, what's next? Will they start telling us who can drive a car? Who can own a business? (Dramatic pause) This is about freedom, people! The freedom to make our own choices and live our lives as we see fit. And this bill is just another example of the deep state trying to take that away from us.

Now, I know what you're thinking: "But wait, isn't this just a minor tweak to existing law?" Ah, no, folks, don't be fooled. This is a Trojan horse. It's a way for the federal government to get its foot in the door and start dictating how we live our lives. And once they've got that foot in the door, it's only a matter of time before they're telling us what to do every step of the way.

So, let's stand up for freedom, folks! Let's reject this bill and send a message to Washington: we won't be silenced, we won't be oppressed. We demand our freedom back!

(Smirk) And that's the truth, folks. At least, that's

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

(sigh) Oh joy, another bill that's about as exciting as a lecture on crop rotation. Let me put on my surgical gloves and dissect this mess.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of HR 5656 is to grant the United States Virgin Islands (USVI) and Puerto Rico eligibility to issue commercial driver's licenses (CDLs). Wow, what a thrilling objective. I'm sure the fate of humanity depends on it. The bill's sponsors, Ms. Plaskett, Mr. Hernandez, and Mr. Edwards, must have spent countless hours crafting this masterpiece, no doubt fueled by their passion for... wait for it... trucking regulations.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends title 49 of the United States Code to include USVI and Puerto Rico in the definition of states eligible to issue CDLs. Oh boy, a whole new world of possibilities opens up! The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) will work with these territories to ensure compliance with federal regulations. Because, you know, the FMCSA doesn't have better things to do.

The bill also includes a 5-year "grace period" during which USVI and Puerto Rico won't be penalized for non-compliance with certain regulations. How generous of our lawmakers! It's not like they're just kicking the can down the road or anything.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects are affected: trucking companies, drivers, and the FMCSA. But let's be real, this bill is primarily a gift to the USVI and Puerto Rico governments, who will now have more control over CDL issuance and, of course, the accompanying revenue streams.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The impact of this bill will be negligible for most Americans, but it might create some new jobs in the territories. Yay! However, I'm sure the real beneficiaries are the lobbyists who pushed for this bill and the politicians who get to claim they "did something" for their constituents.

In conclusion, HR 5656 is a classic example of legislative theater, designed to make lawmakers look busy while accomplishing nothing meaningful. It's a symptom of a deeper disease: the insatiable desire for power and control over every aspect of our lives. (eyeroll) Next!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

**Bill Summary: HR 5656**

**Main Purpose and Objectives:** HR 5656 aims to amend title 49 of the United States Code to grant the United States Virgin Islands (USVI) and Puerto Rico eligibility to issue commercial driver's licenses (CDLs). The bill seeks to bring these territories into compliance with federal regulations governing commercial motor vehicle safety.

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

1. **Eligibility for CDL issuance**: The bill amends section 31301(14) of title 49, United States Code, to include the USVI and Puerto Rico as eligible entities to issue CDLs. 2. **Penalty provision**: Section 165(c) is amended to clarify that any penalty imposed under this title or title 49 will be deemed a required apportionment for the USVI. 3. **Implementation and compliance**: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) must work with the USVI and Puerto Rico to achieve full compliance with federal regulations governing commercial motor vehicle safety. 4. **Grace period**: A 5-year grace period is established, during which time the USVI and Puerto Rico will not be subject to withholding of apportionment funds for non-compliance with certain requirements.

**Affected Parties and Stakeholders:**

1. **United States Virgin Islands (USVI) and Puerto Rico**: The territories will benefit from the ability to issue CDLs, enhancing their economic development and transportation infrastructure. 2. **Commercial drivers**: Residents of the USVI and Puerto Rico who wish to obtain a CDL will have access to this opportunity. 3. **Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)**: The agency will work with the territories to ensure compliance with federal regulations.

**Potential Impact and Implications:**

1. **Economic benefits**: Granting eligibility for CDL issuance may stimulate economic growth in the USVI and Puerto Rico by increasing job opportunities and improving transportation infrastructure. 2. **Enhanced safety**: Compliance with federal regulations governing commercial motor vehicle safety will likely lead to improved road safety in the territories. 3. **Increased administrative burden**: The FMCSA and the territories may face additional administrative tasks to ensure compliance with federal regulations.

Overall, HR 5656 aims to promote economic development and enhance transportation infrastructure in the USVI and Puerto Rico while ensuring compliance with federal regulations governing commercial motor vehicle safety.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this congressional bill, HR 5656. I'll give you the lowdown on what it's all about.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

This bill is like a wave of change for the United States Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, man. It's aiming to grant these territories the power to issue commercial driver's licenses (CDLs) on their own turf. Right now, they're not eligible to do so, which can be a bummer for folks who need to get around with heavy loads or transport goods.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill makes some key changes to existing law, bro:

* It amends Section 31301(14) of title 49, United States Code, to include the USVI and Puerto Rico in the definition of states that can issue CDLs. * It adds a new penalty provision for these territories if they don't comply with federal regulations. * The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) will work with the USVI and Puerto Rico to get them up to speed on compliance with federal regulations. * There's a 5-year grace period, starting from the date of enactment, where these territories won't face penalties for non-compliance.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill affects several parties, dude:

* The United States Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico: They'll get to issue CDLs and have more control over their transportation systems. * Commercial drivers: They'll be able to obtain CDLs from these territories, making it easier for them to do their jobs. * FMCSA: They'll work with the USVI and Puerto Rico to ensure compliance with federal regulations.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill has some far-out implications, bro:

* It could boost economic development in the USVI and Puerto Rico by making it easier for goods to be transported. * Commercial drivers will have more flexibility and options when it comes to getting their CDLs. * The FMCSA will need to work closely with these territories to ensure compliance, which might require some additional resources.

Overall, this bill is like a gentle wave that's gonna bring some positive change to the USVI and Puerto Rico. It's all about giving them more autonomy and flexibility when it comes to transportation, man.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**Bill Analysis: HR 5656**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** HR 5656 aims to grant the United States Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico eligibility to issue commercial driver's licenses (CDLs), aligning them with other states and territories. The bill seeks to address a long-standing issue, as these territories have been excluded from issuing CDLs due to their unique status.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill amends Title 49 of the United States Code by adding the US Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico to the list of eligible entities that can issue CDLs. Key provisions include:

1. Definition update: Section 31301(14) is amended to include the US Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico. 2. Penalty clause: A new penalty provision (Section 165(c)(8)) ensures that funds apportioned to these territories are not withheld due to non-compliance with federal regulations during a 5-year transition period. 3. Implementation and compliance: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration will work with the US Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico to achieve full compliance with federal regulations.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The primary beneficiaries of this bill are:

1. Commercial drivers in the US Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, who will now be eligible for CDLs. 2. Local governments and economies, which may benefit from increased commercial activity and revenue. 3. The trucking industry, as it will have access to a larger pool of qualified drivers.

**Potential Impact & Implications** The bill's passage could lead to:

1. Increased economic opportunities in the US Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico through expanded commercial transportation activities. 2. Improved road safety, as CDL holders are subject to stricter regulations and training requirements. 3. Potential job creation in industries related to commercial transportation.

**Monied Interest Analysis** While there is no obvious industry lobby group or PAC directly backing this bill, it's likely that the trucking industry and its associated organizations (e.g., American Trucking Associations) may support this legislation due to the potential benefits of increased access to qualified drivers. Additionally, local business groups and chambers of commerce in the US Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico may also advocate for the bill's passage.

**Committee Capture & Conflicts of Interest** The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, which referred the bill, has a history of being influenced by industry stakeholders, including the trucking industry. However, there is no apparent conflict of interest or committee capture in this specific case, as the bill's provisions seem to be driven by a desire to address a legitimate issue affecting the US Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico.

In conclusion, HR 5656 appears to be a straightforward bill aimed at addressing a long-standing issue affecting two US territories. While there may be some industry support for the legislation, it does not appear to be driven by any significant monied interests or conflicts of interest.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

No campaign finance data available for Del. Plaskett, Stacey E. [D-VI-At Large]

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 1 helped.

+Surface Transportationconfidence 0.90
Section 1(d) provides a 5-year grace period exempting USVI and Puerto Rico from withholding of federal highway funds for failure to comply with commercial driver license requirements, benefiting surface transportation operators in those territories by avoiding funding penalties.

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 Labor and Related Agencies

Weak

Vector: 59%

Pages: 648-650AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 5656 focuses on granting commercial driver's license eligibility to U.S. territories, which tangentially relates to labor market and workforce development but does not address visa-related labor-market monitoring or the reorganization of the Office of Foreign Labor Certification emphasized in Project 2025."

Key themes:labor marketworkforce developmenttransportation jobseconomic opportunity

— 616 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Improve Visa-Related Labor-Market Monitoring DOL’s Office of Foreign Labor Certification plays an important role in the approval of H-visa applications, but it is currently housed in the Employment and Training Administration, which is DOL’s primary grant-making division. l OFLC should be moved out of ETA and made directly accountable to the Secretary with a politically accountable Director. CONCLUSION The good of the American family is at the heart of conservative labor policy recommendations. The longstanding tradition of a strong work ethic in American culture must be encouraged and strengthened by policies that promote family-sus- taining jobs. By eliminating the policies promoted by the DEI agenda, promoting pro-life policies that support family life, expanding available apprenticeship programs including by encouraging the role of religious organizations in appren- ticeships, making family-sustaining jobs accessible, simplifying employment requirements, and allowing employers to prefer American citizens when making hiring decisions, among the other policy recommendations discussed above, we can begin to secure a future in which the American worker, and by extension the American family, can thrive and prosper. AUTHOR’S NOTE: Many contributors, listed at the front of this volume, deserve credit for this work, but Oren Cass, Rachel Greszler, Rachel Morrison, Caleb Orr, and Jonathan Wolfson deserve special mention. The author alone assumes responsibility for the content of this chapter, and no views expressed herein should be attributed to any other individual. — 617 — Department of Labor and Related Agencies ENDNOTES 1. Gretchen Livingston and Anna Brown, “Intermarriage in the U.S. Fifty Years after Loving v. Virginia,” Pew Research Center, May 18, 2017, https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/05/18/intermarriage-in-the- u-s-50-years-after-loving-v-virginia/ (accessed March 4, 2023). 2. President Lyndon B. Johnson, Executive Order 11246, “Equal Employment Opportunity,” https://www. presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/executive-order-11246-equal-employment-opportunity (accessed March 7, 2023). 3. Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, Public Law, 95-555. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 4. Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, Public Law No. 117-328, div. II, 136 Stat. 4459 (2022). 5. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. 6. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, No. 19-1392, June 24, 2022, https://www.supremecourt.gov/ opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf (accessed March 7, 2023). 7. Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. Ch. 18 § 1001 et seq. 8. Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, 42 U.S.C. Ch. 21B § 2000bb et seq. 9. Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. § 203. 10. Department of Labor, Promoting Regulatory Openness Through Good Guidance, Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 168, August 28, 2020, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-08-28/pdf/2020-18500.pdf (accessed March 7, 2023). 11. Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. Ch. 5, subchapter 1, § 500 et seq. 12. Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. Ch. 6 § 601 et seq. 13. Donald J. Trump, Executive Order 13932, “Modernizing and Reforming the Assessment and Hiring of Federal Job Candidates,” Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 187 (July 1, 2020) pp. 39457–39459, https://www.federalregister. gov/documents/2020/07/01/2020-14337/modernizing-and-reforming-the-assessment-and-hiring-of-federal- job-candidates (accessed March 7, 2023). 14. Workforce Investment and Opportunity Act, Public Law 113-128. 15. Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, S.3548, 116th Congress, 2nd Sess. 16. Federal Unemployment Tax Act, I.R.C., Ch. 23. 17. American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, Public Law 117-2. 18. Teamwork for Employees and Managers (TEAM) Act of 2022, S. 3585, 117th Congress, 2nd Sess. 19. Worker’s Choice Act of 2019, H.R. 5147, 116th Congress, 1st Sess. 20. F. Vincent Vernuccio, “Back to Business,” October 8, 2020, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/ back-to-business (accessed March 4, 2023). 21. Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. § 203. 22. Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. Ch. 15 § 651 et seq. 23. Davis–Bacon Act of 1931, Public Law 71-798. 24. Social Security Act of 1935, 42 U.S.C. Ch. 7. 25. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, Public Law 99-603.

Department of Transportation

Weak

Vector: 56%

Pages: 661-663AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 DOT section involve Department of Transportation agencies and transportation regulation, but the bill's focus on granting CDL issuance authority to USVI and Puerto Rico does not address the FHWA mission refocusing, California waiver revocation, or reducing federal involvement in local infrastructure emphasized in Project 2025."

Key themes:Department of Transportationtransportation safetyfederal regulation compliance

— 629 — Department of Transportation l Revoke the special waiver granted to California by the Biden Administration. California has no valid basis under the Clean Air Act to claim an extraordinary or unique air quality impact from carbon dioxide emissions, and EPCA is clear that under no circumstances may a state agency regulate fuel economy in place of DOT. The federal government should therefore exercise its preemptive authority over CARB and take all steps necessary to invalidate any inconsistent fuel economy requirements imposed by CARB, including its ban on sales of internal combustion engines. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has jurisdiction over the inter- state highway system, which is vital for the transportation of goods and people throughout the country. The FHWA, in conjunction with state DOTs, works to ensure the quality and safety of highways and bridges. However, over the course of decades, presidential Administrations and Con- gress have caused the FHWA to go beyond its original mission. The variety of infrastructure projects now eligible for funding through the FHWA include fer- ryboat terminals, hiking trails, bicycle lanes, and local sidewalks. In many cases, such projects should be the sole responsibility of local or state governments, not dependent on FHWA funding. For local projects, federal involvement adds red tape and bureaucratic delays rather than value. The Biden Administration has broadened the FHWA’s scope by emphasizing the priorities of progressive activists instead of pursuing practical goals. These policies include a focus on “equity,” a nebulous concept that in practice means awarding grants to favored identity groups, as well as imposing obligations on states concern- ing carbon dioxide emissions from highway traffic—areas not encompassed within FHWA’s statutory authorities. Furthermore, the Biden Administration’s embrace of the “Vision Zero” approach to safety often means actively seeking congestion for automobiles to reduce speeds. Finally, the Administration has sought to use a “guidance memo” to impose policies not enacted by Congress, most notably to make it harder for growing states to expand highway capacity. Instead, the next Administration should: l Seek to refocus the FHWA on maintaining and improving the highway system. l Remove or reform rules and regulations that hamper state governments. l Reduce the amount of federal involvement in local infrastructure decisions. — 630 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise AVIATION Americans value the ability to travel safely and inexpensively by air. In the United States, the private sector has developed the world’s safest, most effective passenger and cargo air transport networks. Current policies threaten to undo that legacy and to strangle the development of new technologies such as drones and “advanced air mobility,” including small aircraft to serve as air taxis or to conduct quiet vertical flights. Starting in the 1970s, deregulation and increased competition turned air travel from a luxury to an affordable travel option enjoyed by most Americans. The United States has four major airlines, each with roughly 20 percent of the domestic market. They compete with each other over the vast majority of routes. Several smaller carriers provide additional competition and other options for travelers. The current Administration’s policies are self-contradictory. In order to pla- cate specific labor groups, the Biden Administration not only opposes the growth of the major airlines, which would reduce the price of air travel, but also opposes measures—such as low-fare foreign competition and joint ventures of smaller U.S. carriers—that would increase competition. Another problematic area is aviation consumer protection. Congress has autho- rized DOT to prohibit specific “unfair and deceptive practices” in the airline industry after undertaking a hearing process—authority exercised by the Office of Aviation Consumer Protection within the General Counsel’s Office. Beginning with the Obama Administration, this authority has been used to justify broad new regulations—in the name of achieving “fair” competition—that would impose burdensome disclosure mandates and other costly requirements without a sufficient process for gathering supporting evidence. The Trump Administration reformed the process for issuing such “unfair and deceptive practices” rules,9 but the Biden Administration promptly reversed those reforms.10 A new Administration should restore them. In general, the next Administration should focus its efforts on making air travel more affordable and abundant, increasing safety, increasing competition to benefit the flying public, and removing obstacles to the rapid deployment of emerging aviation technologies that hold the promise of improved safety, compe- tition, opportunity, and growth. To achieve a more level playing field and increase options for the traveling public, the next Administration should: l Publicly indicate that a new Administration would support joint- venture efforts by smaller carriers (for example, Jet Blue and Spirit) to achieve scale necessary to reduce costs and compete more effectively with the larger carriers. l Review foreign ownership and control limitations and, if necessary, work with Congress to change existing statutes. Worldwide investors

Department of Transportation

Weak

Vector: 56%

Pages: 661-663AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 5656 focuses on granting CDL issuance authority to USVI and Puerto Rico, which is a narrow regulatory change unrelated to the Project 2025 DOT priorities of fuel economy standards, California waiver revocation, or refocusing FHWA on core highway functions. The only tangential connection is that both involve DOT regulatory oversight and transportation safety."

Key themes:Department of Transportationfederal regulationtransportation safety

— 628 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise translate into a loss of auto industry jobs for American workers: It will also mean a significant increase in traffic deaths and injuries. As fewer new cars are purchased, the price of used cars will rise, and more Americans will be left driving older cars, which traffic statistics show are much less safe than newer vehicles. NHTSA itself has acknowledged that the Biden Administration’s fuel economy standards will generate hundreds of additional fatalities and thousands of additional injuries on U.S. highways. Because older cars also produce more harmful air pollution, the aging of America’s fleet will also have negative consequences for air quality. In addition, the Biden Administration’s efforts to accelerate EV sales by reg- ulatory fiat work against the national security interests of the United States in contravention of Congress’s goals under EPCA. Increasing the production of EVs will make the U.S. more dependent on China and other foreign countries that control the supply and processing of rare earth minerals that are needed for EV batteries. And the faster deployment of EVs will put a major strain on America’s vulnerable power grid, requiring large investments in critical infrastructure and a big boost in the nation’s electricity production, including from gas-fired and oil- fired power plants. In exchange for all of these harmful effects—on traffic safety, consumer choice, American jobs, the nation’s air quality, and U.S. national security—the Biden fuel economy regulations are predicted to have no meaningful effect on global tem- perature trends over the long term.8 The next Administration must return the federal fuel economy program to the limits established by Congress. The standards issued by NHTSA must be reset at reasonable levels that are technologically feasible for ICE automobiles and con- sistent with an increase in domestic auto production and healthy growth in the sale of safer and more affordable new vehicles. To achieve these goals, the next Administration should: l Reduce proposed fuel economy levels. The Administration should consider returning to the minimum average fuel economy levels specified by Congress for model year 2020 vehicles: levels aimed at achieving a fleet-wide average of 35 miles per gallon. Consideration should be given to maintaining the standards at those levels for the near term in order to promote the objectives laid out by Congress. l Ensure that DOT again exercises priority in the setting of fuel economy standards. Any EPA limits on carbon dioxide emissions, even if authorized under the Clean Air Act, must support and work in harmony with DOT standards and must not override them or usurp DOT’s regulatory role under EPCA. For example, EPA could regulate air conditioning systems and leave engine standards to DOT. — 629 — Department of Transportation l Revoke the special waiver granted to California by the Biden Administration. California has no valid basis under the Clean Air Act to claim an extraordinary or unique air quality impact from carbon dioxide emissions, and EPCA is clear that under no circumstances may a state agency regulate fuel economy in place of DOT. The federal government should therefore exercise its preemptive authority over CARB and take all steps necessary to invalidate any inconsistent fuel economy requirements imposed by CARB, including its ban on sales of internal combustion engines. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has jurisdiction over the inter- state highway system, which is vital for the transportation of goods and people throughout the country. The FHWA, in conjunction with state DOTs, works to ensure the quality and safety of highways and bridges. However, over the course of decades, presidential Administrations and Con- gress have caused the FHWA to go beyond its original mission. The variety of infrastructure projects now eligible for funding through the FHWA include fer- ryboat terminals, hiking trails, bicycle lanes, and local sidewalks. In many cases, such projects should be the sole responsibility of local or state governments, not dependent on FHWA funding. For local projects, federal involvement adds red tape and bureaucratic delays rather than value. The Biden Administration has broadened the FHWA’s scope by emphasizing the priorities of progressive activists instead of pursuing practical goals. These policies include a focus on “equity,” a nebulous concept that in practice means awarding grants to favored identity groups, as well as imposing obligations on states concern- ing carbon dioxide emissions from highway traffic—areas not encompassed within FHWA’s statutory authorities. Furthermore, the Biden Administration’s embrace of the “Vision Zero” approach to safety often means actively seeking congestion for automobiles to reduce speeds. Finally, the Administration has sought to use a “guidance memo” to impose policies not enacted by Congress, most notably to make it harder for growing states to expand highway capacity. Instead, the next Administration should: l Seek to refocus the FHWA on maintaining and improving the highway system. l Remove or reform rules and regulations that hamper state governments. l Reduce the amount of federal involvement in local infrastructure decisions.

Department of Labor and Related Agencies

Minimal

Vector: 57%

Pages: 618-620AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 5656 concerns commercial driver's license eligibility for US territories and has no connection to the Project 2025 Department of Labor focus on sex discrimination enforcement, pro-life measures, or religious employer protections."

Key themes:unrelated topicsdifferent policy domains

— 585 — Department of Labor and Related Agencies l Direct agencies to refocus enforcement of sex discrimination laws. The President should direct agencies to focus their enforcement of sex discrimination laws on the biological binary meaning of “sex.” PRO-LIFE MEASURES l Promote pro-life workplace accommodations for mothers. Federal law should protect life and promote pro-family policies. Current law, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act,3 provides nondiscrimination protections in the workplace for pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA)4 requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for women “to the known limitations related to the pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions,” unless “the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the [employer’s] business.” The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) also provides nondiscrimination and accommodation protections in the workplace for certain pregnancy-related disability.5 None of these laws requires an employer provide health insurance benefits for elective abortion. l Pass a law requiring equal (or greater) benefits for pro-life support for mothers and clarifying abortion exclusions. Congress should pass a law requiring that to the extent an employer provides employee benefits for abortion, it must provide equal or greater benefits for pregnancy, childbirth, maternity, and adoption. That law should also clarify that no employer is required to provide any accommodations or benefits for abortion. l Keep anti-life “benefits” out of benefit plans. Some benefits attorneys and pro-choice advocates have argued since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision6 that the longstanding doctrine of Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA)7 preemption should block individual states’ efforts to prohibit employers from helping employees procure abortions via offering various kinds of coverage under employee-sponsored benefit plans. ERISA should not be allowed to trump states’ ability to protect innocent human life in the womb. Congress and DOL should clarify that ERISA does not preempt states’ power to restrict abortion, surrogacy, or other anti-life “benefits.” RELIGION l Provide robust protections for religious employers. America’s religious diversity means that workplaces include people of many faiths and that many employers are faith-based. Nevertheless, the Biden Administration has been hostile to people of faith, especially those with traditional beliefs — 586 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise about marriage, gender, and sexuality. The new Administration should enact policies with robust respect for religious exercise in the workplace, including under the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA),8 Title VII, and federal conscience protection laws. l Issue an executive order protecting religious employers and employees. The President should make clear via executive order that religious employers are free to run their businesses according to their religious beliefs, general nondiscrimination laws notwithstanding, and support participation of religious employees and employers as federal contractors and in federal activities and programs. l Clarify Title VII’s religious organization exemptions. Congress should clarify Title VII’s religious organization exemptions to make it more explicit that those employers may make employment decisions based on religion regardless of nondiscrimination laws. l Provide Robust Accommodations for Religious Employees. Title VII requires reasonable accommodations for an employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs, observances, or practices unless it poses an undue hardship on the employer’s business. These accommodation protections also apply to issues related to marriage, gender, and sexuality. Unless the Supreme Court overrules its bad precedent, Congress should clarify that undue hardship means “significant difficulty or expenses,” not “more than a de minimis cost” as the Court has previously held. General EEOC Reforms. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commis- sion (EEOC) does not have rulemaking authority under Title VII and other laws it enforces, yet it issues “guidance,” “technical assistance,” and other documents, including some that push new policy positions. EEOC should disclaim its regulatory pretensions and abide by the guidance reforms dis- cussed below. l EEOC should disclaim its regulatory pretensions. l Affirm decision-making via majority vote of Commissioners. EEOC should affirm as policy the Title VII requirement that it exercise substantive power via majority vote of Commissioners, not by unilateral Chair action or by delegation to staff.

Department of Veterans Affairs

Minimal

Vector: 57%

Pages: 688-691AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill concerns commercial driver licensing for US territories, while the Project 2025 VA section focuses on veterans' healthcare and economic policy; there is no substantive connection."

Key themes:federal regulationeconomic development

— 655 — Department of Veterans Affairs ENDNOTES 1. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Division, VHA Directive 1003, “VHA Veteran Patient Experience,” April 14, 2020, pp. 1 and B-1. 2. S. 2372, VA Mission Act of 2018, Public Law No. 115-182, 115th Congress, June 6, 2018, https://www.congress. gov/115/plaws/publ182/PLAW-115publ182.pdf (accessed January 30, 2023). 3. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, VA History Office, “VA History,” last updated May 27, 2021, https://www. va.gov/HISTORY/VA_History/Overview.asp (accessed January 28, 2023). 4. 38 U.S. Code § 1116, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/38/1116 (accessed January 28, 2023). 5. S. 3373, Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022 (Honoring Our PACT Act of 2022), Public Law No. 117-168, 117th Congress, August 10, 2022, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ168/PLAW-117publ168.pdf (accessed January 28, 2023). 6. H.R. 2471, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, Public Law No. 117-103, 117th Congress, March 15, 2022, Division S, Title I, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ103/PLAW-117publ103.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). Known variously as the Department of Veterans Affairs Nurse and Physician Assistant Retention and Income Security Enhancement Act and the VA Nurse and Physician Assistant RAISE Act. 7. See note 5, supra. — 657 — Section Four THE ECONOMY The next Administration must prioritize the economic prosperity of ordi- nary Americans. For several decades, establishment “elites” have failed the citizenry by refusing to secure the border, outsourcing manufacturing to China and elsewhere, spending recklessly, regulating constantly, and generally controlling the country from the top down rather than letting it flourish from the bottom up. The proper role of government, as was articulated nearly 250 years ago, is to secure our God-given, unalienable rights in order that we might enjoy the pursuit of happiness, the benefits of free enterprise, and the blessings of liberty. Finding the right approach to trade policy is key to the fortunes of everyday Americans. In Chapter 26, president of the Competitive Enterprise Institute Kent Lassman and former White House director of trade and manufacturing policy Peter Navarro debate what an effective conservative trade policy would look like. Lass- man argues that the best trade policy is a humble, limited-government approach that would encourage free trade with all nations. He maintains that aggressive trade policies involve an increased government role that future leftist Administra- tions will utilize to push “climate change” and “equity”-based activism. Focusing more on gross domestic product (GDP) growth than on median income, he writes that “people mistakenly believe that U.S. manufacturing and the U.S. economy are in decline” when in truth “American manufacturing output is currently at an all-time high.” Meanwhile, we continue to experience “record-setting real GDP” despite our “long-run decline in manufacturing employment.” Lassman does not think that an aggressive U.S. trade policy would lead to more manufacturing jobs. Rather, he writes, “Federal Reserve research shows” that the

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 Del. Plaskett, Stacey E.

To designate the Christiansted Bandstand at the Christiansted National Historic Site, St. Croix, Virgin Islands, as the "Peter G. Thurland, Sr., Bandstand".

119/hr/8121

To direct the Secretary of Commerce to submit to Congress a report containing an assessment of the value, cost, and feasibility of a trans-Atlantic submarine fiber optic cable connecting the contiguous United States, the United States Virgin Islands, Ghana, and Nigeria.

119/hr/1737

Back to All Bills