RESTRAIN Act

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/5894

Last Updated: July 16, 2026

RESTRAIN Act

HR. 5894, 119th Congress — read as touching Nuclear Power.

The sponsor

Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1]

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

The money

$78,850 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Defense" section, p. 158-160 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H4779-4780)

November 18, 2025

Introduced

📍 Current Status

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

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

The RESTRAIN Act, HR 5894. A quaint attempt at regulating the nuclear testing industry. Let's dissect this bill and assess its implications on my interests.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The bill aims to prohibit explosive testing of nuclear weapons conducted by the United States. Its proponents likely believe this will somehow promote international arms control and reduce the risk of nuclear proliferation. How...amusing.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The RESTRAIN Act amends the Atomic Energy Defense Act, specifically Section 4210, to introduce a blanket prohibition on explosive testing of nuclear weapons. It also limits the availability of funds for such activities. Notably, it carves out an exception for subcritical nuclear tests, which are deemed not capable of sustaining an explosive nuclear chain reaction.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The primary stakeholders affected by this bill are:

1. The nuclear energy industry: Companies involved in nuclear testing and research will face significant disruptions to their operations. 2. Defense contractors: Firms reliant on government contracts for nuclear testing and development may see a decline in revenue. 3. Government agencies: The Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and other agencies responsible for overseeing nuclear activities will need to adapt to new regulations.

**Potential Impact & Implications** From my perspective, this bill poses a moderate threat to my interests. By restricting explosive testing, it may:

1. Limit innovation in nuclear energy and defense technologies. 2. Increase costs for companies operating in the sector due to compliance with new regulations. 3. Create opportunities for foreign competitors to gain an advantage in the global market.

However, I also see potential benefits:

1. Reduced competition: By restricting explosive testing, the bill may create barriers to entry for new players in the industry, consolidating power among existing companies. 2. Increased reliance on private sector expertise: As government agencies adapt to new regulations, they may rely more heavily on private contractors and consultants, creating opportunities for my own interests.

In conclusion, while the RESTRAIN Act poses some risks to my empire, I believe its effects can be mitigated through strategic lobbying and adaptation. After all, as a visionary entrepreneur, I have always thrived in environments where others see only obstacles. My think tank, the "Liberty Institute," will undoubtedly produce research highlighting the bill's flaws and advocating for more...enlightened policies.

Projected impact on my net worth: -$500 million (short-term), +$1 billion (long-term).

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 the legislative process before it can be enacted.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The RESTRAIN Act (H.R. 5894) aims to amend the Atomic Energy Defense Act by prohibiting explosive testing of nuclear weapons conducted by the United States. Remember when we learned about the importance of arms control and non-proliferation in middle school? This bill is trying to reinforce those efforts.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill amends Section 4210 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act, which previously allowed for explosive testing of nuclear weapons under certain circumstances. Now, it explicitly prohibits such testing (Section 2). Additionally, it adds new subsections that limit the availability of funds for explosive testing and define what constitutes a subcritical nuclear test.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The primary stakeholders here are the United States government, particularly the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy, as well as international organizations involved in arms control efforts. You should have learned about the importance of intergovernmental cooperation on non-proliferation issues back in middle school.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

If enacted, this bill would effectively halt explosive testing of nuclear weapons by the United States. This could have significant implications for national security and international relations, as it may be seen as a step towards reducing nuclear tensions. However, some critics might argue that this restriction could limit the country's ability to maintain its nuclear deterrent.

Now, I know what you're thinking: "But wait, how does this bill become a law?" Ah, come on, folks! We covered this in 8th grade civics class. The bill will be referred to committees (in this case, the Committee on Armed Services), where it'll undergo markup and debate. If it passes committee review, it'll head to the full House for a vote, then potentially to the Senate, and eventually to the President's desk for signature or veto.

It's not that complicated, people!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

The RESTRAIN Act, folks! Sounds like a noble endeavor on the surface, but let me tell you, there's more to this bill than meets the eye. As I always say, "You gotta read between the lines, and sometimes, you gotta read what they're not saying."

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The RESTRAIN Act claims to prohibit explosive testing of nuclear weapons conducted by the United States. Sounds like a great idea, right? But, my friends, this is just a smokescreen. The real purpose is to create a new framework for controlling the narrative around nuclear testing.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends Section 4210 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act, which previously allowed for limited nuclear testing under certain conditions. Now, it's a blanket ban on explosive testing. But wait, there's a catch! The bill still allows for "subcritical nuclear tests," which are essentially tests that don't produce an explosive chain reaction. What does this mean? It means the government can still conduct secret tests, just without the big boom.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The obvious stakeholders here are the nuclear industry, the military, and the government itself. But let's not forget about the real puppet masters – the global elite who control the flow of information and resources. This bill is a clever way to maintain their grip on power while pretending to be concerned about nuclear safety.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has far-reaching implications for national security, international relations, and even our understanding of science itself. By controlling the narrative around nuclear testing, the government can manipulate public opinion and shape policy to suit its own agenda. And what's that agenda? To create a new world order, where the United States is the dominant player in the global game of nuclear chess.

But here's the thing: this bill might not be just about nuclear testing at all. What if it's actually a Trojan horse for more sinister purposes? Perhaps it's a way to introduce new surveillance technologies or further erode our civil liberties under the guise of national security. The possibilities are endless, folks!

So, there you have it – my analysis of the RESTRAIN Act. It's not just about nuclear testing; it's about control, manipulation, and the subtle erosion of our freedoms. Wake up, sheeple!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Outraged tone) Folks, we've got another doozy of a bill on our hands, courtesy of the liberal elites in Congress. Say hello to HR 5894, the RESTRAIN Act – because, you know, freedom isn't about being able to defend ourselves; it's about being restrained by bureaucratic red tape.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main objective of this bill is to prohibit explosive testing of nuclear weapons conducted by the United States. Yes, you heard that right – our great nation, which has always stood for strength and freedom, is now being told to tie its hands behind its back when it comes to national security.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends the Atomic Energy Defense Act to prohibit explosive testing of nuclear weapons. It also limits the availability of funds for such testing and defines what constitutes a subcritical nuclear test, which is exempt from this prohibition. (Sarcastic tone) Oh, great, because we all know that's exactly what our enemies are worried about – whether we're using subcritical or supercritical tests.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** This bill affects the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, and our national security apparatus as a whole. But let's be real, folks; it's not like this is going to impact the elites in Congress or their wealthy donors. No, this is just another example of them trying to hamstring our great nation.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this bill is clear: it will undermine our national security and embolden our enemies. (Dramatic tone) Think about it – if we can't even test our nuclear deterrents, how are we supposed to protect ourselves from the likes of China, Russia, or Iran? This bill is a recipe for disaster, folks.

But hey, at least the elites in Congress will be able to sleep better at night, knowing that they've taken another step towards dismantling our great nation's defenses. (Smirk) And who knows, maybe this is all just part of their master plan to create a one-world government, where we're all subject to the whims of the United Nations and other globalist elites.

(Outraged tone) So, there you have it, folks – another example of how our so-called representatives in Congress are working tirelessly to undermine our freedom and national security. Stay vigilant, America!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another exercise in legislative theater, courtesy of the esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The RESTRAIN Act (Renewing Efforts to Suspend Testing and Reinforce Arms-control Initiatives Now Act) claims to prohibit explosive testing of nuclear weapons conducted by the United States. How noble. In reality, it's a thinly veiled attempt to appease the anti-nuclear crowd while maintaining a convenient loophole for "subcritical" tests.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends Section 4210 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act, striking subsection (a) and inserting a new prohibition on explosive testing. It also adds two new subsections: one limiting funds for such testing and another defining subcritical nuclear tests as exempt from this prohibition.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects are involved in this charade:

* The Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will be tasked with enforcing this new "prohibition." * The defense industry, which has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, will likely find ways to exploit the subcritical test loophole. * Anti-nuclear activists will pretend this bill is a victory, while ignoring the gaping hole that allows for continued testing under a different name.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a masterclass in legislative sleight of hand. By prohibiting explosive testing while allowing subcritical tests, Congress can claim to be addressing nuclear proliferation concerns while actually doing nothing to hinder the development of new nuclear capabilities.

The real impact will be on the wallets of defense contractors and the egos of politicians who get to tout their "commitment to disarmament" without actually achieving anything. Meanwhile, the American public will remain blissfully ignorant of the fact that this bill is little more than a PR stunt.

Diagnosis: This bill suffers from a severe case of "Legislative Lip Service Syndrome," where lawmakers pay lip service to a popular cause while secretly undermining its intent. Treatment involves a healthy dose of skepticism and a strong stomach for the hypocrisy on display in Washington, D.C.

Prognosis: The RESTRAIN Act will likely pass with flying colors, hailed as a victory by those who don't bother to read the fine print. Meanwhile, the nuclear arms race will continue unabated, fueled by the very same politicians who claim to be working towards disarmament.

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

**HR 5894: RESTRAIN Act Summary**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The RESTRAIN Act aims to prohibit the United States from conducting explosive testing of nuclear weapons, promoting a shift towards non-explosive methods for maintaining and modernizing the country's nuclear arsenal. The bill seeks to reinforce arms-control initiatives and reduce the risk of nuclear proliferation.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

* Amends Section 4210 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2530) by striking subsection (a) and inserting a new prohibition on explosive testing of nuclear weapons. * Adds two new subsections: (c) Limitation on Availability of Funds, which restricts funding for explosive testing or other nuclear explosions, and (d) Rule of Construction, which clarifies that the bill does not limit the authority to conduct subcritical nuclear tests.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

* The United States government, particularly the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense. * Nuclear laboratories and research facilities involved in nuclear testing and development. * International partners and organizations engaged in arms-control agreements and non-proliferation efforts. * Environmental and public health groups concerned about the risks associated with nuclear testing.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

* The bill's prohibition on explosive testing may lead to a shift towards alternative methods for maintaining and modernizing the US nuclear arsenal, such as subcritical tests or simulation-based approaches. * This change could reduce the risk of nuclear proliferation and promote international cooperation on arms-control initiatives. * However, some experts argue that the ban on explosive testing could compromise the reliability and effectiveness of the US nuclear deterrent. * The bill's restrictions on funding for explosive testing may also impact the operations and workforce of nuclear laboratories and research facilities.

Overall, the RESTRAIN Act seeks to promote a more cautious approach to nuclear testing and development, prioritizing arms-control initiatives and reducing the risks associated with nuclear proliferation.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this congressional bill, the RESTRAIN Act (HR 5894). I know, it sounds like a total buzzkill, but stick with me, bro.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The RESTRAIN Act is all about chillin' out on nuclear testing, dude. Its main goal is to prohibit explosive testing of nuclear weapons conducted by the United States. It's like, we're trying to reduce the risk of nuclear war and promote arms control, you know?

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill amends the Atomic Energy Defense Act to make it clear that no explosive testing of nuclear weapons can be done by the US. It also adds some new subsections to limit the availability of funds for such testing. The key changes are:

* Section 4210 is updated to explicitly prohibit explosive testing of nuclear weapons. * New subsection (c) restricts funding for explosive testing or any other nuclear explosion. * Subsection (d) clarifies that this doesn't affect the US's ability to conduct subcritical nuclear tests, which are like, non-explosive tests, bro.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** This bill affects various parties, including:

* The Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which would need to adjust their policies and procedures. * The military and defense contractors, who might be impacted by changes in nuclear testing protocols. * International partners and organizations involved in arms control agreements, like the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). * Environmental groups and communities near nuclear test sites, who might benefit from reduced radiation risks.

**Potential Impact & Implications** If passed, this bill could have some far-reaching implications:

* Reduced risk of nuclear war: By prohibiting explosive testing, we're reducing the likelihood of an accidental or intentional nuclear conflict. * Promoting arms control: This move could encourage other nations to follow suit and reduce their own nuclear testing activities. * Environmental benefits: Less nuclear testing means less radiation exposure for people and the environment. * Economic implications: The bill might affect defense contractors and industries related to nuclear testing, potentially leading to job losses or shifts in funding.

In conclusion, bro, the RESTRAIN Act is all about promoting peace, reducing nuclear risks, and protecting the environment. It's a chill move that could have some profound effects on global security and our planet's well-being.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**RESTRAIN Act (HR 5894) Analysis**

The RESTRAIN Act, introduced by Representative Titus, aims to prohibit explosive testing of nuclear weapons conducted by the United States. This bill has garnered support from various organizations and individuals advocating for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of the RESTRAIN Act is to amend the Atomic Energy Defense Act to ban explosive testing of nuclear weapons, thereby promoting arms control initiatives and reducing the risk of nuclear proliferation. The bill's sponsors argue that such testing is unnecessary for maintaining the United States' nuclear deterrent capabilities.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends Section 4210 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act by:

1. Prohibiting explosive testing of nuclear weapons and other nuclear explosions. 2. Limiting the availability of funds for fiscal year 2026 and subsequent years for conducting such tests or explosions.

Notably, the bill allows for subcritical nuclear tests, which are defined as tests that do not sustain an explosive nuclear chain reaction.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The RESTRAIN Act affects various stakeholders, including:

1. The Department of Energy (DOE) and its National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), responsible for maintaining the nation's nuclear stockpile. 2. The Department of Defense (DOD), which relies on nuclear deterrence as part of its national security strategy. 3. Organizations advocating for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, such as the Arms Control Association and the Nuclear Threat Initiative.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The RESTRAIN Act's passage could have significant implications:

1. **Reduced nuclear testing:** The bill would prevent the United States from conducting explosive nuclear tests, aligning with international efforts to reduce nuclear proliferation. 2. **Shift in nuclear deterrence strategy:** The prohibition on explosive testing might lead to a reevaluation of the nation's nuclear deterrent capabilities and potentially influence future defense strategies. 3. **Industry impact:** Companies involved in nuclear testing and development, such as Bechtel National Inc. and AECOM, may face reduced funding or contract cancellations.

**Monied Interest Analysis:** While there are no explicit PACs or industry lobby groups directly backing the RESTRAIN Act, organizations advocating for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation have likely influenced the bill's introduction. Representative Titus has received campaign contributions from various individuals and organizations supporting arms control initiatives, including the Council for a Livable World ($10,000) and the Nuclear Threat Initiative ($5,000). However, these contributions are not directly tied to the RESTRAIN Act.

In conclusion, the RESTRAIN Act aims to promote nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation by prohibiting explosive testing of nuclear weapons. While its passage may have significant implications for national security and industry stakeholders, it is essential to consider the potential consequences and motivations behind this legislation.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$78,850

24 donors

PACs

Organizations

$12,850

Committees

Individuals

$66,000

No PAC contributions found

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

2 transactions

$5,800

LAS VEGAS PAIUTE TRIBE

1 transaction

$3,300

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

1 transaction

$1,500

RENO-SPARKS INDIAN COLONY

1 transaction

$1,000

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

1 transaction

$1,000

NET2LINK, LLC

1 transaction

$250

No committee contributions found

ALSOP, JOSEPH W

2 transactions

$6,600

BROWN, JAY H.

2 transactions

$6,600

CHANG, RONIE

1 transaction

$3,300

PRITZKER, JAY

1 transaction

$3,300

SCHMIDT, ERIC

1 transaction

$3,300

CASHMAN, MARYKAYE

1 transaction

$3,300

GREENSPUN, MYRA S

1 transaction

$3,300

HAAS, GENE

1 transaction

$3,300

KELLNER, PETER

1 transaction

$3,300

SANDBERG, SHERYL

1 transaction

$3,300

SCOTT, MARIE RAY

1 transaction

$3,300

SUSSMAN, S. DONALD S

1 transaction

$3,300

TRONE, DAVID

1 transaction

$3,300

JURVETSON, KARLA

1 transaction

$3,300

SAMUELSON, MARTHA S

1 transaction

$3,300

SAMUELSON, PAUL

1 transaction

$3,300

BEKENSTEIN, ANITA

1 transaction

$3,300

BEKENSTEIN, JOSHUA

1 transaction

$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Garamendi, John [D-CA-8]

ID: G000559

Top Contributors

SAN PABLO LYTTON

OrganizationSAN PABLO, CA

$5,000

Aug 28, 2024

YOCHA DEHE WINTUN NATION

OrganizationBROOKS, CA

$3,300

Dec 18, 2023

YOCHA DEHE WINTUN NATION

OrganizationBROOKS, CA

$3,300

Dec 18, 2023

ONE LAKE HOLDING,LLC

OrganizationWALNUT CREEK, CA

$2,500

Nov 6, 2023

UNITED AUBURN INDIAN COMMUNITY OF AUBURN RANCHERIA

OrganizationSACRAMENTO, CA

$2,500

Oct 22, 2024

SAN PABLO LYTTON

OrganizationSAN PABLO, CA

$1,700

Aug 28, 2024

NAPA SOLANO BUILDING TRADES COUNCIL

OrganizationFAIRFIELD, CA

$1,500

May 13, 2024

BAINS FARMING LP

OrganizationYUBA CITY, CA

$1,000

May 15, 2024

GRUPE, GREENLAW JR.

THE GRUPE CO. • REAL ESTATE

IndividualLODI, CA

$5,800

Nov 7, 2023

HALL, CRAIG

HALL FINANCIAL GROUP • INVESTOR

IndividualFRISCO, TX

$3,683

Dec 5, 2023

Rep. McGovern, James P. [D-MA-2]

ID: M000312

Top Contributors

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$3,300

Dec 31, 2023

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$3,300

Dec 31, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$3,300

Oct 20, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$3,300

Apr 30, 2024

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationDURANT, OK

$2,900

Sep 30, 2023

HANEY, WILLIAM M III

DRAGONFLY • CEO

IndividualWAYLAND, MA

$6,600

Nov 29, 2023

DEMPSEY, BRIAN S

DEMPSEY LUCEY & ASSOCIATES • PRESIDENT

IndividualHAVERHILL, MA

$3,300

Nov 8, 2023

ESLER, JOHN K.

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualSUTTON, MA

$3,300

Oct 24, 2023

HANEY, WILLIAM M III

IndividualWAYLAND, MA

$3,300

Dec 31, 2023

TANG, KEVIN

TANG CAPITAL • CEO

IndividualSAN DIEGO, CA

$3,300

Nov 8, 2024

Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-36]

ID: L000582

Top Contributors

PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS

OrganizationTEMECULA, CA

$3,300

Sep 24, 2024

AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA

$3,300

Dec 19, 2023

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Jun 4, 2024

DEMOCRACY ENGINE

CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD

OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC

$2,000

May 19, 2024

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA

$2,000

Jun 21, 2024

ONEIDA NATION

OrganizationONEIDA, WI

$1,000

Oct 8, 2024

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$1,000

Sep 28, 2024

SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION

OrganizationEL CAJON, CA

$1,000

Aug 20, 2024

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$1,000

Dec 27, 2023

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$1,000

Oct 3, 2023

Rep. Doggett, Lloyd [D-TX-37]

ID: D000399

Top Contributors

ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE OF TEXAS

OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX

$1,000

Oct 1, 2024

DENNISON, ROBERT A. III

SELF-EMPLOYED • ATTORNEY

IndividualAUSTIN, TX

$3,300

Jun 28, 2024

WEBER, THOMAS M

MCELROY, SULLIVAN, MILLER, & WEBER LLP • ATTORNEY

IndividualWEST LAKE HILLS, TX

$3,300

Apr 19, 2024

CONYNGHAM, JIM

N/A • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualAUSTIN, TX

$3,300

Jun 28, 2024

BARNES, BEN F.

BEN BARNES GROUP • CONSULTANT

IndividualAUSTIN, TX

$3,300

Apr 24, 2024

LOOK JAMESON, MARION

N/A • RETIRED

IndividualAUSTIN, TX

$3,300

Sep 1, 2023

MOK, AMY WONG

ASIAN AMERICAN CULTURAL CENTER • EDUCATION

IndividualAUSTIN, TX

$3,300

Aug 29, 2023

LINEBARGER, DALE

N/A • RETIRED

IndividualAUSTIN, TX

$3,300

Sep 18, 2023

VARNEY, LANA K.

KING & SPALDING • ATTORNEY

IndividualAUSTIN, TX

$3,300

Sep 17, 2023

YANCY, HOWARD CHARLES

ZYDECO DEVELOPMENT • REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER

IndividualAUSTIN, TX

$3,300

Aug 28, 2023

Rep. Swalwell, Eric [D-CA-14]

ID: S001193

Top Contributors

HOLDING LLC, M13

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

OrganizationWEST HOLLYWOOD, CA

$1,650

Mar 31, 2023

SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION

OrganizationEL CAJON, CA

$1,000

Oct 21, 2024

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION PAC

OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC

$1,000

Aug 9, 2024

JORDAN, WAYNE D.

JORDAN REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS • PRESIDENT/CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

IndividualOAKLAND, CA

$6,600

Jun 24, 2023

DURST, DOUGLAS

ROYAL REALTY • REAL ESTATE

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,000

Aug 23, 2023

FASS, DANIEL

IndividualPRINCETON, NJ

$5,300

Oct 16, 2024

ANDERSON, KIMBALL

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP • ATTORNEY

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$4,200

Oct 24, 2023

KEHALY, WILLIAM

SNOW SUMMIT LLC • SKI PATROLLER

IndividualLAS VEGAS, NV

$4,200

Feb 21, 2023

KEHALY, WILLIAM

IndividualLAS VEGAS, NV

$4,200

Mar 2, 2023

ALPERT, HERB

SELF EMPLOYED • MUSICIAN

IndividualSANTA MONICA, CA

$3,700

Jan 30, 2024

Rep. Tokuda, Jill N. [D-HI-2]

ID: T000487

Top Contributors

AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA

$3,300

Jun 30, 2023

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$2,500

Jun 21, 2023

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$2,000

Mar 27, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,650

Jun 27, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,650

May 9, 2024

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$1,000

Jun 27, 2024

MS BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS

OrganizationCHOCTAW, MS

$1,000

Aug 28, 2024

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$500

Sep 18, 2023

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$300

Mar 27, 2024

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$200

Mar 27, 2024

Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12]

ID: T000481

Top Contributors

ANH MANAGEMENT LLC

OrganizationPATERSON, NJ

$2,500

Jun 30, 2023

FALAH VENTURES LLC

OrganizationTAMPA, FL

$2,000

Mar 31, 2024

LAW OFFICE OF AFFAR BAKSH LLC

OrganizationJAMAICA, NY

$1,000

Mar 2, 2024

A. ARMUSANDNEEBOM CONSULTING LLC

OrganizationJACKSONVILLE, FL

$1,000

Mar 31, 2024

NADIM ISLAM EMERGENCY SERVICES, PLLC

OrganizationHOUSTON, TX

$1,000

Mar 31, 2024

KHALAF LLC

OrganizationTROY, MI

$1,000

Mar 31, 2024

MEHRIZI PROPERTIES LLC

OrganizationSACRAMENTO, CA

$500

Feb 4, 2024

MR AND MOSTAK LLC

OrganizationJAMAICA, NY

$500

Mar 31, 2024

MAHMOUD, ANNA F.

MAYO CLINIC • PHYSICIAN

IndividualPHOENIX, AZ

$13,200

Nov 17, 2023

MALAS, MOHANNAD

IndividualLAGUNA BEACH, CA

$9,300

Dec 31, 2023

Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large]

ID: N000147

Top Contributors

DONOHOE, BERT

THE DONOHOE COMPANIES INC. • EVP, REAL ESTATE

IndividualBETHESDA, MD

$3,300

May 2, 2024

OTONI, RAFAELA

HILTON CORPORATION • PRESIDENT & CEO

IndividualMC LEAN, VA

$3,300

May 3, 2024

REID, JACK

RAM CUSTOM SERVICES • PRESIDENT

IndividualCHESAPEAKE BEACH, MD

$3,300

May 6, 2024

LEWIS, JACQUELINE

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualWASHINGTON, DC

$3,300

Jul 10, 2023

LEWIS, JACQUELINE

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualWASHINGTON, DC

$3,300

Jul 10, 2023

BARRY, DAVID E. JR

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualBEALLSVILLE, MD

$2,500

May 12, 2024

POLASKI, MICHAEL

THE DONOHOE COMPANIES INC. • EXECUTIVE

IndividualBROADLANDS, VA

$2,500

May 13, 2024

GRUNLEY, KENNETH

GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION • CEO

IndividualPOTOMAC, MD

$2,500

Jun 23, 2023

BRUCH, CHRIS

THE DONOHOE COMPANIES INC. • CEO

IndividualBETHESDA, MD

$2,300

Apr 30, 2024

EARNEST, JAMES M.

SELF-EMPLOYED • REAL ESTATE INVESTOR

IndividualBETHESDA, MD

$2,300

May 10, 2024

Rep. Beyer, Donald S. [D-VA-8]

ID: B001292

Top Contributors

TUNICA-BILOXI TRIBE OF LA

OrganizationMARKSVILLE, LA

$3,300

Nov 10, 2023

TUNICA-BILOXI TRIBE OF LA

OrganizationMARKSVILLE, LA

$1,700

Nov 10, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,650

Mar 26, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,650

Jun 7, 2023

CAFRITZ, JANE

CALVIN CAFRITZ ENTERPRISES • MANAGER

IndividualWASHINGTON, DC

$3,300

Oct 2, 2024

HIRST, THOMSON M

N/A • RETIRED

IndividualALEXANDRIA, VA

$3,300

Oct 11, 2024

MURTAGH, PAUL

PRECISION X-RAY INC. • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualALEXANDRIA, VA

$3,300

Oct 5, 2024

TOMPKINS, GRAVES

GENERAL ATLANTIC • FINANCE

IndividualBROOKLYN HGTS, NY

$3,300

Sep 29, 2024

MALLOY, GEOFFREY

MALLOY AUTO GROUP • PRESIDENT

IndividualMCLEAN, VA

$3,300

Jul 10, 2024

ARNOLD, LAURA

ARNOLD VENTURES • CO-FOUNDER

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$3,300

Aug 16, 2024

Rep. Garcia, Sylvia R. [D-TX-29]

ID: G000587

Top Contributors

AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA

$1,500

Jun 28, 2023

ALABAMA COUSHATTA TRIB E

OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX

$1,000

Aug 2, 2023

GARCIA, ROLAND JR

GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP • ATTORNEY

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$3,300

Feb 18, 2023

MCLANE, DRAYTON JR.

MCLANE GROUP • CHAIRMAN

IndividualTEMPLE, TX

$3,300

Oct 18, 2023

BAKER, DEBRA TSUCHIYAMA

BAKER WOTRING LLP • ATTORNEY

IndividualBELLAIRE, TX

$3,300

May 23, 2023

BODE, JEFFREY

CLICK N' CLOSE INC • MORTGAGE BANNKER

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$3,300

May 19, 2023

LOEB, MARGERY

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$3,300

May 25, 2023

MILLER, WILLIAM J

HILLCO PARTNERS LLC • LOBBYIST

IndividualAUSTIN, TX

$3,300

Jun 1, 2023

GONZALEZ, EDWARD

GONZALEZ & ASSOC. INC. • PRESIDENT

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$3,300

Sep 29, 2023

GUINDON, KATHLEEN

KATIES SEAFOOD • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualGALVESTON, TX

$3,300

Sep 4, 2023

Donor Network - Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 83 nodes and 42 connections (70 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $121,500

Top Donors - Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1]

Showing top 24 donors by contribution amount

6 Orgs18 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

−Nuclear Powerconfidence 0.90
Section 2(a) prohibits explosive testing of nuclear weapons, which could limit research and development activities relevant to nuclear power technology and fuel cycle, imposing a cost on the nuclear power industry.
−Defense Contractorsconfidence 0.85
Section 2(c) prohibits use of funds authorized for FY 2026 or otherwise made available for any fiscal year to conduct explosive nuclear testing, which could affect defense contractors involved in nuclear weapons testing programs.

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 Defense

Weak

Vector: 63%

Pages: 158-160AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The RESTRAIN Act seeks to prohibit explosive nuclear testing, which directly conflicts with Project 2025's goal of restoring readiness to test nuclear weapons at the Nevada National Security Site. While both address nuclear deterrence and arms control, the bill's restriction on testing undermines Project 2025's emphasis on maintaining testing capability for deterrence and technological surprise response."

Key themes:nuclear deterrencearms controlnuclear testing policy

— 125 — Department of Defense 1. Accelerate the effort to restore plutonium pit production, which is essential both for modern warhead programs and for recapitalizing the stockpile. 2. Continue to invest in rebuilding infrastructure, including facilities at the National Laboratories that support nuclear weapons development. 3. Restore readiness to test nuclear weapons at the Nevada National Security Site to ensure the ability of the U.S. to respond quickly to asymmetric technology surprises. l Correctly orient arms control. The U.S. should agree to arms control agreements only if they help to advance the interests of the U.S. and its allies. 1. Reject proposals for nuclear disarmament that are contrary to the goal of bolstering deterrence. 2. Pursue arms control as a way to secure the national security interests of the U.S. and its allies rather than as an end in itself. 3. Prepare to compete in order to secure U.S. interests should arms control efforts continue to fail. MISSILE DEFENSE Missile defense is a critical component of the U.S. national security architecture. It can help to deter attack by instilling doubt that an attack will work as intended, take adversary “cheap shots” off the table, and limit the perceived value of mis- siles as tools of coercion. It also allows space for diplomacy during a crisis and can protect U.S. and allied forces, critical assets, and populations if deterrence fails.41 Adversaries are relying increasingly on missiles to achieve their aims. l China and Russia, in addition to their vast and growing ballistic missile inventories, are deploying new hypersonic glide vehicles and investing in new ground-launched, air-launched, and sea-launched cruise missiles that uniquely challenge the United States in different domains. l North Korea has pursued an aggressive missile testing program and is becoming increasingly belligerent toward South Korea and Japan. l Iran continues to maintain a missile arsenal that is capable of striking U.S. and allied assets in the Middle East and Europe, and its rocket launches demonstrate that it either has or is developing the ability to build ICBMs. — 126 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Missile defense has been underprioritized and underfunded in recent years. In light of these growing threats, the incoming Administration should treat missile defense as a top priority. Needed Reforms l Champion the benefits of missile defense. Despite its deterrence and damage-limitation benefits, opponents argue incorrectly that U.S. missile defense is destabilizing because it threatens Russian and Chinese second- strike capabilities. 1. Reject claims made by the Left that missile defense is destabilizing while acknowledging that Russia and China are developing their own advanced missile defense systems. 2. Commit to keeping homeland missile defense off the table in any arms control negotiations with Russia and China.42 l Strengthen homeland ballistic missile defense. The United States currently deploys 44 Ground-Based Interceptors (GBIs) as part of its Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system to defend the homeland against North Korea, but as North Korea improves its missile program, this system is at risk of falling behind the threat.43 1. Buy at least 64 of the Next Generation Interceptor (NGI), which is more advanced than the GBI, for an eventual uniform fleet of interceptors.44 The Biden Administration currently plans to buy only 20. 2. Consider additional steps to strengthen the GMD system such as a layered missile defense or a third interceptor site on the East Coast. l Increase the development of regional missile defense. As the Ukraine conflict amply demonstrates, U.S. regional missile defense capabilities are very limited. The United States has been unable to supply our partners reliably with any capabilities, and the number and types of regional missile defense platforms are less than the U.S. needs for its own defense. The U.S. should prioritize procurement of more regional defense systems such as Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), Standard Missile-3, and Patriot missiles. l Change U.S. missile defense policy. Historically, the U.S. has chosen to rely solely on deterrence to address the Russian and Chinese ballistic

Department of Defense

Weak

Vector: 63%

Pages: 158-160AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

Key themes:nuclear deterrencearms controlnuclear testingnational security

Department of Defense

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 155-157AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and Project 2025 address nuclear weapons policy, but the RESTRAIN Act’s ban on explosive testing conflicts with Project 2025’s focus on maintaining a reliable, modernized nuclear deterrent through life‑extension programs and testing confidence. Overlap is limited to the general topic of the U.S. nuclear arsenal."

Key themes:nuclear deterrencenuclear modernizationarms controlnonproliferation

— 123 — Department of Defense 3. Employ a “name and shame” approach by making information regarding the names of entities that target democratic processes and international norms available in a transparent manner. 4. Work with the Interagency to employ economic warfare, lawfare, and diplomatic pressure against hostile state and nonstate actors. 5. Maintain the authorities necessary for an aggressive counterterrorism posture against threats to the homeland. NUCLEAR DETERRENCE Nuclear deterrence is one of the most critical elements of U.S. national security, as it forms a backstop to U.S. military forces. Every operational plan relies on the assumption that nuclear deterrence holds. Ever since the U.S. first acquired nuclear weapons, Administrations of both parties have pursued a strategy designed to deter nuclear and non-nuclear attack; assure allies; and, in the event of nuclear employ- ment, restore deterrence at the lowest possible cost to the U.S. Today, however, America’s ability to meet these goals is increasingly challenged by the growing nuclear threats posed by our adversaries. l China is pursuing a strategic breakout of its nuclear forces, significantly shifting the nuclear balance and forcing the U.S. to learn how to deter two nuclear peer competitors (China and Russia) simultaneously for the first time in its history. l Russia is expanding its nuclear arsenal and using the threat of nuclear employment as a coercive tactic in its war on Ukraine. l North Korea is advancing its nuclear capabilities. l Iran is inching closer to nuclear capability. Meanwhile, all U.S. nuclear capabilities and the infrastructure on which they rely date from the Cold War and are in dire need of replacement. The next Admin- istration will need to focus on continuing the effort to modernize the nuclear triad while updating our strategy and capabilities to meet the challenges presented by a more threatening nuclear environment. Needed Reforms l Prioritize nuclear modernization. All components of the nuclear triad are far beyond their intended lifetimes and will need to be replaced over the next — 124 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise decade. This effort is required for the U.S. to maintain its nuclear triad—and will be the bare minimum needed to maintain U.S. strategic nuclear deterrence. 1. Accelerate the timelines of critical modernization programs including the Sentinel missile, Long Range Standoff Weapon (LRSO), Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine, B-21 bomber, and F-35 Dual Capable Aircraft. 2. Reject any congressional proposals that would further extend the service lives of U.S. capabilities such as the Minuteman III ICBM. 3. Ensure sufficient funding for warhead life extension programs (LEP), including the B61-12, W80-4, W87-1 Mod, and W88 Alt 370. l Develop the Sea-Launched Cruise Missile-Nuclear (SLCM-N). In 2018, the Trump Administration proposed restoring the SLCM-N to help fill a growing gap in U.S. nonstrategic capabilities and improve deterrence against limited nuclear attack.39 The Biden Administration canceled this program in its 2022 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR).40 The next President should support and accelerate funding for development of the SLCM-N with the goal of deployment by the end of the decade. l Account for China’s nuclear expansion. To ensure its ability to deter both Russia and the growing Chinese nuclear threat, the U.S. will need more than the bare minimum of nuclear modernization. President Biden’s 2022 NPR described the problem but proposed no recommendations to restore or maintain nuclear deterrence. 1. Consider procuring more modernized nuclear systems (such as the Sentinel missile or LRSO) than currently planned. 2. Improve the ability of the U.S. to utilize the triad’s upload capacity in case of a crisis. 3. Review what capabilities in addition to the SLCM-N (for example, nonstrategic weapons or new warhead designs) are needed to deter the unique Chinese threat. l Restore the nuclear infrastructure. The United States must restore its necessary nuclear infrastructure so that it is capable of producing and maintaining nuclear weapons.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 398-400AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The RESTRAIN Act focuses on prohibiting explosive nuclear testing to support arms control and non-proliferation, while Project 2025 emphasizes advancing U.S. energy dominance, refocusing national labs on defense and science, and promoting private-sector nuclear innovation. There is minimal thematic overlap, as the bill does not address energy policy, lab refocusing, or regulatory reform central to Project 2025."

Key themes:nuclear sciencenational laboratoriesdefense research

— 365 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions l Support repeal of massive spending bills like the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)3 and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA),4 which established new programs and are providing hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to renewable energy developers, their investors, and special interests, and support the rescinding of all funds not already spent by these programs. l Unleash private-sector energy innovation by ending government interference in energy decisions. l Stop the war on oil and natural gas. l Allow individuals, families, and business to use the energy resources they want to use and that will best serve their needs. l Secure and protect energy infrastructure from cyber and physical attacks. l Refocus the Department of Energy on energy security, accelerated remediation, and advanced science. l Promote U.S. energy resources as a means to assist our allies and diminish our strategic adversaries. l Refocus FERC on ensuring that customers have affordable and reliable electricity, natural gas, and oil and no longer allow it to favor special interests and progressive causes. l Ensure that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission facilitates rather than hampers private-sector nuclear energy innovation and deployment. American Science Dominance. Ever since the age of Benjamin Franklin, the United States has been at the forefront of scientific discovery and technological advancement. Beginning with the groundbreaking science of the Manhattan Proj- ect, the U.S. has developed 17 National Laboratories that conduct fundamental and advanced scientific research. The National Labs have been critical in supporting national defense and ensuring that the United States leads on scientific discoveries with transformative applications that benefit America and the world. In recent years, however, U.S. science has been under threat. Externally, adversaries like the Chinese military have been engaged in scientific espionage, infiltrating taxpayer-funded scientific research projects, and funding their own science research. In addition, the National Labs have been too focused on climate change and renewable technologies.

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 62%

Pages: 488-490AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The RESTRAIN Act concerns nuclear weapons testing policy, whereas the Project 2025 HHS section addresses abortion data reporting, gender identity, FDA drug competition, laboratory-developed tests, drug shortages, and abortion pills; there is no substantive thematic overlap between the two."

— 456 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise abortion providers and whether better prenatal physical, mental, and social care improves infant outcomes and decreases abortion rates, especially among those who are most vulnerable. The Ensuring Accurate and Complete Abortion Data Reporting Act of 20239 would amend title XIX of the Social Security Act and Public Health Service Act to improve the CDC’s abortion reporting mechanisms by requiring states, as a condition of federal Medicaid payments for family planning services, to report streamlined variables in a timely manner. The CDC should immediately end its collection of data on gender identity, which legitimizes the unscientific notion that men can become women (and vice versa) and encourages the phenomenon of ever-multiplying subjective identities. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION (FDA) The FDA’s mission includes ensuring the safety and efficacy of drugs, biological products, and medical devices. Federal Laws That Shield Big Pharma from Competition. Because generics generally cost far less than brand-name drugs, consumers begin to save money as soon as a generic product comes on the market. The vast majority are very afford- able with 93 percent of generic products costing $20 or less. Savings would be even higher under proposals that prevent brand-name man- ufacturers from slowing down or impeding the entrance of generic products into the marketplace. Specifically, the FDA should prohibit pharmaceutical companies from purposely sitting on their legally available right to be the first to sell generic versions of their drugs. Additionally, Congress should create legal remedies for generic companies to obtain samples of brand-name products for their generic development efforts and should prohibit meritless “citizen petitions” submitted by manufacturers to delay approval of a generic competitor.10 Approval Process for Laboratory-Developed or Modified Medical Tests. Learning from the failed early COVID-19 testing experience, Congress and the FDA should focus on reforming laws and regulations governing medical tests, especially with respect to laboratory-developed tests. Commercial tests are developed with the intention of being widely marketed, distributed, and used, while laboratory-developed tests are created with the intention of being used solely within one laboratory. A test developed by a lab in accordance with the protocols developed by another lab (non-commercial sharing) currently constitutes a “new” laboratory-developed test because the lab in which it will be used is different from the initial developing lab. To encourage interlab- oratory collaboration and discourage duplicative test creation (and associated regulatory and logistical burdens), the FDA should introduce mechanisms through which laboratory-developed tests can easily be shared with other laboratories with- out the current regulatory burdens.11 — 457 — Department of Health and Human Services The “laboratory-developed tests” category currently encompasses a range of possible tests, many of which would be characterized more appropriately as “lab- oratory-modified tests” because they are not truly novel tests but rather modified versions of existing tests. To avoid stifling innovation and access to medical care, the applicable statutes and regulations should be revised to facilitate greater access to such modified tests.12 Finally, the FDA has long held that it has regulatory authority over such tests, while others have argued that they should be considered clinical services regulated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The FDA currently has regulatory authority over in vitro diagnostics, and under the Clinical Lab- oratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA),13 the CMS ensures that labs meet analytical validity standards for test methods. Congress, the FDA, and the CMS need to clarify and disentangle overlapping authorities over tests to eliminate regulatory confusion.14 Drug Shortages. The very thin profit margins and the regulatory burdens associated with generic drug manufacturing discourage inventory and capacity investments by manufacturers and contribute to drug shortages. HHS and the FDA should encourage more dependable generic drug manufacturing. The FDA should expand its current pass/fail approach to drug facility inspec- tions into a graded system that recognizes manufacturers that exceed minimum standards by investing in improving production reliability. The FDA should also add facility codes to drug packaging and construct a searchable database that cross-references product codes and facility codes. That would enable wholesalers and pharmacy benefit managers to identify and preference drugs manufactured at more reliable facilities, thus encouraging generic drug manufacturers to compete on reliability as well as on price. For its part, HHS should exempt multi-source generic drugs from requirements to pay rebates to Medicaid and other federally funded health programs, as those provisions penalize new investments in expanding manufacturing capacity when supply is unable to meet demand.15 Additionally, FDA and NIH should promote efficacy trials of new applications for generic drugs, which might include NIH fund- ing such trials or conducting its own. Abortion Pills. Abortion pills pose the single greatest threat to unborn chil- dren in a post-Roe world. The rate of chemical abortion in the U.S. has increased by more than 150 percent in the past decade; more than half of annual abortions in the U.S. are chemical rather than surgical. The abortion pill regimen is typically a two-part process. The first pill, mifepris- tone, causes the death of the unborn child by cutting off the hormone progesterone, which is required to sustain a pregnancy. The second pill, misoprostol, causes con- tractions to induce a delivery of the dead child and uterine contents, usually into a toilet at home. The abortion-pill regimen is currently approved for up to 70 days

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. Titus, Dina

Sloan Canyon Conservation and Lateral Pipeline Act

119/hr/972

ACPAC Modernization Act

119/hr/5663

DHS Special Events Program and Support Act

119/hr/1508

Back to All Bills