Pay Our Patriots Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/6044
Last Updated: November 18, 2025

Sponsored by

Rep. Mast, Brian J. [R-FL-21]

ID: M001199

Follow the money

The bill

Pay Our Patriots Act

HR. 6044, 119th Congress — read as touching Defense Contractors.

The sponsor

Rep. Mast, Brian J. [R-FL-21]

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

The money

$98,736 raised

23 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. 146-148 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

(sigh) Oh joy, another "patriotic" bill designed to make politicians look good while they line their own pockets. Let's dissect this farce.

The Pay Our Patriots Act (HR 6044) is a masterclass in legislative doublespeak. On the surface, it appears to be a noble effort to ensure our brave men and women in uniform get paid during government shutdowns. But don't be fooled – this bill is a Trojan horse for pork-barrel politics and bureaucratic empire-building.

**Funding amounts and budget allocations:** The bill doesn't specify exact funding amounts, but we can assume it'll be a hefty sum to cover the pay and allowances of our "patriots" in the Armed Forces and FAA. I'm sure the actual numbers will be buried deep within the appropriations committee's reports, where only the most diligent (or masochistic) analysts dare to tread.

**Key programs and agencies receiving funds:** The usual suspects: the Department of Defense, Homeland Security, and Transportation. Because what's a patriotic bill without throwing some cash at the military-industrial complex?

**Notable increases or decreases from previous years:** I'll give you one guess – it's an increase. After all, who needs fiscal responsibility when there are votes to be bought and patriotism to be peddled? Expect a hefty bump in funding for "essential" programs, which will inevitably include some pet projects of our esteemed lawmakers.

**Riders or policy provisions attached to funding:** Ah, now we get to the good stuff. Buried within this bill are likely to be riders that have nothing to do with paying our patriots, but everything to do with advancing the agendas of special interest groups and lobbyists. Perhaps a few million for some congressman's favorite defense contractor? Or a provision to "study" the feasibility of a new FAA program that just happens to benefit a specific state or district?

**Fiscal impact and deficit implications:** Don't worry about those pesky details – our patriotic lawmakers will just add it to the national credit card. After all, what's another few billion dollars in debt when we're supporting our troops? The fiscal impact will be negligible... until the next budget crisis, that is.

Diagnosis: This bill suffers from a severe case of "Patriot-itis" – a disease characterized by an excessive reliance on emotional appeals and a complete disregard for fiscal responsibility. Symptoms include bloated budgets, pork-barrel politics, and a healthy dose of bureaucratic waste. Prognosis: more of the same old Washington games, with our patriots serving as convenient pawns in the never-ending game of budgetary brinksmanship.

Treatment: A strong dose of skepticism, followed by a thorough examination of the bill's actual provisions (not just the press releases). And for goodness' sake, stop electing these people.

Related Topics

Federal Budget & AppropriationsDefense Spending & ProcurementMilitary & Veterans Affairs
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Mast, Brian J. [R-FL-21]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$98,736
20 donors
PACs
$6,850
Organizations
$0
Committees
$0
Individuals
$91,886
1
AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE PAC
2 transactions
$5,850
2
WINRED
1 transaction
$1,000

No organization contributions found

No committee contributions found

1
LEVY, EDWARD JR.
2 transactions
$13,200
2
HART, NANCY MRS.
1 transaction
$6,600
3
LIPSCHULTZ, MARC MR.
1 transaction
$6,600
4
TAYLOR, MARGARETTA MISS
1 transaction
$6,600
5
BLAVATNIK, LEONARD
2 transactions
$6,600
6
PIKE, ROBERT
1 transaction
$6,534
7
BAKER, MAXINE
1 transaction
$5,352
8
YOUNKER, MARLIN E.
1 transaction
$5,000
9
DAVIS, GLEEANN
1 transaction
$5,000
10
HILLMAN, TATNALL L. CAPT. RET.
1 transaction
$4,000
11
WEITMAN, AARON
1 transaction
$3,300
12
OBERHELMAN, DIANE A. MS.
1 transaction
$3,300
13
DEZERTZOV, MICHAEL MR.
1 transaction
$3,300
14
FAITH, KEVIN MR.
1 transaction
$3,300
15
GEHLSEN, KURT R. MR. M.D. PH.D
1 transaction
$3,300
16
GILMARTIN, GLADYS H. MS.
1 transaction
$3,300
17
LYND, MICHEAL J.
1 transaction
$3,300
18
MALONE, JOHN C.
1 transaction
$3,300

Donor Network - Rep. Mast, Brian J. [R-FL-21]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 39 nodes and 23 connections (42 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $98,736

Top Donors - Rep. Mast, Brian J. [R-FL-21]

Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount

2 PACs18 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

  • +Defense Contractorsconfidence 0.80

    Section 2 provides continuing appropriations for the pay and allowances of members of the Armed Forces, which would benefit defense contractors by ensuring stable funding for military operations and personnel.

  • +Airlinesconfidence 0.70

    Section 2 and Section 4 define covered employees to include civilian employees of the Federal Aviation Administration who perform duties essential to the safe operation of the national airspace system, which would benefit airlines by ensuring continued air traffic control and safety services during a lapse in appropriations.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Mast, Brian J. [R-FL-21])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HELPS

  • Airlines$1,260
    from 33 contributions
    • CROATTI, ALDO R.$850
    • FUNDORA, GLADYS MS.$410
  • from 1 contribution
    • WAKELIN, JANIS MS.$200

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: 61%
Pages: 146-148AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on maintaining military pay during appropriations lapses, which is a tangential concern to the Project 2025 goal of increasing Air Force funding, modernization, and eliminating pass-through funding. It does not address the specific Air Force underfunding or procurement objectives outlined in the policy."

Key themes:military payDepartment of Defensegovernment shutdown continuity

— 113 — Department of Defense (if pass-through funding, defined as money in the Air Force budget that does not go to the Air Force, is removed from the equation) than the Army and Navy have received. This underfunding has forced the Air Force to cut its forces and forgo modernizing aging weapons systems that were never designed to operate in current threat environments and are structurally and mechanically exhausted. The result is an Air Force that is the oldest, smallest, and least ready in its history. The decline in Air Force capacity and capability is occurring at the same time the security environment demands the very options that the Air Force uniquely provides. Combatant commanders routinely request more Air Force capabilities than the service has the capacity to provide. The Air Force today simply cannot accomplish all of the missions it is required to perform. The Air Force has consistently stated on the official record that it is not sized to meet the mission demands placed on it by the various U.S. Combatant Commands. A 2018 study, “The Air Force We Need,”30 showed a 24 percent deficit in Air Force capacity to meet the needs of the National Defense Strategy. Those conclusions remain valid and are more pronounced today because of subsequent aircraft retire- ments. The demand is also higher because of world events. To understand these trends, one needs only to consider that the Air Force’s future five-year budget plan retires 1,463 aircraft while buying just 467. This makes for a reduction of 996 air- craft by 2027. The net result is a force that is smaller, older, and less ready at a time when demand is burgeoning. Needed Reforms l Increase spending and budget accuracy in line with a threat-based strategy. Returning the U.S. military to a force that can achieve deterrence or win in a fight if necessary requires returning to a threat-based defense strategy. Real budget growth combined with a more equitable distribution of resources across the armed services is the only realistic way to create a modernized Air Force with the capacity to meet the needs of the National Defense Strategy. Additionally, as noted above, pass-through funding causes numbers cited in current DOD budget documents to be higher than the dollar amounts actually received by the Air Force. 1. Adopt a two-war force defense strategy with scenarios for each service that will allow the Air Force to attain the resources it requires by developing a force-sizing construct that reflects what is required to accomplish strategic objectives. 2. Eliminate pass-through funding, which has grown to more than $40 billion per year and has caused the Air Force to be chronically underfunded for decades. — 114 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 3. Increase the Air Force budget by 5 percent annually (after adjusting for inflation) to reverse the decline in size, age, and readiness and facilitate the transition to a more modern, lethal, and survivable force. l Reduce near-term and mid-term risk. Increasing the Air Force’s acquisition of next-generation capabilities that either are or soon will be in production will increase the ability of the United States to deter or defeat near-term to mid-term threats. 1. Increase F-35A procurement to 60–80 per year. 2. Build the capacity for a B-21 production rate of 15–18 aircraft per year along with applicable elements of the B-21 long-range strike family of systems. 3. Increase Air Force airlift and aerial refueling capacity to support agile combat employment operations that generate combat sorties from a highly dispersed posture in both Europe and the Pacific. 4. Develop and buy larger quantities of advanced mid-range weapons (50 nm to 200 nm) that are sized to maximize targets per sortie for stealth aircraft flying in contested environments against target sets that could exceed 100,000 aimpoints. 5. Accelerate the development and production of the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile to reduce the risk inherent in an aging Minuteman III force in light of China’s nuclear modernization breakout. 6. Increase the number of EC-37B electronic warfare aircraft from 10 to 20 in order to achieve a minimum capacity to engage growing threats from China across the electromagnetic spectrum. l Invest in future Air Force programs and efforts. Increasingly capable adversaries require new capabilities to enable victory against those adversaries. 1. Attain an operationally optimized advanced battle management system as the Air Force element of the DOD Joint All Domain Command and Control enterprise. 2. Produce the next-generation air dominance system of systems (air moving target indication, other sensors, communications, command and control, weapons, and uninhabited aerial vehicles).

Department of Defense

Weak
Vector: 59%
Pages: 146-148AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill ensures continuity of military pay during a shutdown, which touches on DOD funding but does not address the Project 2025 objectives of increasing Air Force spending, eliminating pass-through funding, or adopting a threat-based force strategy."

Key themes:Department of Defensemilitary paygovernment shutdown

— 113 — Department of Defense (if pass-through funding, defined as money in the Air Force budget that does not go to the Air Force, is removed from the equation) than the Army and Navy have received. This underfunding has forced the Air Force to cut its forces and forgo modernizing aging weapons systems that were never designed to operate in current threat environments and are structurally and mechanically exhausted. The result is an Air Force that is the oldest, smallest, and least ready in its history. The decline in Air Force capacity and capability is occurring at the same time the security environment demands the very options that the Air Force uniquely provides. Combatant commanders routinely request more Air Force capabilities than the service has the capacity to provide. The Air Force today simply cannot accomplish all of the missions it is required to perform. The Air Force has consistently stated on the official record that it is not sized to meet the mission demands placed on it by the various U.S. Combatant Commands. A 2018 study, “The Air Force We Need,”30 showed a 24 percent deficit in Air Force capacity to meet the needs of the National Defense Strategy. Those conclusions remain valid and are more pronounced today because of subsequent aircraft retire- ments. The demand is also higher because of world events. To understand these trends, one needs only to consider that the Air Force’s future five-year budget plan retires 1,463 aircraft while buying just 467. This makes for a reduction of 996 air- craft by 2027. The net result is a force that is smaller, older, and less ready at a time when demand is burgeoning. Needed Reforms l Increase spending and budget accuracy in line with a threat-based strategy. Returning the U.S. military to a force that can achieve deterrence or win in a fight if necessary requires returning to a threat-based defense strategy. Real budget growth combined with a more equitable distribution of resources across the armed services is the only realistic way to create a modernized Air Force with the capacity to meet the needs of the National Defense Strategy. Additionally, as noted above, pass-through funding causes numbers cited in current DOD budget documents to be higher than the dollar amounts actually received by the Air Force. 1. Adopt a two-war force defense strategy with scenarios for each service that will allow the Air Force to attain the resources it requires by developing a force-sizing construct that reflects what is required to accomplish strategic objectives. 2. Eliminate pass-through funding, which has grown to more than $40 billion per year and has caused the Air Force to be chronically underfunded for decades.

Department of Veterans Affairs

Weak
Vector: 59%
Pages: 685-687AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 6044 ensures continued pay for military and FAA employees during a shutdown, which touches on federal employee pay continuity but does not address the VA-specific goals of broadening pay for critical skill sets, hiring veterans, or improving VA recruitment and retention outlined in Project 2025."

Key themes:federal employee paycontinuity of operationsfinancial stability for personnel

— 652 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Broaden pay and benefits in critical VA skill sets (beyond medical care occupations) to be more competitive with private-sector industry. IT, acquisition, cyber, and economists are some examples of skill sets that are difficult for the VA to recruit, largely because of the limitations of federal pay scales. l Continue to maximize the use of new VA hiring and pay authorities provided by Congress in the RAISE Act6 and PACT Act7 as well as existing authorities in student loan forgiveness and the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. Personnel l Foster a culture that is mission (veteran) driven, alert, engaged, and habitually responsive to the veteran, and structure an environment that promotes a flexible and agile workplace. l Increase employee satisfaction/experience to improve recruitment and retention of VA personnel. Go beyond the traditional focus on the extrinsic (monetary pay and bonuses) and seek creative ways to instill teamwork, loyalty, and pride. l Train leaders and managers to promote an energized and productive workplace culture and reward those who do it well. Ensure that senior leaders (SES) set the proper example. l Focus more attention on hiring veterans and military spouses. The percentage of veterans employed at VA has been declining. l Support the White House Office of Presidential Personnel (PPO) in identifying a fully vetted roster of candidates to assume all key positions at VA well ahead of formal nominations. The VA is the second-largest federal agency, yet it is authorized a woefully small number of PA/PAS positions when compared to other agencies of lesser size. Congress and the Office of Personnel Management should be engaged on ways to provide authorities for a higher number of non-career PA positions. The White House PPO can be inclined to discount the VA’s importance, but given the political attention that VA can generate for Congress and the media, PPO should understand the importance of finding talented political appointees to serve at VA. l Increase the number and utilization of Limited Term Appointment Senior Executive Service positions for up to three years to work on special projects to ensure talent refreshment, talent acquisition, and flexibility. — 653 — Department of Veterans Affairs l Manage the relationship with organized labor effectively and proactively. 1. Ensure that any agenda that includes labor/civil service reform in the VA has a clear direction from the Secretarial level, support from the General Counsel, alignment with the Assistant Secretary for Human Resources and Administration, and a unified and strong political will to carry it out. Without those elements, labor reforms are very difficult to accomplish. 2. Ensure that each senior leader in the process gets buy-in from reform- minded career employees willing to accept and support change. Those mid-level and senior-level managers exist, but they will need to be identified early and shown trust and confidence. 3. Ensure that the White House communicates the labor reform agenda swiftly. Trump Administration executive orders on civil service reform (official time, government-furnished office space) were issued too late, and departments and agencies were not prepared to execute them. 4. Anticipate the inevitable opportunities for legal challenges from organized labor, and be prepared for them to happen and be dragged out—which makes early, decisive timing all the more important. 5. Ensure that the White House is prepared to support a concerted and deliberate effort on implementation to avoid perceptions of a disconnected strategy and disaggregated effort. 6. Remain mindful of which labor contracts end, when they end, and what the agency’s goals for renegotiation are. If not done effectively, contract end dates will be missed or lack notification. It is therefore essential to have a clear strategy with respect to what leadership wants from a new contract: Do not make the perfect the enemy of the good in contract negotiations. l Work with Congress to sunset the Office of Accountability and Whistleblower Protection (OAWP). OAWP was well intentioned when formed, but it is redundant with the activities of supervisors as well as equal employment opportunity, Office of the Inspector General, Office of Special Counsel, and other policies, programs, and procedures for holding employees accountable. This redundancy results in lengthy investigations, gaps in coverage, and an overall ineffective method of employee and supervisor accountability.

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.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills