WILLIS Act
Download PDFSponsored by
Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]
ID: B001302
Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
January 3, 2025
Introduced
Committee Review
đ Current Status
Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.
Floor Action
Passed House
Senate Review
Passed Congress
Presidential Action
Became Law
đ 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
Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The WILLIS Act (because who doesn't love a good acronym?) is a thinly veiled attempt to punish the Fulton County District Attorney's Office for daring to investigate and prosecute certain high-profile individuals. The bill's sponsors, Reps. Biggs, Crane, and Luna, are essentially throwing a tantrum because they don't like the way the DA's office is doing its job.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill prohibits federal funds from being awarded to the Fulton County District Attorney's Office, effective immediately. It also rescinds any unobligated balances and requires the DA's office to reimburse the federal government for all amounts expended after January 1, 2021. Because, you know, the DA's office was clearly using those funds to buy yachts and caviar.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The obvious target is the Fulton County District Attorney's Office, but let's not forget the real stakeholders: the politicians who are trying to strong-arm the DA into dropping certain investigations. I'm sure it's just a coincidence that this bill was introduced by representatives from Arizona and Florida, states with... interesting histories of corruption.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of "legislative lupus" â a disease where politicians try to cure their own symptoms (i.e., being investigated) by attacking the immune system (the DA's office). The real impact will be on the citizens of Fulton County, who will likely see a decrease in funding for essential services and an increase in corruption. But hey, at least the politicians will get to keep their noses clean.
In conclusion, this bill is a textbook example of " congressional cowardice syndrome" â where lawmakers try to hide behind legislation instead of facing the consequences of their own actions. It's a pathetic attempt to silence the DA's office and maintain the status quo of corruption. I give it two thumbs down and a healthy dose of contempt.
Diagnosis: Legislative lupus, with symptoms of congressional cowardice syndrome and a severe case of "we-can't-handle-the-truth-itis." Prognosis: poor, with a high likelihood of further corruption and abuse of power. Treatment: a strong dose of transparency, accountability, and actual leadership. But let's be real, that's not going to happen anytime soon.
Related Topics
đ° Campaign Finance Network
Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]
Congress 119 ⢠2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No organization contributions found
No committee contributions found
Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance
This bill has 2 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
Rep. Crane, Elijah [R-AZ-2]
ID: C001132
Top Contributors
10
Rep. Luna, Anna Paulina [R-FL-13]
ID: L000596
Top Contributors
10
Donor Network - Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 34 nodes and 36 connections
Total contributions: $142,850
Top Donors - Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]
Showing top 25 donors by contribution amount
Project 2025 Policy Matches
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. Higher similarity scores indicate stronger thematic connections.
Introduction
â 7 â Foreword Instead, party leaders negotiate one multitrillion-dollar spending billâseveral thousand pages longâand then vote on it before anyone, literally, has had a chance to read it. Debate time is restricted. Amendments are prohibited. And all of this is backed up against a midnight deadline when the previous âomnibusâ spending bill will run out and the federal government âshuts down.â This process is not designed to empower 330 million American citizens and their elected representatives, but rather to empower the party elites secretly nego- tiating without any public scrutiny or oversight. In the end, congressional leadersâ behavior and incentives here are no differ- ent from those of global elites insulating policy decisionsâover the climate, trade, public health, you name itâfrom the sovereignty of national electorates. Public scrutiny and democratic accountability make life harder for policymakersâso they skirt it. Itâs not dysfunction; itâs corruption. And despite its gaudy price tag, the federal budget is not even close to the worst example of this corruption. That distinction belongs to the âAdministrative State,â the dismantling of which must a top priority for the next conservative President. The term Administrative State refers to the policymaking work done by the bureaucracies of all the federal governmentâs departments, agencies, and millions of employees. Under Article I of the Constitution, âAll legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.â That is, federal law is enacted only by elected legislators in both houses of Congress. This exclusive authority was part of the Framersâ doctrine of âseparated powers.â They not only split the federal governmentâs legislative, executive, and judicial powers into different branches. They also gave each branch checks over the others. Under our Constitution, the legislative branchâCongressâis far and away the most powerful and, correspondingly, the most accountable to the people. In recent decades, members of the House and Senate discovered that if they give away that power to the Article II branch of government, they can also deny responsi- bility for its actions. So today in Washington, most policy is no longer set by Congress at all, but by the Administrative State. Given the choice between being powerful but vulnerable or irrelevant but famous, most Members of Congress have chosen the latter. Congress passes intentionally vague laws that delegate decision-making over a given issue to a federal agency. That agencyâs bureaucratsânot just unelected but seemingly un-fireableâthen leap at the chance to fill the vacuum created by Congressâs preening cowardice. The federal government is growing larger and less constitutionally accountableâeven to the Presidentâevery year. l A combination of elected and unelected bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency quietly strangles domestic energy production through difficult-to-understand rulemaking processes;
Introduction
â 7 â Foreword Instead, party leaders negotiate one multitrillion-dollar spending billâseveral thousand pages longâand then vote on it before anyone, literally, has had a chance to read it. Debate time is restricted. Amendments are prohibited. And all of this is backed up against a midnight deadline when the previous âomnibusâ spending bill will run out and the federal government âshuts down.â This process is not designed to empower 330 million American citizens and their elected representatives, but rather to empower the party elites secretly nego- tiating without any public scrutiny or oversight. In the end, congressional leadersâ behavior and incentives here are no differ- ent from those of global elites insulating policy decisionsâover the climate, trade, public health, you name itâfrom the sovereignty of national electorates. Public scrutiny and democratic accountability make life harder for policymakersâso they skirt it. Itâs not dysfunction; itâs corruption. And despite its gaudy price tag, the federal budget is not even close to the worst example of this corruption. That distinction belongs to the âAdministrative State,â the dismantling of which must a top priority for the next conservative President. The term Administrative State refers to the policymaking work done by the bureaucracies of all the federal governmentâs departments, agencies, and millions of employees. Under Article I of the Constitution, âAll legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.â That is, federal law is enacted only by elected legislators in both houses of Congress. This exclusive authority was part of the Framersâ doctrine of âseparated powers.â They not only split the federal governmentâs legislative, executive, and judicial powers into different branches. They also gave each branch checks over the others. Under our Constitution, the legislative branchâCongressâis far and away the most powerful and, correspondingly, the most accountable to the people. In recent decades, members of the House and Senate discovered that if they give away that power to the Article II branch of government, they can also deny responsi- bility for its actions. So today in Washington, most policy is no longer set by Congress at all, but by the Administrative State. Given the choice between being powerful but vulnerable or irrelevant but famous, most Members of Congress have chosen the latter. Congress passes intentionally vague laws that delegate decision-making over a given issue to a federal agency. That agencyâs bureaucratsânot just unelected but seemingly un-fireableâthen leap at the chance to fill the vacuum created by Congressâs preening cowardice. The federal government is growing larger and less constitutionally accountableâeven to the Presidentâevery year. l A combination of elected and unelected bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency quietly strangles domestic energy production through difficult-to-understand rulemaking processes; â 8 â Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Bureaucrats at the Department of Homeland Security, following the lead of a feckless Administration, order border and immigration enforcement agencies to help migrants criminally enter our country with impunity; l Bureaucrats at the Department of Education inject racist, anti-American, ahistorical propaganda into Americaâs classrooms; l Bureaucrats at the Department of Justice force school districts to undermine girlsâ sports and parentsâ rights to satisfy transgender extremists; l Woke bureaucrats at the Pentagon force troops to attend âtrainingâ seminars about âwhite privilegeâ; and l Bureaucrats at the State Department infuse U.S. foreign aid programs with woke extremism about âintersectionalityâ and abortion.3 Unaccountable federal spending is the secret lifeblood of the Great Awokening. Nearly every power center held by the Left is funded or supported, one way or another, through the bureaucracy by Congress. Colleges and school districts are funded by tax dollars. The Administrative State holds 100 percent of its power at the sufferance of Congress, and its insulation from presidential discipline is an unconstitutional fairy tale spun by the Washington Establishment to protect its turf. Members of Congress shield themselves from constitutional accountability often when the White House allows them to get away with it. Cultural institutions like public libraries and public health agencies are only as âindependentâ from public accountability as elected officials and voters permit. Letâs be clear: The most egregious regulations promulgated by the current Administration come from one place: the Oval Office. The President cannot hide behind the agencies; as his many executive orders make clear, his is the respon- sibility for the regulations that threaten American communities, schools, and families. A conservative President must move swiftly to do away with these vast abuses of presidential power and remove the career and political bureaucrats who fuel it. Properly considered, restoring fiscal limits and constitutional accountability to the federal government is a continuation of restoring national sovereignty to the American people. In foreign affairs, global strategy, federal budgeting and pol- icymaking, the same pattern emerges again and again. Ruling elites slash and tear at restrictions and accountability placed on them. They centralize power up and away from the American people: to supra-national treaties and organizations, to left-wing âexperts,â to sight-unseen all-or-nothing legislating, to the unelected career bureaucrats of the Administrative State.
Introduction
â 543 â Department of the Interior 68. Karen Budd Falen, âBidenâs â30 By 30 Planâ: A Slap at American Private Property Rights,â Cowboy State Daily, April 15, 2021, https://cowboystatedaily.com/2021/04/15/bidens-30-by-30-plan-a-slap-at-american-private- property-rights/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 69. U.S. Department of the Interior, âOrder No. 3396: Rescission of Secretaryâs Order 3388, âLand and Water Conservation Fund Implementation by the U.S. Department of the Interior,ââ February 11, 2021, https://www. doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so-3396-signed-2-11-21-final.pdf (accessed March 17, 2021). 70. Ibid. 71. Associated Press, âUte Indian Tribe Criticizes Bidenâs Camp Hale Monument Designation,â KUER 90.1, October 13, 2022. 72. William Perry Pendley, âTrump Wants to Free Up Federal Lands, His Interior Secretary Fails Him,â National Review Online, September 25, 2017, https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/09/secretary-interior-ryan-zinke- monuments-review-trump-executive-order-antiquities-act-environmentalists/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 73. The Oregon and California Revested Lands Sustained Yield Management Act of 1937, Public Law 75-405, 43 U.S. Code § 2601. 74. Ibid., and American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d 184, 187 (D.D.C. 2019). 75. American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d, pp. 187â188. 76. Federal Register, Vol. 55, No. 26 (June 26, 1990), p. 26114â26194. 77. Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 114 (June 13, 2000), pp. 37249â37252. 78. Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 11 (January 18, 2017), pp. 6145â6150. 79. American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d 184 (D.D.C. 2019). 80. U.S. Department of the Interior, âFinal Consent Decrees/Settlement Agreements,â https://www.doi.gov/ solicitor/transparency/final (accessed March 16, 2023). 81. Michael Doyle, âInterior Order Erases Litigation Website,â E&E News, June 17, 2022, https://www.eenews.net/ articles/interior-order-erases-litigation-website/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 82. Rob Roy Ramey, On the Origin of Specious Species (Lexington Books 2012), pp. 77â97. 83. William Perry Pendley, âKilling Jobs to Save the Sage Grouse: Junk Science, Weird Science, and Plain Nonsense,â Washington Times, May 31, 2012, https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/31/killing- jobs-to-save-the-sage-grouse/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 84. Michael Lee, âWyomingâs Push to Delist Grizzly Bears from Endangered Species List Faces Opposition from Anti-Hunting Group,â Fox News, January 21, 2022, https://www.foxnews.com/politics/wyoming-delist-grizzly- endangered-species-list-opposition-anti-hunting-group (accessed March 18, 2023). 85. News release, âTrump Administration Returns Management and Protection of Gray Wolves to States and Tribes Following Successful Recovery Efforts,â October 29, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/trump- administration-returns-management-and-protection-gray-wolves-states-and-tribes (accessed March 18, 2023). 86. 50 Code of Federal Regulations §17, and Sean Paige, ââRewildingâ Will Backfire on Colorado,â The Gazette, June 19, 2022, https://gazette.com/opinion/guest-column-rewilding-will-backfire-on-colorado/article_ d0016672-ed79-11ec-b027-abe62ba840a1.html (accessed March 18, 2023). 87. Madeleine C. Bottrill et al., âIs Conservation Triage Just Smart Decision Making?â Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Vol. 23, No. 12 (December 2008), pp. 649â654, https://karkgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/Bottrill-et-al-2008. pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 88. Rob Roy Ramey II, testimony before the Committee on Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, April 8, 2014, https://naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rameytestimony4_8.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 89. Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, Public Law 95â87. 90. Pennsylvania is the nationâs third-largest coal producer, and its state program was the model for SMCRA. 91. Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 207 (October 26, 2020), pp. 67631â67635. 92. U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, âApproximate Original Contour,â INEâ26, June 23, 2020, https://www.osmre.gov/sites/default/files/pdfs/directive1003.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 93. Tim Gallaudet and Timothy R. Petty, âFederal Action Plan for Improving Forecasts of Water Availability,â National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, October 2019, https://www.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/ legacy/document/2019/Oct/Federal%20Action%20Plan%20for%20Improving%20Forecasts%20of%20 Water%20Availability.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). â 544 â Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 94. 32 U.S. Code, ch. 52. 95. Donald J. Trump, âPresidential Memorandum on Promoting the Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West,â October 19, 2018, https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/presidential- memorandum-promoting-reliable-supply-delivery-water-west/ (accessed March 17, 2023). 96. U.S. Department of the Interior, âLand Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations,â https://www.doi.gov/ buybackprogram (accessed March 18, 2023). 97. Great American Outdoors Act, Public Law 116â152.
Showing 3 of 5 policy matches
About These Correlations
Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.