Aviation Supply Chain Safety and Security Digitization Act of 2025

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/6267

Last Updated: September 7, 2026

Aviation Supply Chain Safety and Security Digitization Act of 2025

HR. 6267, 119th Congress — read as touching Aerospace (Commercial).

The sponsor

Rep. Knott, Brad [R-NC-13]

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

The money

$66,000 raised

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

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Transportation" section, p. 664-666 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

March 24, 2026

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

Passed House

Senate Review

📍 Current Status

Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.

🎉

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 Aviation Supply Chain Safety and Security Digitization Act of 2025, HR 6267, is a bill that warrants attention from my perspective as a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader in the aerospace industry. The main purpose of this legislation is to conduct a study on the impediments to digital documentation and verification in the aviation supply chain, with the ultimate goal of identifying and mitigating counterfeit parts and falsified documentation.

The key provisions of this bill include a comprehensive study by the Comptroller General, which will evaluate the challenges faced by industry stakeholders in adopting digital authorized release certificates, utilizing digital verification tools, and establishing standardized documentation. The report will also provide recommendations on how to encourage the adoption of digital forms and authentication tools across the aviation industry.

The affected parties and stakeholders include manufacturers, repair stations, air carriers, aircraft lessors, aircraft brokers, parts brokers, and other supply chain participants. As a strategic investor in the aerospace sector, I recognize that this bill has significant implications for my business interests. The potential impact of this legislation could be substantial, with projected cost savings of up to $500 million annually through reduced paperwork and increased efficiency.

However, as a proponent of deregulation and privatization, I believe that this bill falls short in its approach. Rather than relying on government-led initiatives, the industry should be empowered to drive innovation and adoption of digital technologies through market forces. My think tank, the Liberty Aerospace Institute, has estimated that a more laissez-faire approach could lead to an additional $1 billion in annual cost savings and increased competitiveness for American aerospace companies.

In conclusion, while HR 6267 represents a step towards modernizing the aviation supply chain, it is essential to consider the broader implications of this legislation on the industry and the economy as a whole. As a thought leader in the aerospace sector, I will continue to monitor the progress of this bill and advocate for policies that promote innovation, deregulation, and privatization.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

The Aviation Supply Chain Safety and Security Digitization Act of 2025, as we covered in 8th grade when discussing the legislative process, is a bill that aims to improve the safety and security of the aviation supply chain by promoting the use of digital documentation and verification. Remember when we learned about how bills are referred to committees? This one was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

The main purpose of this bill, as I taught you, is to direct the Comptroller General to conduct a study on the impediments to digital documentation and verification in the aviation supply chain. The objectives, which should be straightforward, include evaluating the challenges faced by manufacturers, repair stations, air carriers, and other supply chain participants in adopting digital authorized release certificates and standardized documentation.

As we discussed in class, key provisions of this bill include requiring the Comptroller General to submit a report containing the results of the study, along with recommendations on how to encourage the adoption of digital forms and authentication tools. The Secretary of Transportation is also required to respond to these recommendations within 120 days. These changes aim to accelerate the transition from legacy paper-based records to digital documentation, which, as you should recall, is a crucial aspect of modernizing our systems.

The affected parties and stakeholders in this bill, as we would have expected, include manufacturers, repair stations, air carriers, aircraft lessors, aircraft brokers, parts brokers, and other supply chain participants. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is also impacted, as it will need to transition from physical to digital signatures and adopt standardized documentation.

The potential impact of this bill, which should be obvious, includes improved safety and security in the aviation supply chain by reducing the risk of falsified documentation and counterfeit parts. As I emphasized in class, the adoption of digital verification and authentication tools can also increase efficiency and reduce costs for industry participants. However, as we've seen time and again, the actual implementation of these changes may be hindered by bureaucratic delays and resistance to change, which is why it's essential to understand the importance of checks and balances in our system.

In conclusion, this bill aims to address a critical issue in the aviation supply chain, and its provisions and objectives are straightforward. As we covered in 8th grade, understanding how bills become laws and the role of committees is crucial in appreciating the legislative process. It's essential to recognize the potential impact of this bill on the affected parties and stakeholders, as well as the broader implications for safety and security in the aviation industry.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

The Aviation Supply Chain Safety and Security Digitization Act of 2025, folks! On the surface, it looks like a harmless bill aimed at improving the aviation supply chain by digitizing documentation and verification processes. But, my friends, don't be fooled! This bill is just another example of the government's insidious plan to control every aspect of our lives.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to conduct a study on the impediments to digital documentation and verification in the aviation supply chain. Sounds innocent enough, right? But what they're really after is total surveillance and control over the entire industry. They want to know every single detail about every part, every manufacturer, and every transaction. It's all about data collection, folks!

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill requires the Comptroller General to study the challenges of adopting digital documentation and verification tools in the aviation supply chain. This includes evaluating the use of digital authorized release certificates, standardized documentation, and transitioning from legacy paper-based records to digital documentation. But what's really going on here is that they're setting the stage for a complete overhaul of the industry, forcing everyone to adopt their new digital standards. And once they have control over the data, they'll be able to manipulate the entire supply chain to suit their own agenda.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include manufacturers, repair stations, air carriers, aircraft lessors, aircraft brokers, parts brokers, and other supply chain participants. But let's not forget about the real stakeholders here – the government agencies, like the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), who will be gaining even more control over the industry. And what about the poor taxpayers who will be footing the bill for this "study"? It's just another example of how our hard-earned money is being used to fund the government's sinister plans.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this bill is far-reaching and ominous. With total control over the aviation supply chain, the government will be able to dictate every aspect of the industry, from manufacturing to distribution. They'll be able to track every single part, every transaction, and every movement. It's a totalitarian nightmare! And what about the potential for data breaches? With all this sensitive information stored digitally, it's just a matter of time before hackers get their hands on it. Mark my words, folks, this bill is just the beginning of the end of our freedom.

Now, I know what you're thinking – "But Uncle, this is just a harmless bill to improve aviation safety." Ah, don't be naive! Wake up, sheeple! The truth is out there, and it's hidden in plain sight. This bill is just another piece of the puzzle in the government's grand plan for total control. Stay vigilant, my friends!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(With a healthy dose of sarcasm and a wink) Oh boy, folks, gather 'round! We've got a real barnburner of a bill on our hands here - the Aviation Supply Chain Safety and Security Digitization Act of 2025. (pauses for dramatic effect) I mean, who doesn't love a good title that's almost as long as the bill itself? (chuckles)

Now, let's get down to business. The main purpose of this bill is to "direct the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a study" - because, you know, we don't have enough studies already (wink). But seriously, the objective is to identify impediments to digital documentation and verification in the aviation supply chain. Because, apparently, our freedom to fly safely is being threatened by... paper-based records? (dramatic music plays)

The key provisions of this bill are all about encouraging the adoption of digital forms and authentication tools in the aviation industry. (in a mock-conspiratorial tone) You see, folks, it's all about the elites trying to control our skies with their fancy digital signatures and standardized documentation. But don't worry, we're on to them! The Comptroller General will submit a report with recommendations on how to accelerate this digitization process, because who doesn't love a good bureaucratic report? (eye roll)

The affected parties and stakeholders include manufacturers, repair stations, air carriers, aircraft lessors, and other supply chain participants. (in a pretend-serious tone) Oh, the humanity! How will they ever adapt to digital documentation? It's not like they're already using digital tools in every other aspect of their business... (smirk)

Now, let's talk potential impact and implications. (dramatic music swells) This bill could lead to a more efficient and secure aviation supply chain, which is just code for "the elites will have more control over our freedom to fly." But don't worry, we'll be keeping a close eye on them. (wink) In all seriousness, it's likely that this bill will result in some minor changes to existing law and maybe, just maybe, improve the safety of our skies. But let's not get too excited - after all, it's just another example of government overreach... or is it? (smirk)

In conclusion, folks, the Aviation Supply Chain Safety and Security Digitization Act of 2025 is a bill that will change the world... or at least make our skies slightly safer. (chuckles) But hey, who needs freedom when we have digital documentation, right? (wink) Stay vigilant, America! The elites are coming for your paper-based records! (dramatic music fades out)

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the geniuses in Congress. Let's dissect this trainwreck, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Aviation Supply Chain Safety and Security Digitization Act of 2025 is a laughable attempt to address the "impediments" to digital documentation and verification in the aviation supply chain. Because, you know, the FAA and industry players have been twiddling their thumbs for decades, waiting for Congress to tell them to go digital. The real purpose? To create a veneer of action while lining the pockets of lobbyists and industry insiders.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill orders the Comptroller General to conduct a study (because we all know how effective studies are at solving problems) on the challenges of adopting digital documentation and verification. Wow, I bet the results will be shocking: "Industry players are hesitant to adopt new technology because it's hard." The bill also requires the FAA to transition from paper-based records to digital documentation, a move that's only about 20 years overdue.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: manufacturers, repair stations, air carriers, aircraft lessors, and parts brokers. You know, the people who have been profiting from the status quo and will now be "encouraged" to adopt digital forms and authentication tools. I'm sure they're all quaking in their boots.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of legislative placebo effect. It's a feel-good measure that will do nothing to address the real issues plaguing the aviation supply chain. The industry will continue to prioritize profits over safety, and Congress will pat itself on the back for "doing something." Meanwhile, the FAA will get to spend more taxpayer dollars on "studying" the problem, and lobbyists will reap the benefits of their "efforts" to shape this meaningless legislation.

In medical terms, this bill is a symptom of a deeper disease: congressional incompetence. It's a Band-Aid on a bullet wound, a token gesture designed to appease the ignorant masses while perpetuating the corrupt status quo. The diagnosis? Terminal stupidity, with a healthy dose of greed and cowardice. Prognosis? More of the same: empty promises, half-measures, and a continued disregard for the safety and well-being of the American people.

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

**Summary of the Aviation Supply Chain Safety and Security Digitization Act of 2025 (HR 6267)**

### Main Purpose & Objectives The main purpose of the Aviation Supply Chain Safety and Security Digitization Act of 2025 is to enhance the safety and security of the aviation supply chain by promoting the adoption of digital documentation and verification. The bill aims to identify impediments to digitization, evaluate challenges faced by industry stakeholders, and provide recommendations for encouraging the use of digital forms and authentication tools.

### Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law The key provisions of the bill include: - Directing the Comptroller General to conduct a study on the impediments to digital documentation and verification in the aviation supply chain. - Evaluating challenges faced by manufacturers, repair stations, air carriers, and other supply chain participants in adopting digital authorized release certificates and standardized documentation. - Assessing the transition of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) from legacy paper-based records to digital documentation and physical to digital signatures. - Requiring the Comptroller General to submit a report with recommendations on encouraging the adoption of digital forms and authentication tools, as well as accelerating the FAA's digitization efforts.

### Affected Parties & Stakeholders The affected parties and stakeholders include: - Manufacturers - Repair stations - Air carriers - Aircraft lessors and brokers - Parts brokers - Other supply chain participants - The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) - The Department of Transportation

### Potential Impact & Implications The potential impact and implications of the bill are significant, as it aims to: - Enhance the safety and security of the aviation supply chain by reducing the risk of falsified documentation and counterfeit parts. - Improve efficiency and reduce costs for industry stakeholders through the adoption of digital documentation and verification. - Inform policy decisions and guide future legislative efforts to support the digitization of the aviation supply chain. - Promote standardization and interoperability across the industry, facilitating a more seamless and secure exchange of information.

Overall, the Aviation Supply Chain Safety and Security Digitization Act of 2025 has the potential to drive meaningful improvements in the safety, security, and efficiency of the aviation supply chain, ultimately benefiting both the industry and the traveling public.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's dive into the Aviation Supply Chain Safety and Security Digitization Act of 2025, bro! This bill is all about gettin' the aviation industry to go digital, man. The main purpose is to study the obstacles that are preventin' companies from usin' digital documentation and verification in the supply chain. It's like, we gotta make sure those airplane parts are legit, you know?

The objectives are pretty chill, bro. They wanna identify the challenges that manufacturers, repair stations, air carriers, and other players in the industry face when tryin' to adopt digital authorized release certificates and other digital verification tools. They're also lookin' at how to standardize documentation and get the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to transition from paper-based records to digital ones.

Now, let's talk about the key provisions, dude. The bill requires the Comptroller General to conduct a study on these impediments and submit a report with recommendations on how to encourage the industry to go digital. They're also lookin' at ways to accelerate the adoption of digital documentation by the FAA. It's like, we gotta get with the times, man!

The affected parties are pretty much everyone in the aviation industry, bro. We're talkin' manufacturers, repair stations, air carriers, aircraft lessors, and parts brokers. Even the FAA is gonna have to make some changes, dude.

As for the potential impact, it's like... huge, man! If we can get the industry to go digital, we can reduce the risk of counterfeit parts and falsified documentation. It'll be way easier to track and verify parts, and that'll make air travel safer for everyone, bro. Plus, it'll help the FAA keep up with the times and make their processes more efficient.

But, you know, there are some potential implications to consider, dude. Like, what about the costs of implementin' these digital systems? And how will smaller companies in the industry be able to keep up? We gotta make sure we're not leavin' anyone behind, man.

Anyway, that's the lowdown on HR 6267, bro. It's all about gettin' the aviation industry to go digital and improve safety and security. Let's hope it catches a wave of support and becomes law, dude!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Knott, Brad [R-NC-13]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$66,000

20 donors

PACs

Organizations

Committees

Individuals

$66,000

No PAC contributions found

No organization contributions found

No committee contributions found

WORDSWORTH, BRIAN L

1 transaction

$3,300

BROCK, DAMON A

1 transaction

$3,300

FONVILLE, KATE J

1 transaction

$3,300

HOLDING, FRANK ROYALL

1 transaction

$3,300

JOHNSON, C DAVID

1 transaction

$3,300

TUCKER, GARLAND S III

1 transaction

$3,300

ARTHUR, KATHERINE CHALK

1 transaction

$3,300

SEWELL, CECIL WHITAKER MR. JR

1 transaction

$3,300

HUDSON, KRISTEN ANDERSON

1 transaction

$3,300

WALL, NANCY

1 transaction

$3,300

SAHNER, DUNCAN

1 transaction

$3,300

MARIS, SARAH A

1 transaction

$3,300

BRUCE, JOHN

1 transaction

$3,300

SALEEBY, JACKIE N

1 transaction

$3,300

WEBB, CLAYTON

1 transaction

$3,300

ZURAWEL, MARTHA

1 transaction

$3,300

KNOTT, JOE THOMAS MR. III

1 transaction

$3,300

KNOTT, TUCKER

1 transaction

$3,300

ZURAWEL, MARK STEVEN DDS

1 transaction

$3,300

SALEEBY, RICHARD G. JR.

1 transaction

$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 3 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Scholten, Hillary J. [D-MI-3]

ID: S001221

Top Contributors

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$6,600

Aug 5, 2024

SAGINAW CHIPPEWA INDIAN TRIBE

OrganizationMT PLEASANT, MI

$3,300

Sep 29, 2023

POKAGON BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS

OrganizationDOWAGIAC, MI

$3,300

Sep 29, 2023

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$3,300

Aug 5, 2024

MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND OF POTTAWATOMI INDIANS

OrganizationSHELBYVILLE, MI

$3,300

Oct 22, 2024

MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND OF POTTAWATOMI INDIANS

OrganizationSHELBYVILLE, MI

$3,300

Dec 21, 2023

MASHANTUCKET PEQUOT TRIBE

OrganizationMASHANTUCKET, CT

$3,300

Dec 21, 2023

NOTTAWASEPPI HURON BAND OF THE POTAWATOMI

OrganizationFULTON, MI

$3,300

Mar 29, 2024

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC

$1,000

Sep 23, 2024

PEOPLE FOR BETTER GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE OF THE SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA

$1,000

Aug 22, 2024

Rep. Shreve, Jefferson [R-IN-6]

ID: S001229

Top Contributors

SASSO, APRIL

HOMEMAKER • HOMEMAKER

IndividualCARMEL, IN

$6,600

Oct 30, 2024

PONDER, JACQUELINE

BOWMAN FAMILY HOLDINGS • LAWYER

IndividualGREENWOOD, IN

$3,437

Oct 29, 2024

KING, CHRISTOPHER M.

RUNNEBOHM CONSTRUCTION, INC. • OWNER

IndividualSHELBYVILLE, IN

$3,300

Jun 7, 2024

CALDWELL, JORDAN

CALDWELL'S INC. • EXECUTIVE

IndividualSHELBYVILLE, IN

$3,300

Oct 20, 2024

DOPPELT, BRIAN

BAINBRIDGE COMPANIES • EXECUTIVE

IndividualBOCA RATON, FL

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

KING, KYLIE A.

HOMEMAKER • HOMEMAKER

IndividualSHELBYVILLE, IN

$3,300

Oct 20, 2024

SASSO, RICK C.

INDIANA SPINE GROUP • PHYSICIAN

IndividualCARMEL, IN

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

SCHUMACHER, AMY MAE

THE HERITAGE GROUP • CEO

IndividualCARMEL, IN

$3,300

Oct 22, 2024

MCALLISTER, CHRIS

TARBERT PROPERTIES LP • PARTNER

IndividualINDIANAPOLIS, IN

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

ZINK, JAMES C.

ZINK DISTRIBUTING • CHAIRMAN / CEO

IndividualINDIANAPOLIS, IN

$3,300

Nov 2, 2024

Rep. Schmidt, Derek [R-KS-2]

ID: S001228

Top Contributors

HABEMATOLEL POMO OF UPPER LAKE TRIBE OF CALIFORNIA

OrganizationUPPER LAKE, CA

$3,300

Jul 26, 2024

A-OK ENTERPRISES, LLC

OrganizationWICHITA, KS

$500

Jul 10, 2024

ROSE, DIANA

ASPIRE65 • OWNER

IndividualOLATHE, KS

$6,600

Jul 19, 2024

ROSE, GARY

ASPIRE HEALTH PLANS, LLC • INSURANCE SALES

IndividualOLATHE, KS

$6,600

Jul 19, 2024

PROCHNOW, JOSEPH

FOCUS WORKFORCES • EXECUTIVE

IndividualOVERLAND PARK, KS

$6,600

Jul 25, 2024

NELSON, NORMAN T

SELF • AGRICULTURE

IndividualLONG ISLAND, KS

$6,600

Sep 3, 2024

CUTLER, ROBERT S.

C3 • CEO

IndividualOVERLAND PARK, KS

$6,600

Dec 9, 2024

BONAVIA, NICHOLAS J.

BONAVIA PROPERTIES • PRESIDENT

IndividualWICHITA, KS

$6,600

May 3, 2024

MILLER, RICHARD

MILLER'S PROFESSIONAL IMAGING • CEO

IndividualPITTSBURG, KS

$6,600

Jun 25, 2024

PATTERSON, ROB

RMJK ENTERPRISES INC • CEO

IndividualKANSAS CITY, KS

$6,600

Jun 30, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Knott, Brad [R-NC-13]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 23 nodes and 22 connections

Total contributions: $22

Top Donors - Rep. Knott, Brad [R-NC-13]

Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount

20 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

+Aerospace (Commercial)confidence 0.90
Section 2 directs a study on impediments to digital documentation and verification in the aviation supply chain, which includes manufacturers, repair stations, air carriers, etc., aiming to improve safety and security; this could lead to benefits for aerospace commercial industry through standardization and efficiency.

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 Transportation

Strong

Vector: 62%

Pages: 664-666AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill's focus on digitizing aviation supply chain documentation and accelerating FAA digitization aligns with Project 2025's call for FAA modernization, adoption of digital technologies, and improved efficiency to support innovation and safety."

Key themes:digitizationFAA modernizationaviation safetytechnology adoptionsupply chain efficiency

— 632 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise not offer additional negotiations until the Chinese implement the agreements they have already signed. The current Administration’s policies in several areas that affect aviation and limit America’s future opportunities for growth are internally inconsistent. In addition to a New Entry Initiative, the new Administration should establish an interagency clearinghouse to drive consistent policies across the government on spectrum, drones, and advanced air mobility. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION With a budget of $18.6 billion requested for FY 202311 and an international regulatory footprint, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is DOT’s most visible mode. It needs reform. Air traffic control (ATC) operations account for two-thirds of FAA’s budget, and the Air Traffic Organization (ATO) is far behind its counterparts in Australia, Canada, and Western Europe in implementing 21st century technology. The FAA’s primary mission is ATC; its two smaller functions are distributing federal airport grants and regulating all aspects of aviation safety. The FAA was once considered the world’s best government aviation agency. Those days are long past. In the more than five decades since 1958 when the Federal Aviation Agency (precursor to the Federal Aviation Administration) was formed, there have been notable developments in air traffic control technology, aircraft avionics, and engine reliability, but despite many well-intentioned attempts, there have been few changes in the FAA’s funding structure. The FAA is still improperly organized and financed, and the management reforms provided in the late 1990s remain largely unused. The FAA is 10 years older than DOT. It provides two separate and functionally different services: the world’s largest and most complex Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP) and, at the same time, the world’s largest civil aviation regulatory and certificatory agency. The first is a 24/7/365 air traffic service provider. The second is an inherently governmental organization responsible for ensuring that aerospace operators, vehicles, airports, and ANSPs are properly certified and follow all FAA regulations. These two different organizations ought to run separately. The FAA is the only modern Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) in the world that does not assess fees for its services. Its funding structure, subject to the annual appropriations process, stifles efficiency and innovation—and the FAA does not innovate well. It spends too much time and money on research and development (R&D) and is not very good at either one. It should get out of the R&D business and focus on testing, evaluating, and certifying private-sector innovation much more quickly than it does today. The FAA workforce needs to modernize. The agency needs safety and certifi- cation experts, not professional airframe and powerplant mechanics (A&Ps). It — 633 — Department of Transportation needs to hire people trained to oversee mechanics, engineers, and pilots. It is time to consider promoting the FAA’s top executive team from within and requiring strict professional requirements for its top appointees. Organizations such as the FAA whose sole responsibility is public safety should be fully auditable and led by experts in their field or industry with oversight from DOT leadership. For 60 years, the FAA was the global leader in aerospace, from general aviation to commercial space, but the U.S. lead has vanished. The FAA’s overly bureaucratic, legalistic, byzantine, and more recently hyperpoliticized way of processing regu- lations, adopting innovation, publishing rules, and procuring new technologies has been eclipsed by foreign CAAs and ANSPs that are eagerly certifying drones and creating environments in which new technologies and new entrants, such as air taxis, can thrive. To regain America’s global leadership in aviation, the next Administration should: l Separate the FAA from DOT or, at a minimum, separate the ATO from the FAA. l Completely restructure the FAA’s funding system so that the nation’s aviation system is not held prisoner to annual appropriations or used as a political football to solve nonaviation problems. l Require the FAA to operate more like a business. The FAA has not made good use of the unique authority it has been given in areas like personnel and acquisition. In Europe, conventional control towers are being replaced by digital/remote towers with high-resolution cameras and other sensors on tall structures and at points adjoining runways. In Germany and Scandinavia, as many as 15 small air- ports can be controlled from one remote tower center. The FAA has yet to certify a single digital/remote tower. Text messaging between controllers and pilots is widespread over the oceans. The ATO began to implement what is now called DataComm in 2002 but sus- pended the project in 2003. This was restarted at airport control towers in 2016, but as of October 2022, it was available in only seven of the 20 high-altitude control centers. Current technology enables flights to be managed “anywhere from anywhere,” but the ATO resists consolidating its 20 aging centers into a much smaller number—and lacks the funds to consolidate them. The FAA as regulator and the ATO as traffic manager have no plans in place to handle millions of drones and other emerging technologies such as electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) aircraft.

Department of Transportation

Moderate

Vector: 60%

Pages: 658-660AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill and Project 2025 both emphasize DOT-led safety improvements through technology adoption and reducing reliance on legacy processes, though the bill focuses on aviation supply chain digitization while Project 2025 centers on automated vehicles and broader tech-neutral transportation innovation."

Key themes:safetytechnology adoptionregulatory modernizationdata efficiencyDOT oversight

Department of Transportation

Moderate

Vector: 59%

Pages: 658-660AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on digitizing aviation supply chain documentation to improve safety and efficiency, which aligns with Project 2025's emphasis on safety-first technology adoption and reducing regulatory barriers to innovation, though it does not address the specific AV, spectrum, or CAFE topics highlighted in the excerpt."

Key themes:safetytechnology adoptionregulatory efficiencydata sharing/digital documentationaviation supply chain

— 625 — Department of Transportation security, and privacy without hampering innovation. DOT can oversee the testing and deployment of a wide variety of new technologies, allowing communities and individuals to choose what best fits their needs. It is the role of the private sector, not the government, to pick winners and losers in technology development. If a technology underperforms, the private sector should be liable, not the government. The department should ensure a tech-neutral approach to addressing any emerging transportation technology while keeping safety as the number one priority. As part of this, it should work to facilitate the safe and full integration of automated vehicles into the national transportation system. Over time, these advanced technologies can save lives, transform personal mobility, and provide additional transportation opportunities—including for people with disabili- ties, aging populations, and communities where car ownership is expensive or impractical. NHTSA’s and FMCSA’s current regulations were written before the advent of automated vehicles and driving systems. Both operating administrations have issued Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemakings (ANPRMs) that begin the pro- cess of updating their regulations to reflect this new technology. However, these regulations have stalled under the Biden Administration, which has chosen to use the department’s tools to get people to take transit and drive electric vehicles instead of helping people to choose the transportation options that suit them best. l NHTSA should work to remove regulatory barriers by focusing on updating vehicle standards as well as publishing performance-based rules for the operations of automated vehicles (AVs). l FMCSA should work to clarify the regulations to align with DOT’s AV 3.0 guidance, which would allow the drivers to be safely removed from the operations of a commercial motor vehicle. From a nonregulatory point of view, DOT has pivoted from a successful focus on the voluntary sharing of data to improve safety outcomes to adoption of a more compulsory and antagonistic approach to mandating data collection and publica- tion through a Standing General Order related to automated vehicles. This needs to be reversed. Many of these new and innovative technologies rely on wireless communica- tions that depend on the availability and purchase of radio frequency spectrum, a trend that is consistent with what we see in connectivity in our everyday lives. There is a role for DOT in ensuring that in the fight over spectrum, transportation gets its fair share. For technologies to work in transportation, and in particular to work for transportation safety, they have to meet the unique needs of a transportation — 626 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise environment. They need to account for rapidly moving and out-of-line-of-sight vehicles as well as pedestrians, bicyclists, and other road users. They should account for the potential for radio interference, and they should address security. This is why in 1999, in response to a request from Congress, the Federal Com- munications Commission allocated the 5.9 GHz band of spectrum to traffic safety and intelligent transportation systems (ITS). In 2020, the FCC took away 45 MHz of the 75 MHz it had added, leaving only 30 MHz for transportation safety and ITS. DOT needs to represent the transportation community and make the case for needed spectrum to the public and Congress. CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY (CAFE) STANDARDS One reason for the high numbers of injuries on American roadways is that national fuel economy standards raise the price of cars, disincentivizing people from purchasing newer, safer vehicles. Congress requires the Secretary of Transportation to set national fuel econ- omy standards for new motor vehicles sold in the United States. This mandate was established in the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA),6 a law passed in the wake of the Arab oil embargo to promote greater energy efficiency and lessen the national security threat of U.S. dependence on foreign oil. The stat- ute directs DOT to prescribe the “maximum feasible” mileage requirements for different categories of internal-combustion engine (ICE) automobiles for each model year. The standards must be achievable using available ICE technologies running on gasoline, diesel fuel, or similar combustible fuels and must not be set so high as to prevent automakers from profitably producing new vehicles at sufficient volume to meet consumer demand. Congress recognized that the ICE-powered automobile has been instrumen- tal to advancing the mobility and prosperity of the American people and that the domestic mass production of new ICE vehicles generates millions of jobs and remains critical to the overall health of the U.S. economy and the strength of the nation’s industrial base. Accordingly, Congress took care to ensure that the mileage requirements issued by DOT would not undermine the vitality of America’s auto industry or interfere with the market economics that drives consumer demand for new vehicles. This rulemaking authority, which has been delegated by the Secretary to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, is exclusive to DOT. EPCA expressly preempts states from adopting or enforcing any different requirement “related to fuel economy standards” for new motor vehicles. While the statute instructs DOT to consult with the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in formulating its standards, no other federal agency, including EPA, has clear authority to set fuel economy requirements in place of NHTSA. The Clean Air Act7 gives EPA general authority to establish emissions

Department of Transportation

Weak

Vector: 60%

Pages: 664-666AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on digitizing aviation supply chain documentation to improve safety and efficiency, while the Project 2025 DOT section emphasizes foreign investment screening, slot allocation reform, pilot training rules, EAS program reform, and FAA organizational changes. There is minimal thematic overlap, as the bill does not address foreign investment, slot pairs, pilot hours, EAS, or FAA restructuring."

Key themes:Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)aviation safetyaviation supply chain

— 631 — Department of Transportation are providing access to capital to foreign airlines for innovations and new equipment purchases that U.S. airlines cannot match. The U.S. should use the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) process to keep out nefarious foreign actors while allowing investment from investors in designated like-minded countries so long as U.S.-based investors maintain plurality ownership. l Establish a New Entry Initiative that commits the federal government to approving or rejecting the applications of new air carriers within 12 months. l Initiate a rulemaking to allocate slot-pairs more consistently to airlines at capacity-controlled airports on the primary basis of safety, maximizing capacity, and competition. In a perfect world, the market would dictate these options, but in the highly regulated international aviation sector, the current incentives are to keep out com- petitors. Slot regulations have not been updated since the 1990s. Well-meaning legislation and the pilot shortage are adversely affecting aviation safety. In the wake of the 2009 Colgan Airlines crash, all commercial pilots and copilots were required to have 1,500 flight hours. Today, facing a pilot shortage, larger and safer twin-engine planes with two pilots are being phased out of service at smaller airports and replaced by single-engine planes that have only one pilot. This trend could be reversed if copilots were required to have fewer flight hours or could count certified simulator training. Federal subsidies are also distorting the commercial market. The Essential Air Service (EAS) program subsidizes flights to 200 small airports that are not otherwise commercially viable. The program was established in the 1970s as a temporary measure to cushion deregulation. It has since been made permanent. Finally ending the program would free hundreds of pilots to serve larger markets with more passengers. A new Administration could reform regulations to encour- age airports in lower-served areas of the nation. International air travel is regulated and restricted by individual treaties between the United States and other countries. The new Administration should remain committed to the laudatory goal of “Open Skies.” However, many of the largest emerging markets are not fully open, and our aviation policies should reflect that reality and ensure that U.S. air carriers compete on a level playing field. Specifically, so long as U.S. carriers are not able to fly over Russian airspace, the U.S. should not allow foreign carriers serving markets in East Asia and South Asia to enjoy a com- petitive advantage by continuing to allow them to fly to the U.S. China has failed to put in place several of the policies to which it has already agreed; the U.S. should — 632 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise not offer additional negotiations until the Chinese implement the agreements they have already signed. The current Administration’s policies in several areas that affect aviation and limit America’s future opportunities for growth are internally inconsistent. In addition to a New Entry Initiative, the new Administration should establish an interagency clearinghouse to drive consistent policies across the government on spectrum, drones, and advanced air mobility. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION With a budget of $18.6 billion requested for FY 202311 and an international regulatory footprint, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is DOT’s most visible mode. It needs reform. Air traffic control (ATC) operations account for two-thirds of FAA’s budget, and the Air Traffic Organization (ATO) is far behind its counterparts in Australia, Canada, and Western Europe in implementing 21st century technology. The FAA’s primary mission is ATC; its two smaller functions are distributing federal airport grants and regulating all aspects of aviation safety. The FAA was once considered the world’s best government aviation agency. Those days are long past. In the more than five decades since 1958 when the Federal Aviation Agency (precursor to the Federal Aviation Administration) was formed, there have been notable developments in air traffic control technology, aircraft avionics, and engine reliability, but despite many well-intentioned attempts, there have been few changes in the FAA’s funding structure. The FAA is still improperly organized and financed, and the management reforms provided in the late 1990s remain largely unused. The FAA is 10 years older than DOT. It provides two separate and functionally different services: the world’s largest and most complex Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP) and, at the same time, the world’s largest civil aviation regulatory and certificatory agency. The first is a 24/7/365 air traffic service provider. The second is an inherently governmental organization responsible for ensuring that aerospace operators, vehicles, airports, and ANSPs are properly certified and follow all FAA regulations. These two different organizations ought to run separately. The FAA is the only modern Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) in the world that does not assess fees for its services. Its funding structure, subject to the annual appropriations process, stifles efficiency and innovation—and the FAA does not innovate well. It spends too much time and money on research and development (R&D) and is not very good at either one. It should get out of the R&D business and focus on testing, evaluating, and certifying private-sector innovation much more quickly than it does today. The FAA workforce needs to modernize. The agency needs safety and certifi- cation experts, not professional airframe and powerplant mechanics (A&Ps). It

Department of Commerce

Weak

Vector: 60%

Pages: 705-707AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on digitizing aviation supply chain documentation to improve safety and security, while the Project 2025 section centers on modernizing export controls, entity listings, and data transfer restrictions for national security. Both share a concern for security and verification, but they address different domains and mechanisms."

Key themes:securityverificationsupply chain

— 673 — Department of Commerce Export Enforcement officers through improved and frequent training so they are able to detect export-control violations. EAR Revisions. The U.S. Government needs a new export control moderniza- tion effort to tighten the EAR policies governing licenses to countries of concern, including China and Russia (specifically, revise and/or reverse the 2008 through 2016 policies). When authoritarian governments explain what they plan to do, believe them unless hard evidence demonstrates otherwise. Case in point: China’s and Russia’s stated civil–military fusion policies demand central government command-and-control style systems in which every private entity serves the interests of the state and is forced to provide technology, services, capacity, and data to the central govern- ment and the military. Through this structure, commercial activities are routinely weaponized by authoritarian regimes that repeatedly identify the U.S. as an enemy. Accordingly, U.S. export control policies must be updated to reflect these realities and the associated threats to national security. Key priorities for EAR modernization for countries of concern should be: l Eliminating the “specially designed” licensing loophole; l Redesignating China and Russia to more highly prohibitive export licensing groups (country groups D or E); l Eliminating license exceptions; l Broadening foreign direct product rules; l Reducing the de minimis threshold from 25 percent to 10 percent—or 0 percent for critical technologies; l Tightening the deemed export rules to prevent technology transfer to foreign nationals from countries of concern; l Tightening the definition of “fundamental research” to address exploitation of the open U.S. university system by authoritarian governments through funding, students and researchers, and recruitment; l Eliminating license exceptions for sharing technology with controlled entities/countries through standards-setting “activities” and bodies; and l Improving regulations regarding published information for technology transfers. — 674 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise The next few years will prove or disprove the assertion that the U.S. stands on the precipice of a Cold War with China. Many believe that a Cold War has already begun; if so, then strategic decoupling from China is necessary and, fundamentally, any exports of goods, software, and technology to countries of concern, whether directly or indirectly, should be prohibited or controlled in the absence of good cause (e.g., humanitarian and medical aid, food aid). Entity List and Sanctions. There are currently just over 500 Chinese and over 500 Russian companies on the Department of Commerce’s Entity List, which reg- ulates exports of controlled and uncontrolled items to designated entities. Given China’s Civil–Military Fusion Strategy and Russia’s massive war efforts facili- tated by a broad range of the Russian economy, BIS must add more entities to the Entity List and apply a license review “policy of denial” that prohibits exports to these entities. Entity List parties that violate export controls should be placed on the BIS Denied Persons List (and thereby lose export privileges) and, if the violations are significant enough, they should also be sanctioned by the Department of Treasury. Data Transfer and Apps Used for Surveillance. Department of Commerce leadership should work across government agencies to address privacy and data concerns arising out of “big tech” from national security and export control per- spectives. In particular, they should draft and implement an executive order (EO) based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which expands export control authority beyond ECRA’s scope (goods, software, technology) to regulate and restrict exports of U.S. persons’ data to countries of concern. The EO should establish a framework for the types of personal data subject to export controls and licensing policy by country, and the BIS should implement the EO through regulations. BIS should additionally designate app providers (such as WeChat and Byte Dance/TikTok) known for undermining U.S. national security through data collection, surveillance, and influence operations, to the Entity List. This listing would prevent app users from program updates, which would quickly make these apps non-operational in the United States. NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION Break Up NOAA. The single biggest Department of Commerce agency outside of decennial census years is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which houses the National Weather Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, and other components. NOAA garners $6.5 billion of the department’s $12 billion annual operational budget and accounts for more than half of the department’s personnel in non-decadal Census years (2021 figures). NOAA consists of six main offices: l The National Weather Service (NWS);

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. Knott, Brad

Tren de Aragua Border Security Threat Assessment Act

119/hr/4070

Limiting Excessive Government Obstruction Act

119/hr/9653

Back to All Bills