PEACE Act
Download PDFSponsored by
Rep. Fine, Randy [R-FL-6]
ID: F000484
Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Invalid Date
Introduced
đ 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
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 our esteemed representatives in Congress. The PEACE Act - because who doesn't love a good acronym? - is a bill that's about as substantial as a placebo pill.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to require the Department of State to provide briefings on antisemitism in Europe. Wow, what a bold move! I'm sure the Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs was just twiddling their thumbs, waiting for Congress to tell them to do something about antisemitism.
The real objective here is to give our politicians a chance to grandstand about how much they care about fighting hate crimes. It's a classic case of "look over there!" - distract from the real issues at home by pretending to care about problems abroad.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill requires the Department of State to provide briefings on antisemitism in Europe, because apparently, they weren't doing that already. It's a stunning display of bureaucratic inefficiency. The briefings will be provided to the "appropriate congressional committees" - code for "the people who will pretend to care about this issue until the next election cycle."
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties are the usual suspects: politicians looking for a photo op, lobbyists trying to curry favor with their favorite representatives, and voters who will be convinced that something is being done about antisemitism.
But let's not forget the real stakeholders here - the ones who actually care about fighting hate crimes. They'll be left wondering why Congress can't seem to pass meaningful legislation that addresses the root causes of these problems.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this bill is exactly zero. It's a feel-good measure designed to make politicians look good, not to actually address the issue at hand. The implications are clear: more bureaucratic red tape, more pointless briefings, and more opportunities for politicians to pretend they're doing something about antisemitism.
In short, the PEACE Act is a legislative placebo - a sugar pill designed to make voters feel better without actually addressing the underlying disease. It's a classic case of "policy theater" - all sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Diagnosis: Terminal stupidity, with a side of bureaucratic inefficiency and a dash of political grandstanding. Prognosis: more of the same.
Related Topics
đ° Campaign Finance Network
No campaign finance data available for Rep. Fine, Randy [R-FL-6]
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 576 â Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 38. Garland Memorandum, October 4, 2021; press release, âAmerica First Legal Seeks Two Federal Investigations on Attorney General Merrick Garlandâs Infamous Oct. 4th Memo Siccing the FBI on Concerned Parents,â America First Legal Foundation, March 14, 2022, https://aflegal.org/america-first-legal-seeks-two-federal- investigations-on-attorney-general-merrick-garlands-infamous-oct-4th-memo-siccing-the-fbi-on-concerned- parents/ (accessed February 3, 2023). 39. Luke Rosiak, âIn Aftermath of Enemies List, School Committee Pledges to âSilence the Opposition,ââ Daily Wire, March 27, 2021, https://www.dailywire.com/news/after-enemies-list-school-body-pledges-to-silence-the- opposition (accessed February 3, 2023). 40. The language of the Equal Protection Clause âreflects that âachieving equal protection against lawbreakers was at the core of the Clauseâs objectives.ââ Lefebure v. DâAquilla, 15 F.4th 650, 669 (5th Cir. 2021) (Graves, J. dissenting) (quoting Lawrence Rosenthal, âPolicing and Equal Protection,â Yale Law & Policy Review, Vol. 21, No. 53 (2003), p. 70) cert. denied, 212 L. Ed. 2d 791, 142 S. Ct. 2732 (2022)), https://casetext.com/case/ lefebure-v-daquilla-2 (accessed February 3, 2023). 41. See, for example, Portland Mayor Ted Wheelerâs actions in 2020 calling on federal officialsâexecuting their mission to protect federal property and officialsâto leave the city, saying, âTheyâre not wanted hereâ despite the fact that local reports found that â[o]ut of more than a thousand arrests reported by the Portland Police Bureau and other local law enforcement since late May 2020, only about 8.4% of the cases are still openâ and that the ârest have been dismissed or listed as no complaint, which means authorities are not currently pursuing charges.â BBC News, âPortland Protests: Mayor Demands Federal Officers Leave City,â July 20, 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53466718 (accessed February 3, 2023), and Hannah Lambert, â91% of Portland Protest Arrests Not Being Prosecuted,â Portland Tribune, January 5, 2021, https://archive.ph/ OSDbz (accessed February 3,2023). 42. Figure 4, âTrend in Average Guideline Minimum and Average Sentence Imposed for Armed Career Criminals Fiscal Years 2010â2019,â in U.S. Sentencing Commission, Federal Armed Career Criminals: Prevalence, Patterns, and Pathways, March 2021, p. 26, https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/ research-publications/2021/20210303_ACCA-Report.pdf (accessed February 3, 2023). 43. 18 U.S. Code § 924(e), https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/924 (accessed February 3, 2023). 44. S. 1586, Restoring the Armed Career Criminal Act, 117th Congress, introduced May 12, 2021, https://www. congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1586 (accessed February 6, 2023). 45. This could require seeking the Supreme Court to overrule Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 (2008), in applicable cases, but the department should place a priority on doing so. 46. 21 U.S. Code § 801 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/chapter-13/subchapter-I/part-A (accessed February 3, 2023). 47. 18 U.S. Code §§ 1961â1968, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-96 (accessed February 3, 2023). 48. For more on this topic generally, see âEnsuring Enforcement and Administration of Our Immigration Laws,â infra. 49. See Paul J. Larkin, âTwenty-First Century Illicit Drugs and Their Discontents: The Scourge of Illicit Fentanyl,â Heritage Foundation Legal Memorandum No. 313, November 1, 2022), https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/ files/2022-11/LM313.pdf. 50. Jessica Rendall, â100,000 People Died from Drug Overdoses in the US in One Year, a Record,â CNET, November 18, 2021, https://www.cnet.com/health/medical/100000-people-died-from-drug-overdoses-in- the-us-in-one-year-a-record/ (accessed February 3, 2023). 51. U.S. Department of Justice, National Security Division, âInformation About the Department of Justiceâs China Initiative and a Compilation of China-Related Prosecutions Since 2018,â last updated November 19, 2021, https://www.justice.gov/archives/nsd/information-about-department-justice-s-china-initiative-and- compilation-china-related (accessed February 3, 2023). 52. Ronn Blitzer and Jake Gibson, âBiden DOJ Ending National Security Initiative Aimed at Countering China amid Complaints About Bias,â Fox News, February 23, 2022, https://www.foxnews.com/politics/doj-ending-china- initiative-national-security-program-bias (accessed February 3, 2023). 53. National Security Strategy, The White House, October 2022, p. 23, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/ uploads/2022/10/Biden-Harris-Administrations-National-Security-Strategy-10.2022.pdf (accessed February 3, 2023). See also ibid., p. 8. â 577 â Department of Justice 54. U.S. Department of Justice, âAbout DOJ: Our Mission,â https://www.justice.gov/about (accessed February 4, 2023). 55. 18 U.S. Code § 248, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/248 (accessed February 4, 2023). 56. Danielle Wallace and Jake Gibson, âPro-life Activist Mark Houck Pleads Not Guilty to Federal Charges After FBI Arrest,â Fox News, September 27, 2022, https://www.foxnews.com/us/pro-life-activist-mark-houck-pleads- not-guilty-federal-charges-fbi-arrest (accessed February 4, 2023). 57. Patty Knap, âPaul Vaughn, Pro-life Father of 11 Arrested by FBI Speaks Out,â National Catholic Register, October 18, 2022, https://www.ncregister.com/news/paul-vaughn-pro-life-father-of-11-arrested-by-fbi-speaks- out (accessed February 4, 2023). 58. 597 U.S. ___ (2022), https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/597/19-1392/case.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023). 59. Jonah McKeown, âTRACKER: Pro-Abortion Attacks in the U.S. Continue (Updated),â Catholic News Agency, last updated September 22, 2022, https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/251553/map-vandalism- attacks-continue-at-pro-life-centers-across-us (accessed February 4, 2023). 60. 28 U.S. Code § 516, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/516 (accessed February 4, 2023). 61. 28 U.S. Code § 519, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/519 (accessed February 4, 2023). 62. 295 U.S. 602 (1935), https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/295/602/ (accessed February 6, 2023). 63. 591 U.S. ___ (2020), https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/19-7_new_0pm1.pdf (accessed February 6, 2023). 64. See Brief for the United States, 303 Creative v. Aubrey Elenis, No. 21-476, August 2022, https://www. supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-476/234119/20220819182151542_21-476%20303%20Creative%20LLC%20 v.%20Elenis%20FINAL.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023). 65. Oral Argument Transcript, 303 Creative v. Aubrey Elenis, No. 21-476, December 5, 2022, https:// www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2022/21-476_8n59.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023). 66. Brief for the United States, Masterpiece Cakeshop Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, No. 16-111, September 2017, p. 9, https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/16-111-tsac-USA.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023) (quoting Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International, Inc., 133 S. Ct. 2321, 2327 (2013), quoting in turn Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic & Institutional Rights, Inc., 547 U.S. 47, 61 (2006)). 67. Ibid., p. 10. 68. Ibid., pp. 10â11. 69. West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 642 (1943), https://tile.loc.gov/storage- services/service/ll/usrep/usrep319/usrep319624/usrep319624.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023). 70. Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, 24 (1971), https://constitutionallawreporter.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ Cohen-v_-California.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023). 71. West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 640. 72. McCullen v. Coakley, 573 U.S. 464, 476 (2014), https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/573/12-1168/ case.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023) (quoting FCC v. League of Women Voters of California, 468 U. S. 364, 377 (1984)). 73. See, for example, 42 U.S. Code § 2000d, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/2000d (accessed February 4, 2023); 42 U.S. Code § 2000e, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/2000e (accessed February 4, 2023); 20 U.S. Code § 1681, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/1681 (accessed February 4, 2023) 74. See âAdvancing Equity and Racial Justice Through the Federal Government,â The White House, https://www. whitehouse.gov/equity/ (accessed February 4, 2023). 75. 18 U.S. Code § 1461, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1461 (accessed February 6, 2023). See also 18 U.S. Code § 1462, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1462 (accessed February 6, 2023). 76. 18 U.S. Code § 241, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241 (accessed February 6, 2023). 77. A similar argument could be advanced for the departmentâs other criminal law enforcement responsibilities such as those within the Environmental and Natural Resources Division. 78. See, for example, Paul Kiel, âControversial USA Delivered âVoter Fraudâ Indictments Right on Time,â TPM Muckraker, May 1, 2007, https://web.archive.org/web/20070503021505/http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/ archives/003107.php (accessed February 4, 2023).
Introduction
â xiv â Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Itâs not 1980. In 2023, the game has changed. The long march of cultural Marxism through our institutions has come to pass. The federal government is a behemoth, weaponized against American citizens and conservative values, with freedom and liberty under siege as never before. The task at hand to reverse this tide and restore our Republic to its original moorings is too great for any one conservative policy shop to spearhead. It requires the collective action of our movement. With the quickening approach of January 2025, we have two years and one chance to get it right. Project 2025 is more than 50 (and growing) of the nationâs leading conservative organizations joining forces to prepare and seize the day. The axiom goes âperson- nel is policy,â and we need a new generation of Americans to answer the call and come to serve. This book is functionally an invitation for you the readerâMr. Smith, Mrs. Smith, and Ms. Smithâto come to Washington or support those who can. Our goal is to assemble an army of aligned, vetted, trained, and prepared conservatives to go to work on Day One to deconstruct the Administrative State. The project is built on four pillars. l Pillar Iâthis volumeâputs in one place a consensus view of how major federal agencies must be governed and where disagreement exists brackets out these differences for the next President to choose a path. l Pillar II is a personnel database that allows candidates to build their own professional profiles and our coalition members to review and voice their recommendations. These recommendations will then be collated and shared with the President-electâs team, greatly streamlining the appointment process. l Pillar III is the Presidential Administration Academy, an online educational system taught by experts from our coalition. For the newcomer, this will explain how the government functions and how to function in government. For the experienced, we will host in-person seminars with advanced training and set the bar for what is expected of senior leadership. l In Pillar IVâthe Playbookâwe are forming agency teams and drafting tran- sition plans to move out upon the Presidentâs utterance of âso help me God.â As Americans living at the approach of our nationâs 250th birthday, we have been given much. As conservatives, we are as much required to steward this precious heritage for the next generation. On behalf of our coalition partners, we thank you and invite you to come join with us at project2025.org. Paul Dans Director, Project 2025 â xv â Authors Daren Bakst is Deputy Director, Center for Energy and Environment, and Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). Before joining CEI, Daren was a Senior Research Fellow at The Heritage Foundation, where he played a lead- ing role in the launch of the organizationâs new energy and environmental center. For a decade, he led Heritageâs food and agricultural policy work, and he edited and co-authored Heritageâs book Farms and Free Enterprise. He has testified numerous times before Congress, has appeared frequently on media outlets, and has played leadership roles in such organizations such as the Federalist Society, American Agricultural Law Association, and Food and Drug Law Institute (serving on the Food and Drug Law Journalâs editorial advisory board). Jonathan Berry is managing partner at Boyden Gray & Associates PLLC. He served as acting Assistant Secretary for Policy at the U.S. Department of Labor, overseeing all aspects of rulemaking and policy development. At the U.S. Depart- ment of Justice, he assisted with the development of regulatory policy and with the nominations of Justice Neil Gorsuch and dozens of other judges. He previ- ously served as Chief Counsel for the Trump transition and earlier clerked for Associate Justice Samuel Alito and Judge Jerry Smith of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. He is a graduate of Yale College and Columbia University School of Law. Lindsey M. Burke is Director of the Center for Education Policy at The Heritage Foundation. Burke served on Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkinâs transition steering committee and landing team for education. She serves on the Board of Visitors for George Mason University, the board of the Educational Free- dom Institute, and the advisory board of the Independent Womenâs Forumâs Education Freedom Center. Dr. Burkeâs research has been published in such journals as Social Science Quarterly, Educational Research and Evaluation, and Research in Educational Administration and Leadership. She holds a BA from Hollins University, an MA from the University of Virginia, and a PhD from George Mason University. David R. Burton is Senior Fellow in Economic Policy in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation. He focuses on securities regulation, tax policy, business law, entrepreneurship, administra- tive law, financial privacy, the U.S. Department of Commerce, corporate welfare,
Introduction
â 450 â Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Goal #1: Protecting Life, Conscience, and Bodily Integrity. The Secretary should pursue a robust agenda to protect the fundamental right to life, protect con- science rights, and uphold bodily integrity rooted in biological realities, not ideology. From the moment of conception, every human being possesses inherent dignity and worth, and our humanity does not depend on our age, stage of development, race, or abilities. The Secretary must ensure that all HHS programs and activities are rooted in a deep respect for innocent human life from day one until natural death: Abortion and euthanasia are not health care. A robust respect for the sacred rights of conscience, both at HHS and among gov- ernments and institutions funded by it, increases choices for patients and program beneficiaries and furthers pluralism and tolerance. The Secretary must protect Americansâ civil rights by ensuring that HHS programs and activities follow the letter and spirit of religious freedom and conscience-protection laws. Radical actors inside and outside government are promoting harmful identity politics that replaces biological sex with subjective notions of âgender identityâ and bases a personâs worth on his or her race, sex, or other identities. This destructive dogma, under the guise of âequity,â threatens Americanâs fundamental liberties as well as the health and well-being of children and adults alike. The next Secretary must ensure that HHS programs protect childrenâs minds and bodies and that HHS programs respect parentsâ basic right to direct the upbringing, education, and care of their children. Goal #2: Empowering Patient Choices and Provider Autonomy. Basic eco- nomics holds that costs tend to decrease and quality and options tend to increase when there is robust and free competition in the provision of goods and services. Health care is no exception. Health care reform should be patient-centered and market-based and should empower individuals to control their health careârelated dollars and decisions. Of course, providers who deliver health care also need the freedom to address the unique needs of their patients. States should be the primary regulators of the medical profession, and the federal government should not restrict providersâ abil- ity to discharge their responsibilities or limit their ability to innovate through government pricing controls or irrational Medicare and Medicaid reimburse- ment schemes. Finally, Americaâs broken insurance system, run largely through confusing pro- vider networks and third-party payers (employers), induces overconsumption of health care, limits consumer shopping, and hides true costs from patients. The federal government should focus reform on reducing burdens of regulatory compliance, unleashing innovation in health care delivery, ceasing interference in the daily lives of patients and providers, allowing alternative insurance coverage options, and returning control of health care dollars to patients making decisions with their providers about their health care treatments and services. â 451 â Department of Health and Human Services Goal #3: Promoting Stable and Flourishing Married Families. Families comprised of a married mother, father, and their children are the foundation of a well-ordered nation and healthy society. Unfortunately, family policies and programs under President Bidenâs HHS are fraught with agenda items focusing on âLGBTQ+ equity,â subsidizing single-motherhood, disincentivizing work, and penalizing marriage. These policies should be repealed and replaced by policies that support the formation of stable, married, nuclear families. Working fathers are essential to the well-being and development of their children, but the United States is experiencing a crisis of fatherlessness that is ruining our childrenâs futures. In the overwhelming number of cases, fathers insulate children from physical and sexual abuse, financial difficulty or poverty, incarceration, teen pregnancy, poor educational outcomes, high school failure, and a host of behavioral and psychological problems. By contrast, homes with non-related âboyfriendsâ present are among the most dangerous place for a child to be. HHS should prioritize married father engagement in its messaging, health, and welfare policies. In the context of current and emerging reproductive technologies, HHS policies should never place the desires of adults over the right of children to be raised by the biological fathers and mothers who conceive them. In cases involving biolog- ical parents who are found by a court to be unfit because of abuse or neglect, the process of adoption should be speedy, certain, and supported generously by HHS. Goal #4: Preparing for the Next Health Emergency. The COVID-19 pan- demic demonstrated how catastrophic a micromanaging, misinformed, centralized, and politicized federal government can be. Basic human rights, medical choice, and the doctorâpatient relationship were trampled without scientific justification and for extended periods of time. Excess deaths, not due to COVID-19, skyrocketed because of forced lockdowns, isolation, vaccine-related mass firings, and colossal disruptions of the economy and daily rhythms of life. The federal governmentâs public health apparatus has lost the publicâs trust. Before the next national public health emergency, this apparatus must be funda- mentally restructured to ensure a transparent, scientifically grounded, and more nimble, efficient, transparent, and targeted response that respects the unique needs and input of patient populations and providers. Every one of the overreaching policies during the pandemicâfrom lockdowns and school closures to mask and vaccine mandates or passportsâreceived its supposed legal justification from the state of emergency declared (and renewed) by the HHS Secretary. Tellingly, however, the threshold for what constitutes a public health emergencyâhow many cases, hospitalizations, deaths, etc.âwas never defined. For the sake of democratic accountability, we must know with clarity what will trigger the next emergency declaration and, just as important, what will trigger its end.
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.