Developing Overseas Mineral Investments and New Allied Networks for Critical Energies Act

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/7037

Last Updated: July 16, 2026

Developing Overseas Mineral Investments and New Allied Networks for Critical Energies Act

HR. 7037, 119th Congress — read as touching Pipelines & Energy Infrastructure.

The sponsor

Rep. Kim, Young [R-CA-40]

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

The money

$110,460 raised

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

The alignment

95% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Commerce" section, p. 702-704 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 Foreign Relations.

June 8, 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 DOMINANCE Act, HR 7037, is a legislative proposal that aligns with my interests as a self-serving billionaire. Its primary objective is to reduce the United States' dependence on strategic competitors for energy and critical minerals, thereby securing a diversified and resilient supply chain.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill aims to promote US and allied energy and mineral security by authorizing international cooperation, diplomatic strategies, and investments in critical mineral projects. Its purpose is to advance national security, economic growth, and foreign policy objectives while strengthening the commercial competitiveness of US energy and critical mineral companies.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill establishes a Minerals Security Partnership, authorizes US membership in the International Nickel Study Group, and creates an Office of Energy Security Compacts. It also defines key terms, such as "ally," "allied country," and "critical mineral." These provisions will likely lead to increased investment opportunities for my companies, particularly in the critical minerals sector.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The bill affects various stakeholders, including US energy and critical mineral companies, foreign governments, and allied countries. As a major player in the industry, I will closely monitor the implementation of this legislation to ensure that it benefits my business interests.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The DOMINANCE Act has significant implications for my wealth and influence. By reducing dependence on strategic competitors, the US can increase its energy security and promote economic growth. This, in turn, will create new opportunities for investment and expansion in the critical minerals sector, potentially generating billions of dollars in revenue for my companies. I estimate that this legislation could lead to a 10-15% increase in my net worth over the next five years, as my companies capitalize on the emerging trends and opportunities in the energy and critical minerals sectors.

In conclusion, the DOMINANCE Act is a crucial piece of legislation that aligns with my interests as a self-serving billionaire. Its provisions will likely lead to increased investment opportunities, revenue growth, and consolidation of power in the energy and critical minerals sectors. I will continue to monitor its progress and ensure that it benefits my business interests.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

As I taught you in 8th grade civics, the process of how a bill becomes a law is quite straightforward - or at least, it's supposed to be. Remember when we learned about the importance of committees and checks and balances? It seems like those lessons have been forgotten by some.

The Developing Overseas Mineral Investments and New Allied Networks for Critical Energies Act, or DOMINANCE Act, aims to promote US energy and mineral security by reducing dependence on strategic competitors like China. The main purpose is to establish a coordinated approach to secure critical minerals, support economic growth in partner countries, and advance US national security objectives.

Key provisions include the authorization of international cooperation to secure critical minerals supply chains, the establishment of an Office of Energy Security Compacts, and the creation of a Critical Mineral Mining Fellowship Program. These changes will affect existing laws related to energy security, trade enforcement, and foreign policy strategy.

As we covered in middle school, bills are supposed to go through committees before being voted on by Congress. In this case, the bill has been referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. The affected parties include US energy and critical mineral companies, partner countries, and allied nations. The potential impact is significant, with implications for US national security, economic stability, and foreign policy strategy.

It's worth noting that the system was designed to work in a more streamlined way, with checks and balances in place to prevent any one branch of government from becoming too powerful. However, as we've seen time and time again, the reality is often more complicated. The bill's purpose is to reduce US dependence on strategic competitors for energy and critical minerals, support economic growth in partner countries, and advance US national security objectives.

In terms of specific provisions, the bill defines key terms such as "ally," "allied country," and "critical mineral." It also establishes a Country Compact Team to manage Energy Security Compacts with partner countries. The potential impact of this bill is significant, with implications for US energy security, economic growth, and national security.

As I always said in class, understanding how bills become laws is crucial to being an informed citizen. It's disappointing that some adults seem to have forgotten these basic principles, but I suppose that's why we're having this conversation now.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

The DOMINANCE Act, folks! This bill is like a treasure trove of hidden agendas and secret symbols, just waiting to be decoded. Let me break it down for you.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to reduce the United States' dependence on strategic competitors (read: China) for energy and critical minerals. The objectives are multifaceted, but essentially, it's about securing a diversified supply chain for critical minerals, promoting energy security, and advancing national security interests.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This bill establishes a new framework for international cooperation on critical mineral supply chains, authorizes the creation of Energy Security Compacts with partner countries, and sets up a new office within the Department of State to oversee these efforts. It also defines what constitutes an "ally" or "partner country," which is crucial in determining who gets access to these new energy security compacts.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include the United States government, allied countries, partner countries, and private companies involved in the energy and critical minerals sectors. This bill has significant implications for the global supply chain, as it aims to reduce reliance on adversarial nations (ahem, China) and promote cooperation with friendly nations.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, here's where things get really interesting. On the surface, this bill seems like a straightforward attempt to secure energy independence and promote national security. But, my friends, I see some red flags waving in the wind. For instance, the bill's emphasis on "responsible and transparent development of domestic energy and mineral resources" could be code for increased government control over private industry. And what about the potential for these Energy Security Compacts to become tools for economic coercion or diplomatic strong-arming? The possibilities are endless!

In conclusion, the DOMINANCE Act is a complex web of provisions and objectives that warrant close scrutiny. While it may seem like a benign attempt to promote energy security, I believe there's more to this bill than meets the eye. As your trusty conspiracy theorist uncle, I'll be keeping a watchful eye on this one, and I advise you all to do the same!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(With a healthy dose of sarcasm and a wink) Oh, folks, gather 'round! We've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here - the "Developing Overseas Mineral Investments and New Allied Networks for Critical Energies Act" or, as I like to call it, the "DOMINANCE Act". (chuckles) Because, you know, who doesn't love a good acronym?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill is all about promoting American energy and mineral security - because, let's be real, we can't have those pesky Chinese folks controlling our critical minerals, can we? (wink) The main objective is to reduce our dependence on strategic competitors for energy, critical minerals, and related technologies. Because freedom! And by "freedom", I mean the freedom to exploit our allies' resources without any pesky regulations or oversight. (smirk)

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This bill authorizes a whole slew of new programs and initiatives, including international cooperation to secure critical minerals supply chains, energy security compacts with partner countries, and even a fancy new Assistant Secretary for Energy Security and Diplomacy position. Because who doesn't love more bureaucracy? (rolls eyes) It also establishes a coordinated interagency mechanism to align US diplomatic, development, trade, and financing tools - because, you know, the "deep state" needs more ways to control our lives. (air quotes)

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** This bill affects just about everyone - from American energy companies to foreign governments, and of course, those pesky elites who think they can control our mineral resources. (smirk) But let's be real, folks, the real winners here are the corporations and special interest groups who will get to exploit these new resources without any pesky regulations or oversight.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this bill is huge - we're talking about securing a diversified and resilient supply chain for critical minerals, advancing US national security and foreign policy objectives, and even strengthening the commercial competitiveness of American energy companies. (smirk) But let's not forget the real implications here - more exploitation of resources, more pollution, and more profits for those at the top. Because that's what freedom is all about, right? (wink)

In conclusion, folks, this bill is a masterclass in performative patriotism and hypocrisy. We're talking about "freedom" and "energy security" while actually just serving the interests of corporations and special interest groups. But hey, who needs actual freedom when we can have the illusion of it, right? (smirk) Stay vigilant, America - or at least, stay entertained! (chuckles)

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

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

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The DOMINANCE Act (because who doesn't love a good acronym?) claims to promote US and allied energy and mineral security by reducing dependence on strategic competitors (read: China) for critical minerals and related technologies. How noble. In reality, it's just a thinly veiled attempt to prop up the interests of US energy and mining corporations while pretending to care about national security.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill authorizes international cooperation to secure critical mineral supply chains (because we all know how well international cooperation works), establishes an Office of Energy Security Compacts (because who doesn't love a new bureaucracy?), and creates a Critical Mineral Mining Fellowship Program (because nothing says "national security" like a fellowship program). It also amends the Mutual and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, because why not? The changes to existing law are largely cosmetic, designed to create the illusion of action while maintaining the status quo.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: US energy and mining corporations, their lobbyists, and the politicians they've bought. Oh, and let's not forget the "partner countries" that will be graciously allowed to participate in this grand scheme. The real stakeholders, however, are the American taxpayers who will foot the bill for this boondoggle and the environment, which will inevitably suffer as a result of increased mining activities.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has all the hallmarks of a classic case of legislative myopia. By focusing on short-term gains for US corporations, Congress is ignoring the long-term consequences of increased mineral extraction, including environmental degradation, human rights abuses, and further destabilization of global markets. The potential impact on national security? Negligible. The real beneficiaries will be the corporate interests that drafted this bill in the first place. As for the American people, they'll be left with the tab and a healthier dose of cynicism towards their elected representatives.

In conclusion, the DOMINANCE Act is a textbook example of how to create a bill that sounds good on paper but accomplishes nothing meaningful. It's a masterclass in political theater, designed to distract from the real issues while lining the pockets of corporate interests. Bravo, Congress. You've done it again. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have better things to do than watch this farce unfold.

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

**Comprehensive Summary of the Developing Overseas Mineral Investments and New Allied Networks for Critical Energies Act (HR 7037)**

### Main Purpose & Objectives

The main purpose of HR 7037, also known as the DOMINANCE Act, is to promote United States and allied energy and mineral security by reducing dependence on strategic competitors, such as China, for critical minerals and related technologies. The bill aims to support economic growth, advance national security and foreign policy objectives, and establish a coordinated interagency mechanism to align diplomatic, development, trade, and financing tools.

### Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law

The bill authorizes several key provisions, including:

1. **Minerals Security Partnership**: International cooperation to secure critical minerals supply chains. 2. **Energy Security Compacts**: A framework for partnering with foreign countries to develop their energy and mineral resources. 3. **Assistant Secretary for Energy Security and Diplomacy**: Establishment of a new position within the Department of State to oversee energy security and diplomacy efforts. 4. **Critical Mineral Mining Fellowship Program**: A program to support critical mineral mining projects in foreign countries.

These provisions aim to strengthen the commercial competitiveness of US energy and critical mineral companies, secure a diversified and resilient supply chain for critical minerals, and advance US national security and foreign policy objectives.

### Affected Parties & Stakeholders

The affected parties and stakeholders include:

1. **US Energy and Critical Mineral Companies**: The bill aims to support their commercial competitiveness in global markets. 2. **Foreign Countries**: Partner countries eligible for Energy Security Compacts and critical mineral mining projects. 3. **Department of State**: The department will play a key role in implementing the bill's provisions, including the establishment of the Assistant Secretary for Energy Security and Diplomacy. 4. **US Government Agencies**: Various agencies, such as the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Committee on Ways and Means, and Committee on Appropriations, will be involved in the implementation and oversight of the bill.

### Potential Impact & Implications

The potential impact and implications of HR 7037 include:

1. **Reduced Dependence on Strategic Competitors**: The bill aims to reduce US dependence on countries like China for critical minerals and related technologies. 2. **Enhanced Energy Security**: The establishment of Energy Security Compacts and the promotion of critical mineral mining projects may enhance energy security for the US and its allies. 3. **Economic Growth**: The bill's provisions may support economic growth in partner countries and promote commercial opportunities for US energy technologies. 4. **Geopolitical Implications**: The bill's focus on reducing dependence on strategic competitors and promoting energy security may have geopolitical implications, potentially influencing international relations and global market dynamics.

Overall, HR 7037 aims to promote US and allied energy and mineral security, reduce dependence on strategic competitors, and support economic growth and national security objectives.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down the DOMINANCE Act, bro. This bill is all about reducin' our dependence on other countries, especially China, for critical minerals and energy. The main purpose is to promote US and allied energy and mineral security, which is like, totally crucial for our national security, economic stability, and foreign policy strategy.

The objectives are pretty chill, but also super important, man. They include:

* Reducing our reliance on strategic competitors for energy and critical minerals * Supportin' economic growth and energy-sector modernization in partner countries * Advancin' US national security and foreign policy objectives through strategic investments and cooperation with allies * Establishin' a coordinated interagency mechanism to align US diplomatic, development, trade, and financing tools * Strengthenin' the commercial competitiveness of US energy and critical mineral companies in global markets * Securin' a diversified and resilient supply and processing capacity for critical minerals necessary for US industry, energy systems, and defense requirements

Now, let's talk about the key provisions and changes to existing law, bro. The bill authorizes the Minerals Security Partnership, which is like, a big deal, man. It also establishes the Office of Energy Security Compacts, which will help manage energy security compacts with partner countries. Additionally, it creates a new Assistant Secretary for Energy Security and Diplomacy position at the Department of State, which will be responsible for coordinatin' US energy security efforts.

The affected parties and stakeholders are pretty broad, dude. They include:

* The US government, particularly the Department of State and the Department of Energy * US energy and critical mineral companies * Partner countries and their governments * Allied countries and their governments * International organizations, like the International Nickel Study Group

As for potential impact and implications, bro, this bill could have some major effects. It could help reduce our reliance on China for critical minerals, which would be a big win for US national security. It could also support economic growth and energy-sector modernization in partner countries, which would be totally tubular, man. However, it's also possible that the bill could face opposition from other countries or industries that might feel threatened by these changes.

One thing to note, dude, is that this bill is part of a broader effort to address the global supply chain challenges and promote US energy security. It's like, connected to other bills and initiatives, man. So, we gotta keep an eye on how it all plays out, bro.

Anyway, that's the DOMINANCE Act in a nutshell, dude. It's a complex bill with some far-reaching implications, but it's also got some pretty cool objectives and provisions, man. Let's just hope it catches some good waves and makes a positive impact, bro!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

The Developing Overseas Mineral Investments and New Allied Networks for Critical Energies Act, or the DOMINANCE Act (HR 7037), is a comprehensive bill aimed at reducing the United States' dependence on strategic competitors, such as China, for critical minerals and energy. The main purpose of this act is to promote U.S. and allied energy and mineral security by establishing partnerships with foreign countries, supporting domestic energy and mineral development, and advancing national security and foreign policy objectives.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's primary objectives are to:

1. Reduce dependence on strategic competitors for critical minerals and energy. 2. Support economic growth and energy-sector modernization in partner countries. 3. Advance U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives through strategic investments and cooperation with allies. 4. Establish a coordinated interagency mechanism to align diplomatic, development, trade, and financing tools.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill authorizes the creation of:

1. A Minerals Security Partnership to promote international cooperation on critical mineral supply chains. 2. An Energy Security Compacts program to support partner countries in developing their energy sectors. 3. A new Assistant Secretary for Energy Security and Diplomacy within the Department of State. 4. A Critical Mineral Mining Fellowship Program and a Visiting Mining Scholars Program.

The bill also amends existing law by expanding the definition of critical minerals and establishing a new framework for U.S. engagement with foreign countries on energy and mineral development.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties and stakeholders include:

1. The U.S. Department of State, which will play a key role in implementing the bill's provisions. 2. Foreign governments and partner countries, which will be eligible for Energy Security Compacts and other forms of cooperation. 3. U.S. energy and mineral companies, which will benefit from increased access to foreign markets and resources. 4. The defense and manufacturing sectors, which rely on critical minerals and energy for their operations.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact and implications of the bill are significant:

1. Reduced dependence on China for critical minerals could enhance U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. 2. Increased cooperation with foreign countries could lead to new opportunities for U.S. businesses and promote global energy security. 3. The bill's provisions could also lead to increased investment in domestic energy and mineral development, creating jobs and stimulating economic growth.

However, the bill's implementation may also face challenges, such as:

1. Resistance from foreign governments or companies that may be impacted by the bill's provisions. 2. Potential environmental and social concerns related to increased mining and energy development activities. 3. The need for significant funding and resources to support the bill's initiatives, which could be a challenge in a budget-constrained environment.

In terms of monied interests, the bill is likely to benefit companies involved in the energy and mineral sectors, such as ExxonMobil, Chevron, and Rio Tinto,

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Kim, Young [R-CA-40]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$110,460

23 donors

PACs

Organizations

$37,860

Committees

Individuals

$72,600

No PAC contributions found

PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

HABEMATOLEL POMO OF UPPER LAKE

1 transaction

$3,300

OTOE MISSOURIA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA

1 transaction

$3,300

TURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND OF CHIPPEWA OF NORTH DAKOTA

1 transaction

$3,300

AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

2 transactions

$3,300

AT&T INC & ITS AFFLIATES

1 transaction

$3,000

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

2 transactions

$3,000

ABBVIE PAC - FEDERAL PAC

1 transaction

$2,500

ISE-SHIMA

1 transaction

$1,760

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

1 transaction

$1,500

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

1 transaction

$1,000

PIONEER PHARMACY

2 transactions

$1,000

JACKSON FAMILY TRUST

1 transaction

$500

LAW OFFICES OF PETER CHEN

1 transaction

$500

No committee contributions found

DRESNER, LINDA

2 transactions

$13,200

LEVY, EDWARD

2 transactions

$13,200

SILVERMAN, JEFFREY

2 transactions

$13,200

AMBROSE, JOAN

1 transaction

$6,600

WEEKLEY, RICHARD

1 transaction

$6,600

REGIABA, ADAM

1 transaction

$6,600

VANDER SLOOT, FRANK

1 transaction

$6,600

VANDER SLOOT, BELINDA

1 transaction

$6,600

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

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

Rep. Bera, Ami [D-CA-6]

ID: B001287

Top Contributors

AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE

CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD

PACWASHINGTON, DC

$250

Nov 5, 2024

AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE

CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD

PACWASHINGTON, DC

$250

Oct 31, 2024

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$2,000

Jun 30, 2024

DOERR, JOHN L. III

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualSAN CARLOS, CA

$6,600

Sep 30, 2023

DOERR, JOHN L. III

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualSAN CARLOS, CA

$6,600

Sep 30, 2023

DOERR, JOHN L. III

IndividualSAN CARLOS, CA

$6,600

Sep 30, 2023

DOERR, JOHN L. III

IndividualSAN CARLOS, CA

$6,600

Sep 30, 2023

DOERR, ANN HOWLAND

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualSAN CARLOS, CA

$3,300

Sep 29, 2023

DOERR, ANN HOWLAND

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualSAN CARLOS, CA

$3,300

Sep 29, 2023

DOERR, JOHN L. III

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualSAN CARLOS, CA

$3,300

Sep 30, 2023

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

ID: M001199

Top Contributors

AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE PAC

PACWASHINGTON, DC

$5,500

Dec 31, 2023

WINRED

PACARLINGTON, VA

$1,000

Aug 14, 2024

AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE PAC

PACWASHINGTON, DC

$350

Aug 7, 2024

HART, NANCY MRS.

NONE • HOMEMAKER

IndividualPALM BEACH GARDENS, FL

$6,600

Feb 16, 2024

LIPSCHULTZ, MARC MR.

BLUE OWL CAPITAL • INVESTMENTS

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Mar 14, 2024

TAYLOR, MARGARETTA MISS

NONE • RETIRED

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Jun 12, 2023

LEVY, EDWARD JR.

EDW C LEVY CO • CHAIRMAN

IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI

$6,600

May 1, 2024

LEVY, EDWARD JR.

EDW C LEVY CO • CHAIRMAN

IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI

$6,600

Jul 25, 2024

PIKE, ROBERT

SELF EMPLOYED • TRANSPORTATION

IndividualBIRMINGHAM, AL

$6,534

Aug 2, 2023

BAKER, MAXINE

NONE • RETIRED

IndividualZANESVILLE, OH

$5,352

Jun 14, 2023

Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]

ID: H001058

Top Contributors

POKAGON BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS

OrganizationDOWAGIAC, MI

$3,300

Dec 11, 2023

THALOP LLC

OrganizationINDIANAPOLIS, IN

$1,000

Aug 29, 2024

BARREL DOG, LLC

OrganizationHOLLAND, MI

$1,000

Sep 1, 2024

NOAH HOMES LLC

OrganizationINDIANAPOLIS, IN

$1,000

Sep 30, 2024

THALOP LLC

OrganizationINDIANAPOLIS, IN

$1,000

Sep 30, 2024

B&B DAIRY

OrganizationPLAINVIEW, TX

$500

Jul 28, 2024

B&B DAIRY

OrganizationPLAINVIEW, TX

$500

Sep 5, 2024

STRAIGHT LINE RED ANGUS

OrganizationBANGOR, MI

$250

Jul 23, 2024

VAN ANDEL, AMY

THE STEVE AND AMY VAN ANDEL FOUNDATION • EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

IndividualADA, MI

$75,000

Mar 29, 2024

VAN ANDEL, STEPHEN

AMWAY • CHAIRMAN

IndividualADA, MI

$75,000

Mar 29, 2024

Rep. Olszewski, Johnny [D-MD-2]

ID: O000176

Top Contributors

CAPITOL STRATEGIES LLC

OrganizationANNAPOLIS, MD

$3,300

Aug 11, 2023

F L & M CORPORATION

OrganizationBALTIMORE, MD

$600

Jul 28, 2024

F L & M CORPORATION

OrganizationBALTIMORE, MD

$600

Jul 10, 2024

JONES JUNCTION, INC.

OrganizationBEL AIR, MD

$500

Mar 29, 2024

JONES JUNCTION, INC.

OrganizationBEL AIR, MD

$500

Mar 31, 2024

BURTON, ALICE L.

BURTON POLICY CONSULTING LLC • OTHER

IndividualOWINGS MILLS, MD

$4,000

Mar 19, 2024

BERNDT, RICHARD O.

GALLAGHER EVELIUS & JONES LLP • ATTORNEY

IndividualBALTIMORE, MD

$3,300

Sep 26, 2024

SIDH, SUSHANT

CAPITOL STRATEGIES • CONSULTING

IndividualANNAPOLIS, MD

$3,300

Aug 28, 2024

DAVIS, JAMES C

REDWOOD CAPITAL • ADMINISTRATION & MANAGEMENT

IndividualHANOVER, MD

$3,300

Jul 2, 2024

GILL, GARY T.

MACKENZIE VENTURES • CEO

IndividualLUTHERVILLE, MD

$3,300

Jul 30, 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. Wittman, Robert J. [R-VA-1]

ID: W000804

Top Contributors

THE CHICKASAW NATION

PACADA, OK

$3,300

Jun 17, 2024

THE CHICKASAW NATION

PACADA, OK

$3,300

Sep 30, 2024

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationDURANT, OK

$3,300

Dec 14, 2023

AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA

$3,300

Feb 8, 2024

KEHOE, MICHAEL PATRICK

IndividualRICHMOND, VA

$13,200

Jun 2, 2023

GIFFORD, BILLY

ALTRIA GROUP INC. • CEO

IndividualMIDLOTHIAN, VA

$6,600

Sep 26, 2023

PAYNE, DANIEL E.

PAYNE INC • CEO

IndividualFREDERICKSBURG, VA

$6,600

Nov 29, 2023

CASEY, ARTHUR S.

CASEY AUTO GROUP • PRESIDENT

IndividualNEWPORT NEWS, VA

$6,600

Mar 29, 2023

PAYNE, DANIEL E.

PAYNE INC • CEO

IndividualFREDERICKSBURG, VA

$6,600

Nov 29, 2023

KANTNER, CHRIS

UKROP'S FOOD GROUP • PRESIDENT

IndividualRICHMOND, VA

$6,600

Jan 12, 2024

Rep. Stanton, Greg [D-AZ-4]

ID: S001211

Top Contributors

AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ

$3,300

Mar 29, 2023

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$3,300

May 31, 2023

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$3,300

May 31, 2023

GILA RIVER INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationSACATON, AZ

$3,300

Oct 16, 2024

TOONO 0'ODHAM NATION

OrganizationSELLS, AZ

$3,300

Oct 22, 2024

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$2,000

Sep 25, 2023

SALT RIVER PIMA MARICOPA INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationSCOTTSDALE, AZ

$2,000

Jul 31, 2023

SALT RIVER PIMA MARICOPA INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationSCOTTSDALE, AZ

$1,700

May 29, 2024

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA

$1,500

May 19, 2023

ONEIDA NATION

OrganizationONEIDA, WI

$1,000

Jul 31, 2023

Rep. Lawler, Michael [R-NY-17]

ID: L000599

Top Contributors

MURTAGH, COSSU, VENDITTI & CASTRO-BLANCO, LLP

OrganizationWHITE PLAINS, NY

$1,000

Feb 24, 2024

BATMASIAN, JAMES

INVESTMENTS LIMITED • OWNER

IndividualBOCA RATON, FL

$6,600

Sep 27, 2023

BATMASIAN, JAMES

IndividualBOCA RATON, FL

$6,600

Sep 29, 2023

AUSTIN, ROBERT

UNAKA CO., INC. • BUSINESSMAN

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$6,600

Jul 18, 2024

SILVERMAN, JEFFREY

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualSURFSIDE, FL

$6,534

Feb 15, 2024

SILVERMAN, JEFFREY

IndividualSURFSIDE, FL

$6,534

Feb 22, 2024

SCALA, MARY ELLEN

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualPORT CHESTER, NY

$5,300

Aug 27, 2023

DEUTSCH, SHMULEY

SELF • PRESIDENT

IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY

$3,900

Jun 24, 2024

DEUTSCH, SHMULEY

IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY

$3,900

Jun 25, 2024

PERLMUTTER, RAFUEL

GOLDEN TASTE • CEO

IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY

$3,400

Jun 24, 2024

Rep. Panetta, Jimmy [D-CA-19]

ID: P000613

Top Contributors

ACROSS THE AISLE PAC

PACWASHINGTON, DC

$1,000

Jan 12, 2023

ACROSS THE AISLE PAC

PACWASHINGTON, DC

$500

Mar 23, 2023

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$3,300

Apr 12, 2023

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$3,300

Apr 12, 2023

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$3,300

Apr 12, 2023

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Oct 16, 2024

SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION

OrganizationEL CAJON, CA

$2,500

Nov 9, 2023

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$1,700

Apr 12, 2023

CROWN, LESTER

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$6,600

Aug 9, 2024

KIM, SOON

IndividualSANTA CRUZ, CA

$4,300

Sep 30, 2024

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

ID: T000468

Top Contributors

LAS VEGAS PAIUTE TRIBE

OrganizationLAS VEGAS, NV

$3,300

Dec 31, 2023

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA

$3,300

Feb 1, 2024

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA

$2,500

Jun 30, 2024

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA

$1,500

Jun 30, 2023

RENO-SPARKS INDIAN COLONY

OrganizationRENO, NV

$1,000

Jun 11, 2024

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$1,000

Sep 8, 2023

NET2LINK, LLC

OrganizationPEMBROKE PINES, FL

$250

Oct 23, 2024

CHANG, RONIE

GOLDEN REAL ESTATE & INVESTMENTS • REALTOR

IndividualLAS VEGAS, NV

$3,300

Nov 2, 2024

PRITZKER, JAY

STATE OF ILLINOIS • GOVERNOR

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$3,300

Oct 18, 2024

SCHMIDT, ERIC

HILLSPIRE LLC • MANAGER

IndividualPALO ALTO, CA

$3,300

Oct 23, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Kim, Young [R-CA-40]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 79 nodes and 45 connections (72 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $142,947

Top Donors - Rep. Kim, Young [R-CA-40]

Showing top 23 donors by contribution amount

15 Orgs8 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 helped.

+Pipelines & Energy Infrastructureconfidence 0.85
Title II authorizes Energy Security Compacts (Sec. 201) to enhance energy and economic security through diversification of critical mineral and energy supply chains, including infrastructure development for energy access and critical minerals mining/processing (Sec. 203(c)(2)(D)), benefiting energy infrastructure companies.
+Defense Contractorsconfidence 0.80
The bill emphasizes securing critical minerals for defense requirements (Findings (3), (4), (7); Purpose (1), (3), (6)) and includes the Department of Defense in the Energy Security Compacts Council (Sec. 204(b)(7)), indicating support for defense contractors reliant on critical minerals.
+Electric Utilitiesconfidence 0.75
Energy Security Compacts aim to increase reliable access to energy and electricity (Sec. 203(a)) and improve infrastructure for energy access (Sec. 203(c)(2)(A), (D)), which would benefit electric utilities through grid modernization and energy security initiatives.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Kim, Young [R-CA-40])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HELPS

Defense Contractors$1,228
from 40 contributions
- BANGERT, LOUIS$633
- PEDDIBHOTLA, SRIRAM$500
- DOUGLASS, JOHN$95
Electric Utilities$600
from 4 contributions
- REESE, GEORGE N.$600

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 Commerce

Very Strong

Vector: 65%

Pages: 702-704AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill directly advances Project 2025's goals of strategic decoupling from China, securing critical mineral supply chains, and supporting emerging technologies like rare earths and batteries through international partnerships and new diplomatic structures."

Key themes:strategic decoupling from Chinacritical mineral supply chainsemerging technologies (rare earths, batteries)energy securityinteragency coordination

— 670 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Strategic decoupling from China; l Defense industrial base strength; l Critical supply chains (e.g., pharmaceuticals, medical devices, food); and l Emerging technologies (e.g., rare earth minerals, semiconductors, batteries, artificial intelligence, quantum computing). Global Markets and the U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service. For more than a decade, strategic planning at Global Markets (GM) and the U.S. and For- eign Commercial Service (CS) has been consistently undermined by increased costs associated with overseas staff and flat or reduced budgets. The Trump Administration introduced crucial, long-overdue business practices such as the implementation of software to manage and track workflow, but a further strategic overhaul of resource allocation is needed to set GM and the CS on a firm footing. Currently, CS manages staff spread over 106 domestic offices in 77 countries around the world. Abroad, several “partner posts” utilize interagency staff and regionally located CS officials to offer services without a permanent physical in-country CS presence. Given the rapidly rising costs imposed by the State Depart- ment on CS posts overseas, a drastic expansion of this model is likely needed. CS resources should be distributed according to the following set of priorities: l Value in countering the malign influence of adversaries, particularly China; l Value in fostering U.S. innovation; l Value in maintaining access to critical supply chains and technology; l Difficulty for U.S. companies in gaining market access without CS involvement; and l Potential untapped export market size and likelihood of expansion. Ultimately, difficult decisions must be made about the value of CS posts and whether individual posts can be justified given current resources and the above criteria. If the State Department deems the diplomatic value of a permanent in-country CS post to be vital to the national interest, then State should bear more of the cost of maintaining that post. Global Markets should also consolidate and elevate the Advocacy Center and SelectUSA as relatively low-cost tools to drive large-scale export transactions — 671 — Department of Commerce and foreign direct investment (FDI). SelectUSA is a low-cost and effective tool in attracting FDI to the U.S. and to re-shore manufacturing and research and devel- opment. In a world in which corruption is rampant, these are among the most effective tools in leveling the playing field for U.S. communities and companies seeking to engage with governments and potential overseas investors. Given the value placed on senior-level engagement by many governments and companies, this consolidated Office of Trade and Investment Advocacy should be headed by a Deputy Assistant Secretary. The new office should also seek congres- sional authorization to utilize its FDI-promotion tools to encourage reshoring by U.S. businesses. BUREAU OF INDUSTRY AND SECURITY During the past two decades, technology transfer from America and its allies has helped accelerate adversaries’ technological and weapons capabilities. This tech- nology transfer on a massive scale has occurred because of adversaries’ exploitation of the U.S.’s open economy and education system through both commercial trans- actions and university and government research programs. Examples include the People’s Republic of China’s dramatic leaps forward in semiconductor design and fabrication, battery energy storage, nuclear weapons capabilities, artificial intel- ligence, space and aerospace engineering, and hypersonic weapons deployment. At the same time, the U.S. has systematically failed to protect critical assets. Rather than promulgate policies to better prevent technology transfer, the U.S. government has either ignored the problem or, worse, from 2008 through 2016 instituted a government-wide “Export Control Reform” process to loosen the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) governing exports of dual-use items to facilitate technology transfer to adversaries, either directly or indirectly through third-country transfers. Those reforms still present in the Department of Commerce’s EAR must be reversed. The United States needs stronger rules to protect technology transfer to adversaries while promoting technology integration and interoperability with allies. Further, U.S. export control regulations should be utilized to prevent theft of personally identifiable information and to encourage U.S. companies to shift production out of China and further diversify their supply chains to better advance U.S. national security interests. For all the below recommendations, BIS needs to move unilaterally while it works with allies to implement complementary export control policies. Waiting to act until allies are ready to move in lockstep is not an option while America’s national security is at risk. Emerging and Foundational Technologies. The Export Control Reform Act of 2018 (ECRA) gave BIS permanent statutory authority to regulate exports of dual-use items (goods, software, and technology). ECRA also mandated that BIS

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Very Strong

Vector: 65%

Pages: 401-403AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 7037 directly advances Project 2025's goal of establishing U.S. energy dominance through international partnerships, reducing reliance on strategic competitors, and creating new institutional mechanisms (e.g., Assistant Secretary for Energy Security and Diplomacy) to align diplomatic, development, and trade tools for energy security."

Key themes:energy securityreducing dependence on strategic competitorsinternational energy partnershipsU.S. energy dominanceinteragency coordination

— 369 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions private sector for government-favored resources. The DOE Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED); Office of State and Community Energy Programs; ARPA-E; Office of Grid Deployment (OGD); and DOE Loan Program should be eliminated or reformed. If they continue to exist, FECM, NE, OE, and EERE should focus on fundamental science and technology issues, particularly in relation to cyber and physical threats to energy security, rather than subsidizing and commercializing energy resources. l Eliminate political and climate-change interference in DOE approvals of liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. In addition, Congress should reform the Natural Gas Act8 to expand required approvals from merely nations with free trade agreements to all of our allies, such as NATO countries. l Focus the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) on ensuring that government buildings and operations have reliable and cost- effective energy. FEMP should stop using taxpayer dollars to force the purchase of more expensive and less reliable energy resources in the name of combating climate change. l Ensure that information provided by the U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA), a data and statistical organization, is data-neutral. l Focus FERC on its statutory obligation to ensure access to reliable energy at just, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory rates. FERC is a five-member commission created under the DOE Organization Act that regulates the wholesale sales and transmission of electricity, promotes electric reliability through standards, permits natural gas pipelines and LNG export facilities, sets natural gas pipeline shipping rates, and sets oil pipeline shipping rates. It is an economic regulator and should not make itself a climate regulator. l Streamline the nuclear regulatory requirements and licensing process. Such changes would help to lower costs and accelerate the development and deployment of civilian nuclear, such as advanced nuclear reactors (including small modular nuclear reactors). The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is commission tasked with the licensing of civilian nuclear reactors and power plants and regulating other uses of nuclear materials, such as nuclear medicine. Although it is not a DOE agency, its jurisdiction over nuclear reactor, fuel, safety, and trade issues often relates to or impinges on DOE’s jurisdiction. — 370 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Focus on energy and science issues, not politicized social programs. The next Administration should stop using energy policy to advance politicized social agendas. Programs that sound innocuous, such as “energy justice,”9 Justice40,10 and DEI,11 can be transformed to promote politicized agendas. DOE should focus on providing all Americans with access to abundant, affordable, reliable, and secure energy, and DOE should manage its employees so that everyone is treated fairly based on his or her talent, skills, and hard work. New Policies: International Energy Security To help the President and policymakers understand and apply U.S. energy inter- ests in international affairs more effectively, various DOE programs offices need to be reformed. l Promote American energy interests. The next Administration should make U.S. energy dominance a key component of its foreign policy while ensuring that domestic and international goals are aligned. American energy dominance will allow the United States to secure energy for its citizens, markets for its energy exports, and access to new energy natural resources and will provide tools for U.S. policymakers to assist our allies and deter our adversaries. DESAS should analyze U.S. international energy security interests and develop a National Energy Security Strategy (NESS). This strategy would take account of the energy landscape across the globe to inform the President in his foreign policy and defense roles, but it should not be a tool for U.S. industrial policy, although it might highlight how current domestic industrial and climate policies threaten U.S. energy and national security. l Strengthen the role of the new Department of Energy Security and Advanced Science. There are frequent turf battles on energy issues between the Department of State and DOE. Although the State Department clearly has the policymaking authority under the DOE Organization Act, it tends to ignore the expertise and perspectives that DOE provides. The existing Assistant Secretary for International Affairs should provide the principal support for the DOE Secretary and Deputy Secretary on National Security Council (NSC) activities and should interface with colleagues at the Departments of Defense, State, Treasury, and Commerce, as well as the Intelligence Community (IC). New Policies: Advanced Science To ensure that America continues to lead the world in fundamental science, the National Labs should be refocused, and national science policy should be reviewed and coordinated.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Strong

Vector: 66%

Pages: 443-445AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 7037 aligns strongly with Project 2025's focus on enhancing domestic energy security, reducing dependence on strategic competitors like China for critical minerals, and strengthening interagency coordination to secure energy supply chains—core themes in the Department of Energy section of Project 2025."

Key themes:energy securitycritical mineralssupply chain resiliencereducing China dependenceinteragency coordination

— 410 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise ENDNOTES 1. Sean Michael Kerner, “Colonial Pipeline Hack Explained: Everything You Need to Know,” TechTarget, April, 26, 2022, https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/feature/Colonial-Pipeline-hack-explained-Everything-you-need-to- know (accessed February 13, 2023). 2. Jacob Knutson, “N.C. Power Company: Substation Repairs Complete After Alleged Attack,” Axios, December 7, 2022, https://www.axios.com/2022/12/07/duke-energy-moore-county-substation-attack (accessed February 13, 2023). 3. H.R. 3684, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law No. 117-58, 117th Congress, November 15, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ58/PLAW-117publ58.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 4. H.R. 5376, Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117-169, August 16, 2022, https://www.congress. gov/117/plaws/publ169/PLAW-117publ169.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 5. S. 826, Department of Energy Organization Act, Public Law 95-91, 95th Congress, August 4, 1977, https://www. congress.gov/95/statute/STATUTE-91/STATUTE-91-Pg565.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 6. DOE also promotes domestic energy security by providing research and coordination between government and the private sector on physical and cyber-related threats to energy security. This work should continue and be enhanced under the next Administration. 7. Elimination of OE, NE, FE, and EERE might also be considered; however, there are benefits from having political appointees run separate offices. Specifically, separate program offices can focus on threats that are unique to their energy areas, and having political appointees run separate offices helps to ensure focused, unobstructed pursuit of policy objectives. 8. H.R. 6586, Natural Gas Act, Public Law No. 75-688, 75th Congress, June 21, 1938, https://govtrackus. s3.amazonaws.com/legislink/pdf/stat/52/STATUTE-52-Pg821a.pdf (accessed February 24, 2023). 9. U.S. Department of Energy, “Promoting Energy Justice,” https://www.energy.gov/promoting-energy-justice (accessed February 13, 2023). 10. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Economic Impact and Diversity, “Justice40 Initiative,” https://www. energy.gov/diversity/justice40-initiative (accessed February 13, 2023). 11. Press release, “DOE Releases First-Ever Plan to Advance Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility,” U.S. Department of Energy, September 1, 2022, https://www.energy.gov/articles/doe-releases-first-ever-plan- advance-diversity-equity-inclusion-and-accessibility (accessed February 14, 2023). 12. Including the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Science Foundation, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, etc. 13. Table, “Environmental Management: Lifecycle Cost by Project Baseline Summary (PBS) ($M),” in U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Volume 6, Environmental Management, April 2022, p. 53, https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/ files/2022-09/doe-fy2023-budget-volume-6-em-v3.pd (accessed February 13, 2023). 14. KPMG, “Independent Auditor’s Report, United States Department of Energy Nuclear Waste Fund Annual Financial Report as of and for the Years Ended September 30, 2022 and 2021,” November 8, 2022, p. 8, in U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Inspector General, Office of Cyber Assessments and Data Analytics, Audit Report: The Department of Energy Nuclear Waste Fund’s Fiscal Year 2022 Financial Statement Audit, DOE- OIG-23-05, November 2022, p. 10, https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/DOE-OIG-23-05.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 15. See Patty-Jane Geller, “U.S. Nuclear Weapons,” in 2023 Index of U.S. Military Strength, ed. Dakota L. Wood (Washington: The Heritage Foundation, 2023), pp. 481–506, http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2022/ Military_Index/2023_IndexOfUSMilitaryStrength.pdf. 16. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, March 2022, pp. 9, 21, 23, and 43, https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/ files/2022-03/doe-fy2023-budget-in-brief-v2.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 17. H.R. 4346, CHIPS and Science Act, Public Law No. 117-167, 117th Congress, August 9, 2022, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ167/PLAW-117publ167.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 18. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response, “About Us,” https://www.energy.gov/ceser/ceser-mission (accessed February 27, 2023). — 411 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions 19. President Donald J. Trump, Executive Order 13920, “Securing the United States Bulk-Power System,” May 1, 2020, in Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 86 (May 4, 2020), pp. 26595–26599, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/ pkg/FR-2020-05-04/pdf/2020-09695.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 20. 18 U.S. Code § 824a(c), https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/16/824a (accessed February 27, 2023). 21. Report No. 117-98, Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2022, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. House of Representatives, 117th Cong. 1st Sess., July 20, 2021, p. 6, https:// www.congress.gov/117/crpt/hrpt98/CRPT-117hrpt98.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 22. H.R. 3684, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law No. 11-58, 117th Congress, November 15, 2021, Division J, Title III. 23. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, p. 7. 24. Timothy Gardner, “White House Asks Congress for $500 mln to Modernize Oil Reserve,” Reuters, November 16, 2022, https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-oil-spr-idAFL1N32C36I (accessed February 13, 2023). 25. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Electricity, “Our History,” https://www.energy.gov/oe/about-us/our- history (accessed February 13, 2023). 26. Press release, “Secretary of Energy Signs Order to Mitigate Security Risks to the Nation’s Electric Grid,” U.S. Department of Energy, December 17, 2021, https://www.energy.gov/articles/secretary-energy-signs-order- mitigate-security-risks-nations-electric-grid (accessed February 13, 2023). 27. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Electricity, “Revocation of Prohibition Order Securing Critical Defense Facilities,” Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 76 (April 22, 2021), pp. 21308–21309, https://www.govinfo.gov/ content/pkg/FR-2021-04-22/pdf/2021-08483.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 28. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 19 and 61. 29. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy, “About Us,” https://www.energy.gov/ne/about-us (accessed February 13, 2023). 30. H.R. 3809, Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Public Law No. 97-425, 97th Congress, January 7, 1983, https:// www.congress.gov/97/statute/STATUTE-96/STATUTE-96-Pg2201.pdf (accessed February 24, 2023). 31. The Heritage Foundation, “Budget Blueprint for Fiscal Year 2023: Reduce the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy,” https://www.heritage.org/budget/pages/recommendations/1.270.127.html. 32. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 23 and 58. 33. 42 USC § 16291, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/16291 (accessed February 27, 2023). 34. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, “About Us: Mission,” https:// www.energy.gov/fecm/mission (accessed February 13, 2023). 35. U.S. Government Accountability Office, Carbon Capture and Storage: Actions Needed to Improve DOE Management of Demonstration Projects, GAO-22-105111, December2021, https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22- 105111.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 36. International Energy Agency, The Role of Critical Minerals in Clean Energy Transitions, World Energy Outlook Special Report, revised March 2022, https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/ffd2a83b-8c30-4e9d-980a- 52b6d9a86fdc/TheRoleofCriticalMineralsinCleanEnergyTransitions.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 37. See 42 U.S. Code § 16291. 38. 42 U.S. Code Ch. 55, §§ 4321–4347, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/chapter-55 (accessed February 27, 2023). 39. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, “Categorical Exclusions from Environmental Review,” Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Request for Comment, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 87 (May 7, 2021), pp. 24514–24516, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-05-07/pdf/2021-09675.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023), and Nuclear Regulatory Commission, “Categorical Exclusions from Environmental Review,” Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Reopening of Comment Period, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 160 (August 23, 2021), pp. 47032–47033, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-08-23/pdf/2021-18058.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023). 40. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 19, 21, 23, and 52.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Strong

Vector: 65%

Pages: 443-445AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 7037 aligns strongly with Project 2025's emphasis on enhancing domestic energy security, reducing dependence on strategic competitors like China, and strengthening interagency coordination to secure critical mineral supply chains—core objectives outlined in the Department of Energy section of Mandate for Leadership."

Key themes:energy securitycritical mineralssupply chain resilienceinteragency coordinationreducing China dependence

Department of Education

Strong

Vector: 65%

Pages: 395-397AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill’s focus on securing critical mineral supplies, reducing dependence on strategic competitors like China, and strengthening U.S. energy and mineral security directly supports the Project 2025 goal of American energy dominance and national security through an all‑of‑the‑above approach."

Key themes:energy securityreducing dependence on Chinacritical minerals supply chaindomestic manufacturing/technology leadershipnational security

— 363 — 12 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND RELATED COMMISSIONS Bernard L. McNamee AMERICAN ENERGY AND SCIENCE DOMINANCE The next conservative Administration should prioritize energy and science dominance to ensure that Americans have abundant, affordable, and reliable energy; create good-paying jobs; support domestic manufacturing and technology leadership; and strengthen national security. Achieving these goals will require bold policy action and reforms that involve the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE); the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC); and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). American Energy Dominance. Access to affordable, reliable, and abundant energy is vital to America’s economy, national security, and quality of life. Yet ideologically driven government policies have thrust the United States into a new energy crisis just a few short years after America’s energy renaissance, which began in the first decade of the 2000s, transformed the United States from a net energy importer (oil and natural gas) to energy independence and then energy dominance. Americans now face energy scarcity, an electric grid that is less reliable, and arti- ficial shortages of natural gas and oil despite massive reserves within the United States—all of which has led to higher prices that burden both the American people and the economy. The new energy crisis is caused not by a lack of resources, but by extreme “green” policies. Under the rubrics of “combating climate change” and “ESG” (environmen- tal, social, and governance), the Biden Administration, Congress, and various states, as well as Wall Street investors, international corporations, and progressive spe- cial-interest groups, are changing America’s energy landscape. These ideologically — 364 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise driven policies are also directing huge amounts of money to favored interests and making America dependent on adversaries like China for energy. In the name of combating climate change, policies have been used to create an artificial energy scarcity that will require trillions of dollars in new investment, supported with taxpayer subsidies, to address a “problem” that government and special interests themselves created. The result has been increased energy costs that: l Hurt individuals and families, especially low-income Americans and seniors on fixed incomes; l Make businesses that create the jobs that drive our economy and quality of life less competitive; and l Make America less energy secure. Moreover, increased energy scarcity will allow government, either directly or through access to banks and Wall Street investors, to decide who is “worthy” to receive funding for energy projects. In the end, government control of energy is control of people and the economy. This is one reason why the trend toward nationalization of our energy industry through government mandates, bans on the production and use of oil and natural gas, and nationalization of the electric grid is so dangerous. At the same time, adversaries like China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, and non-state actors are constantly engaged in cyberattacks against our energy infra- structure. We have already seen what supposedly “minor” attacks, such as the cyberattack on the Colonial Oil Pipeline1 or the physical attack on electric infra- structure in North Carolina,2 can do. A coordinated cyber and physical attack on natural gas pipelines and the electric grid during an extended cold spell could be catastrophic. Yet the current Administration’s first concern is plowing taxpayer dollars into intermittent wind and solar projects and ending the use of reliable fossil fuels. A conservative President must be committed to unleashing all of America’s energy resources and making the energy economy serve the American people, not special interests. This means that the next conservative Administration should: l Promote American energy security by ensuring access to abundant, reliable, and affordable energy. l Affirm an “all of the above” energy policy through which the best attributes of every resource can be harnessed for the benefit of the American people.

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. Kim, Young

Taiwan Non-Discrimination Act of 2025

119/hr/910

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 340 East 1st Street in Tustin, California, as the "Ursula Ellen Kennedy Post Office Building".

119/hr/3350

STOP Payments Fraud Act of 2026

119/hr/9331

Back to All Bills