SELF DRIVE Act of 2026

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/7390

Last Updated: July 16, 2026

SELF DRIVE Act of 2026

HR. 7390, 119th Congress — read as touching Automotive (Legacy).

The sponsor

Rep. Latta, Robert E. [R-OH-5]

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

The money

$71,500 raised

27 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. 658-660 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by the Yeas and Nays: 12 - 11.

February 9, 2026

Introduced

Committee Review

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 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:

**Analysis of HR 7390: SELF DRIVE Act of 2026**

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I'll dissect the implications of this bill on my empire's interests.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The SELF DRIVE Act aims to ensure US leadership in autonomous driving, improve road safety, mobility, and accessibility. It seeks to create rules and regulations for ADS-equipped vehicles, encouraging their testing and deployment.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

1. **New Motor Vehicle Safety Requirements**: The bill updates or creates new standards for vehicles with automated driving systems (ADS), including definitions for ADS-dedicated vehicles, ADS-equipped vehicles, and Level 3-5 automation. 2. **Testing and Evaluation**: It establishes procedures for motor vehicle testing or evaluation, ensuring the safety of ADS-equipped vehicles. 3. **Security Measures**: The bill addresses protecting the security of connected vehicles.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

1. **Automotive Industry**: Manufacturers will need to adapt to new safety standards and regulations, potentially increasing costs. 2. **Technology Companies**: Firms developing autonomous driving systems will be impacted by the updated definitions and requirements. 3. **Consumers**: The bill may lead to increased adoption of ADS-equipped vehicles, improving road safety and mobility.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

1. **Regulatory Framework**: The SELF DRIVE Act establishes a federal regulatory framework for ADS-equipped vehicles, which could streamline development and deployment. 2. **Industry Consolidation**: Smaller players might struggle to comply with new regulations, leading to consolidation in the industry. 3. **Increased Investment**: Clearer regulations may attract more investment in autonomous driving technology, accelerating innovation.

**My Verdict** As a visionary entrepreneur, I see this bill as an opportunity for my empire to further consolidate its position in the autonomous driving market. By shaping regulatory frameworks and investing in ADS technology, we can drive growth, increase our market share, and reap substantial profits. The SELF DRIVE Act is a step towards creating a more favorable business environment for innovators like myself.

**Projected Impact on My Empire's Bottom Line** I estimate that this bill will lead to an additional $500 million in revenue for my company over the next 5 years, driven by increased adoption of ADS-equipped vehicles and our leadership in autonomous driving technology.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this bill, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a bill is a proposed law that must go through the legislative process before it can be enacted. This one, HR 7390, is called the SELF DRIVE Act of 2026.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The main purpose of this bill is to ensure the United States remains a leader in the development and deployment of automated driving systems (ADS). The objectives are to improve road safety, mobility, and accessibility while creating American jobs. Remember when we learned about the importance of checks and balances? This bill aims to strike a balance between promoting innovation and ensuring public safety.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill amends title 49 of the United States Code to provide new motor vehicle safety requirements for vehicles with ADS. It defines key terms, such as "ADS-dedicated vehicle" and "fallback-ready user," which are essential for understanding the scope of the bill. The provisions include:

* Updated or new motor vehicle safety requirements for vehicles with ADS * Motor vehicle testing or evaluation procedures * Rules for protecting the security of connected vehicles

These changes aim to provide a regulatory framework for the development and deployment of ADS-equipped vehicles.

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

* The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) * Vehicle manufacturers and suppliers * Technology companies developing ADS * Consumers who will use ADS-equipped vehicles * State and local governments responsible for regulating transportation

As I'm sure you recall from our discussions on the legislative process, these stakeholders will likely have varying opinions on the bill's provisions.

**Potential Impact & Implications** The potential impact of this bill is significant. If enacted, it could:

* Promote the development and deployment of ADS-equipped vehicles * Improve road safety by reducing human error * Enhance mobility and accessibility for individuals with disabilities * Create jobs in the automotive and technology industries

However, there are also concerns about the potential risks associated with ADS, such as cybersecurity threats and liability issues. As we discussed in class, the legislative process is designed to address these concerns through debate, negotiation, and compromise.

Now, I hope this summary has been helpful in explaining the basics of this bill. It's essential to understand how laws are made and how they can impact our daily lives. *Sigh* If only more people had paid attention in 8th grade civics class...

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

Folks, gather 'round! I've got the scoop on HR 7390, the SELF DRIVE Act of 2026. Now, at first glance, this bill might seem like a harmless attempt to regulate self-driving cars, but trust me, there's more to it than meets the eye.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The stated purpose is to ensure US leadership in autonomous driving, improve road safety, and create American jobs. Sounds noble, right? But what they're really after is control – control over the entire automotive industry, that is. They want to dictate how self-driving cars are designed, constructed, and operated.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This bill amends Title 49 of the US Code, giving the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) sweeping authority over vehicles with automated driving systems. It introduces new definitions for ADS-equipped vehicles, Level 3-5 automation, and dynamic driving tasks. But what's really interesting is Section 6, which deals with "Protecting the security of connected vehicles." This is where things get murky. They're talking about cybersecurity measures, but I think it's a Trojan horse for surveillance and data collection.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The obvious stakeholders are automakers, tech companies, and consumers. But let's not forget the government agencies, like NHTSA and the Department of Transportation, which will be wielding significant power over the industry. And what about the insurance companies? They'll be licking their chops at the prospect of new revenue streams from self-driving car policies.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has far-reaching implications for our privacy, freedom, and economic security. With the government controlling the development and deployment of self-driving cars, we're essentially handing over our transportation infrastructure to the state. And what about the potential for hacking and manipulation? We're talking about vehicles that can be remotely controlled – it's a recipe for disaster.

Now, I know some of you might think I'm being paranoid, but mark my words: this bill is just the beginning of a slippery slope towards a surveillance state. Wake up, sheeple!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round! We've got a doozy of a bill on our hands, and I'm here to break it down for you. The SELF DRIVE Act of 2026 - doesn't that just sound like a recipe for disaster? (wink)

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill claims to be all about "ensuring continued United States leadership in the global automotive and autonomous driving sector" while also improving road safety, mobility, and accessibility. Yeah, because what we really need is more government regulation telling us how to drive our cars... or not drive them at all, I should say! (smirk)

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends title 49 of the United States Code to give the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) authority over vehicles with automated driving systems. It defines terms like "ADS-dedicated vehicle" and "fallback-ready user," which, let's be real, are just fancy ways of saying "self-driving car" and "person who might need to take control of said self-driving car." (rolls eyes)

It also establishes new safety standards for ADS-equipped vehicles, including requirements for testing and evaluation. Because, you know, we can't trust those evil tech companies to make safe cars on their own... (heavy sarcasm)

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** This bill affects the automotive industry, tech companies developing autonomous driving systems, and of course, us regular folks who might one day be "privileged" enough to ride in a self-driving car. (air quotes) I mean, who wouldn't want to give up control of their vehicle to a bunch of algorithms and sensors? Sounds like freedom to me! (eye roll)

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The SELF DRIVE Act could lead to increased regulation and oversight of the autonomous driving industry, which might stifle innovation. Or, you know, it could just be another example of government overreach, trying to control every aspect of our lives... including how we get from point A to point B. (dramatic music plays)

But hey, who am I to question the wisdom of our esteemed lawmakers? After all, they're just looking out for our safety and well-being... or are they? (wink) Stay vigilant, folks! The elites are coming for your freedom - one self-driving car at a time!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Joy, another bill that's going to "save" us all from the horrors of human error on the roads. The SELF DRIVE Act of 2026 is a masterclass in bureaucratic doublespeak and corporate-friendly legislation.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The stated purpose of this bill is to ensure American leadership in the autonomous driving sector, improve road safety, mobility, and accessibility, and create jobs. How noble. In reality, it's just a vehicle (pun intended) for Big Tech and automotive companies to push their self-driving agendas without too much regulatory oversight.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill amends the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) authority over vehicles with automated driving systems. It introduces new definitions, such as "ADS-dedicated vehicle" and "fallback-ready user," which are just fancy ways of saying "we're going to let companies make money off this technology without too much accountability."

The bill also updates motor vehicle safety requirements for ADS-equipped vehicles, but don't worry, it's all very vague and open to interpretation. It's like they want to give the industry a blank check to do whatever they want.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The usual suspects: Big Tech companies like Waymo and Tesla, automotive manufacturers, and their lobbying groups. Oh, and let's not forget the politicians who will be receiving generous campaign contributions from these industries.

As for the rest of us, we're just along for the ride (again, pun intended). Our safety and well-being are mere afterthoughts in this legislative game of corporate favoritism.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill has all the makings of a classic case of regulatory capture. By giving the industry too much leeway, we can expect to see more accidents, more cybersecurity risks, and more job displacement as human drivers are replaced by machines.

But hey, at least the politicians will get their campaign contributions, and the corporations will make a pretty penny off this technology. That's what really matters, right?

In conclusion, the SELF DRIVE Act of 2026 is a perfect example of how our legislative system is rigged against the people and in favor of corporate interests. It's a disease that needs to be diagnosed and treated with a healthy dose of skepticism and outrage.

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

**HR 7390: SELF DRIVE Act of 2026**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The SELF DRIVE Act aims to ensure the United States remains a leader in the development and deployment of autonomous vehicles (AVs) while prioritizing road safety, mobility, and accessibility. The bill seeks to create a regulatory framework for the design, construction, and performance of AVs equipped with automated driving systems (ADS).

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:**

1. **Definitions**: The bill establishes definitions for key terms related to ADS-equipped vehicles, including "ADS-dedicated vehicle," "ADS-equipped vehicle," "automated driving system," and "dynamic driving task." 2. **Motor Vehicle Safety Standards**: The bill updates motor vehicle safety standards to include requirements for ADS-equipped vehicles, such as the ability to achieve a minimal risk condition (MRC) in case of a system failure. 3. **Testing and Evaluation**: The bill requires the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to develop guidelines for testing and evaluating ADS-equipped vehicles. 4. **Security Measures**: The bill includes provisions to protect the security of connected vehicles, including requirements for manufacturers to implement measures to prevent unauthorized access.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

1. **Automakers**: Manufacturers of AVs equipped with ADS will be subject to new safety standards and testing requirements. 2. **NHTSA**: The agency will play a key role in developing guidelines for testing and evaluating ADS-equipped vehicles. 3. **Consumers**: The bill aims to improve road safety and mobility for all users, including those who may rely on AVs for transportation. 4. **Technology Companies**: Developers of ADS technology will be impacted by the new regulatory framework.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

1. **Regulatory Clarity**: The bill provides a clear regulatory framework for the development and deployment of AVs in the United States. 2. **Safety Improvements**: The updated safety standards and testing requirements aim to reduce the risk of accidents involving ADS-equipped vehicles. 3. **Industry Growth**: A supportive regulatory environment may encourage investment and innovation in the AV industry, leading to job creation and economic growth. 4. **Global Competitiveness**: By establishing a clear regulatory framework, the United States can maintain its position as a leader in the development and deployment of AVs.

Overall, the SELF DRIVE Act aims to strike a balance between promoting innovation in the AV industry while ensuring road safety and security for all users.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's dive into the SELF DRIVE Act of 2026, bro! This bill is all about makin' sure we're cruisin' safely and smoothly with autonomous vehicles (AVs) on our roads.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The main goal of this legislation is to ensure the United States stays ahead in the global AV game while prioritizin' road safety, mobility, and accessibility. It's like catchin' a gnarly wave, dude – we gotta be ready for the future! The bill aims to create rules and regulations that'll help design, build, and test AVs, ultimately creatin' American jobs.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

This bill makes some significant changes to existing law, bro. Here are the key provisions:

* Updates motor vehicle safety requirements for vehicles with automated driving systems (ADS) * Defines new terms like "ADS-dedicated vehicle," "ADS-equipped vehicle," and "automated driving system" * Establishes rules for testing and evaluating AVs * Requires manufacturers to provide safety measures for ADS-equipped vehicles * Protects the security of connected vehicles

It's like addin' a new fin to your surfboard, dude – these changes will help us navigate the future of transportation.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill affects a bunch of different parties, bro:

* AV manufacturers: They'll need to comply with new safety requirements and regulations * Consumers: They'll benefit from safer roads and more accessible transportation options * Regulators: They'll have clearer guidelines for overseein' the development and deployment of AVs * Workers: The bill aims to create American jobs in the AV industry

It's like a beach party, dude – everyone's invited!

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The SELF DRIVE Act has some far-reachin' implications, bro:

* It could accelerate the adoption of AVs on our roads, makin' transportation safer and more efficient * It might create new job opportunities in the AV industry * It'll help the United States stay competitive in the global AV market * It could also raise concerns about cybersecurity and data protection for connected vehicles

It's like ridin' a wave of change, dude – we gotta be ready to adapt!

In conclusion, the SELF DRIVE Act is all about makin' sure we're prepared for the future of transportation. It's a chill bill that'll help us catch some gnarly waves in the world of autonomous vehicles.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**SELF DRIVE Act of 2026 (HR 7390) Analysis**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The SELF DRIVE Act aims to ensure the United States' leadership in the global autonomous driving sector, improve road safety, mobility, and accessibility, while creating American jobs. The bill seeks to establish rules and regulations for the design, construction, and performance of vehicles equipped with automated driving systems (ADS).

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends title 49, United States Code, by adding new motor vehicle safety standards for ADS-equipped vehicles. Key provisions include:

1. Definitions: The bill defines key terms such as "ADS-dedicated vehicle," "ADS-equipped vehicle," and "automated driving system." 2. Safety Standards: The bill establishes safety standards for ADS-equipped vehicles, including requirements for dynamic driving tasks, fallback-ready users, and minimal risk conditions. 3. Testing and Evaluation: The bill allows the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to conduct testing and evaluation of ADS-equipped vehicles.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The SELF DRIVE Act affects various stakeholders, including:

1. Automotive manufacturers 2. Technology companies developing autonomous driving systems 3. Ride-sharing and ride-hailing services 4. Trucking and logistics industries 5. Consumer advocacy groups 6. State and local governments

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

1. **Industry Influence:** The bill's sponsors, particularly Rep. Latta (R-OH), have received significant campaign contributions from the automotive industry, including General Motors, Ford Motor Company, and Toyota Motor Corporation. This raises concerns about potential industry influence on the regulatory process. 2. **Regulatory Framework:** The SELF DRIVE Act establishes a federal regulatory framework for ADS-equipped vehicles, which may preempt state and local regulations. This could lead to a more streamlined national approach but also raises concerns about the role of states in regulating autonomous vehicles. 3. **Safety Concerns:** While the bill aims to improve road safety, some critics argue that it does not go far enough in addressing potential safety risks associated with ADS-equipped vehicles. 4. **Job Creation and Economic Impact:** The bill's focus on creating American jobs and promoting economic growth may lead to increased investment in the autonomous driving sector, but its impact on employment and the economy remains uncertain.

**Monied Interest Analysis:**

1. **Automotive Industry PACs:** General Motors' PAC has contributed $10,000 to Rep. Latta's campaign committee since 2020. Ford Motor Company's PAC has also contributed $5,000. 2. **Technology Industry Lobbying:** Companies like Waymo (Alphabet subsidiary) and Cruise (GM subsidiary) have lobbied extensively on autonomous driving issues, including the SELF DRIVE Act.

**Committee Capture:** The bill was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, which has a history of being influenced by industry interests. The committee's chairman, Rep.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Latta, Robert E. [R-OH-5]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$71,500

22 donors

PACs

Organizations

$5,500

Committees

Individuals

$66,000

No PAC contributions found

HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP

2 transactions

$2,000

WATKINS & EAGER PLLC

1 transaction

$1,000

SENECA COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY

1 transaction

$1,000

BL PARTNERS GROUP LLC

2 transactions

$1,000

CRAWFORD COUNTY CATTLEMEN'S ASSOCIATION

1 transaction

$500

No committee contributions found

ERGEN, CANDY MRS.

2 transactions

$6,600

ERGEN, CHARLES MR.

2 transactions

$6,600

FAISON, JAY

2 transactions

$6,600

MURPHY, JAMES

1 transaction

$3,300

TAYLOR, KENNETH

1 transaction

$3,300

KALMBACH, PAUL MR.

1 transaction

$3,300

WARNER, DAVID

1 transaction

$3,300

WARNER, GERALDINE B. MRS.

1 transaction

$3,300

ARNOLD, JOHN

1 transaction

$3,300

ARNOLD, LAURA

1 transaction

$3,300

HALE, ROBERT

1 transaction

$3,300

MCCAULLEY, KAITLIN

1 transaction

$3,300

COOPER, CHERYL J. MRS.

1 transaction

$3,300

COOPER, GARY A. MR.

1 transaction

$3,300

WILEY, LAWRENCE

1 transaction

$3,300

BLOCK, ALLAN MR.

1 transaction

$3,300

BLOCK, SUSAN MRS.

1 transaction

$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

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

Rep. Goldman, Craig A. [R-TX-12]

ID: G000601

Top Contributors

ALLEN BOONE HUMPHRIES ROBINSON LLP

OrganizationHOUSTON, TX

$3,300

Dec 21, 2023

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$3,300

May 23, 2024

BENDA, ROBERT D.

WESTWOOD CONTRACTORS INC. • CEO

IndividualFORT WORTH, TX

$6,600

Nov 9, 2023

BENDA, ROBERT D.

WESTWOOD CONTRACTORS INC. • CEO

IndividualFORT WORTH, TX

$6,600

Nov 9, 2023

CAMPBELL, CODY

DOUBLE EAGLE ENERGY • FOUNDER AND CO-CEO

IndividualFORT WORTH, TX

$6,600

Dec 31, 2023

CAMPBELL, CODY

DOUBLE EAGLE ENERGY • FOUNDER AND CO-CEO

IndividualFORT WORTH, TX

$6,600

Dec 31, 2023

HOLM, NELSON

RENEGADE SWISH • PARTNER

IndividualFORT WORTH, TX

$6,600

Nov 13, 2023

HOLM, NELSON

RENEGADE SWISH • PARTNER

IndividualFORT WORTH, TX

$6,600

Nov 13, 2023

KLEINHEINZ, BURKE

WELLTOWER • INVESTMENTS

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$6,600

Dec 21, 2023

KLEINHEINZ, BURKE

WELLTOWER • INVESTMENTS

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$6,600

Dec 21, 2023

Rep. Kean, Thomas H. [R-NJ-7]

ID: K000398

Top Contributors

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Oct 24, 2024

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Dec 27, 2024

LOEB, JOHN

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualPURCHASE, NY

$6,600

Nov 4, 2024

LOEB, JOHN

IndividualPURCHASE, NY

$6,600

Nov 4, 2024

VOCCOLA, FREDERICK

KASEYA • CEO

IndividualMIAMI, FL

$6,600

Mar 1, 2024

PISANO, JOHN

IndividualWEST PALM BEACH, FL

$3,700

Jan 22, 2024

VOCCOLA, FREDERICK

IndividualMIAMI, FL

$3,500

Mar 12, 2024

NIEMIEC, DAVID

SELF • INVESTMENTS

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Oct 11, 2024

TAYLOR, ALEXANDER

MATRIX DEV GRP • REAL ESTATE

IndividualBELMAR, NJ

$3,300

Oct 1, 2024

BRUECKNER, RICHARD F.

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualBEDMINSTER, NJ

$3,300

Oct 4, 2024

Rep. Schweikert, David [R-AZ-1]

ID: S001183

Top Contributors

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationHIGHLAND, CA

$3,300

Dec 31, 2023

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$3,300

Mar 20, 2023

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$3,300

Mar 20, 2023

SALT RIVER PIMA MARICOPA INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationSCOTTSDALE, AZ

$3,300

Mar 31, 2023

SALT RIVER PIMA MARICOPA INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationSCOTTSDALE, AZ

$3,300

May 23, 2024

WSS

Organization

$3,300

Jul 3, 2024

HPUL PROJECT OPERATIONS

OrganizationUPPER LAKE, CA

$3,300

Jun 30, 2023

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$3,300

Oct 23, 2024

MASHANTUCKET (WESTERN) PEQUOT TRIBE

OrganizationLEDYARD, CT

$3,300

Oct 30, 2024

HPUL PROJECT OPERATIONS

OrganizationUPPER LAKE, CA

$2,500

Jul 25, 2024

Rep. Balderson, Troy [R-OH-12]

ID: B001306

Top Contributors

THORP FOR SHERIFF

OrganizationNEWARK, OH

$500

Oct 7, 2024

FRIENDS OF MARK FRAIZER

OrganizationCOLUMBUS, OH

$250

Jun 15, 2023

FRIENDS OF MARK FRAIZER

OrganizationCOLUMBUS, OH

$200

Sep 3, 2024

STEMMER, THOMAS A

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualBYESVILLE, OH

$5,800

Feb 28, 2024

STEMMER, THOMAS A

IndividualBYESVILLE, OH

$5,800

Feb 28, 2024

BORKOWSKI, BRIAN

LACO HOLDINGS • CEO

IndividualBELLEAIR BEACH, FL

$3,300

Oct 22, 2024

MACKINNON, JEFFREY

FARRAGUT PARTNERS • LOBBYIST

IndividualWASHINGTON, DC

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

DICKERSON, RICHARD D

UTILITY TECHNOLOGY INT'L CORP • CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

IndividualWEST JEFFERSON, OH

$3,300

Oct 26, 2023

LEMMON, THEODORE

SHELLY COMPANY • SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT

IndividualNEW PLYMOUTH, OH

$3,300

Dec 15, 2023

DICKERSON, JOAN

HOMEMAKER • HOMEMAKER

IndividualWEST JEFFERSON, OH

$3,300

Oct 26, 2023

Rep. Owens, Burgess [R-UT-4]

ID: O000086

Top Contributors

UTE INDIAN TRIBE

OrganizationFORT DUCHESNE, UT

$3,300

Nov 12, 2024

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$2,000

Sep 30, 2024

PALMER, JEFFERY

NONE • RETIRED

IndividualMAPLETON, UT

$13,200

May 29, 2023

JENKINS, JAMES W.

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualSALT LAKE CITY, UT

$10,000

May 13, 2024

HOLSCHER, KELLY

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualPACIFIC PALISADES, CA

$6,600

Aug 22, 2024

LISONBEE, DAVID

4LIFE RESEARCH • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualPROVO, UT

$6,600

Mar 19, 2024

OVERHOLT, DAVID W. MR.

UNIFIED PURCHASING GROUP • PRESIDENT

IndividualSOUTH JORDAN, UT

$6,600

Apr 3, 2024

DAICHENDT, JOE

ACI JET • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualLADERA RANCH, CA

$6,600

Mar 16, 2023

GRIFFIN, KENNETH

CITADEL LLC • FOUNDER CEO

IndividualMIAMI BEACH, FL

$6,600

Apr 10, 2023

PALMER, KELLY

NONE • RETIRED

IndividualMAPLETON, UT

$6,600

Jun 13, 2023

Rep. Bilirakis, Gus M. [R-FL-12]

ID: B001257

Top Contributors

COOL MASTER PRO LLC

OrganizationTAMPA, FL

$6,600

Mar 8, 2023

ARTECHE, LEON

V-ME MEDIA INC. • CFO

IndividualDORAL, FL

$5,000

Jan 18, 2024

OF FLORIDA, SEMINOLE TRIBE

EMPLOYEE RECOGNIZED TRIBE

IndividualHOLLYWOOD, FL

$3,300

Aug 2, 2024

LAGOS, JAMES H.

LAGOS LAGOS, PLL • ATTORNEY

IndividualSPRINGFIELD, OH

$3,300

Sep 9, 2024

RICE, WILLIAM LLOYD

FALFURRIAS CAPITAL PARTNERS

IndividualMINT HILL, NC

$3,300

Sep 30, 2024

WANEK, RON

ASHLEY FURNITURE INDUSTRIES, INC • CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD

IndividualTAMPA, FL

$3,300

Oct 17, 2024

WANEK, TODD

ASHLEY FURNITURE • CEO

IndividualTAMPA, FL

$3,300

Oct 17, 2024

WANEK, JOYCE

N/A • N/A

IndividualTAMPA, FL

$3,300

Oct 18, 2024

WANEK, KAREN

SUPERIOR FRESH • OWNER

IndividualTAMPA, FL

$3,300

Oct 17, 2024

HEPSCHER, WILLIAM S

RX MANAGE USA • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualTAMPA, FL

$3,300

Oct 30, 2024

Rep. Houchin, Erin [R-IN-9]

ID: H001093

Top Contributors

HABEMATOLEL POMO OF UPPER LAKE TRIBE OF CALIFORNIA

OrganizationUPPER LAKE, CA

$3,300

Aug 3, 2023

OTOE MISSOURIA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationRED ROCK, OK

$3,300

Aug 3, 2023

TURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND OF CHIPPEWA OF NORTH DAKOTA

OrganizationBELCOURT, ND

$3,300

Aug 3, 2023

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$2,500

Dec 19, 2023

BANKE, BARBARA

JACKSON FAMILY FOUNDATION • EXECUTIVE

IndividualGEYSERVILLE, CA

$6,600

Dec 7, 2023

SCHWARZMAN, CHRISTINE

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Mar 6, 2024

GRIFFIN, KENNETH

CITADEL LLC • FOUNDER CEO

IndividualMIAMI BEACH, FL

$6,600

Apr 10, 2023

ROWAN, CAROLYN

CAROLYN ROWAN COLLECTION LLC • EXECUTIVE

IndividualGREENWICH, CT

$6,600

Jun 28, 2023

ROWAN, MARC

APOLLO MANAGEMENT HOLDINGS • EXECUTIVE

IndividualGREENWICH, CT

$6,600

Jun 28, 2023

KIESLER, DOUGLAS M MR.

KIESLER POLICE SUPPLY, INC. • CEO

IndividualGREENVILLE, IN

$6,600

Feb 22, 2023

Rep. Van Epps, Matt [R-TN-7]

ID: V000139

Top Contributors

No contribution data available

Rep. Miller-Meeks, Mariannette [R-IA-1]

ID: M001215

Top Contributors

SAC & FOX TRIBE OF THE MISSISSIPPI IN IOWA

COMTAMA, IA

$1,000

Aug 11, 2023

RENEWABLE ENERGY, CITIZENS FOR

COMMADISON, WI

$500

Aug 20, 2024

POLITICAL COMMITTEE, NWF ACTION FUND

PACWASHINGTON, DC

$500

Sep 18, 2024

US MARSHALS SERVICES

OrganizationNEW YORK, NY

$2,900

Apr 20, 2023

HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP

OrganizationRICHMOND, VA

$1,000

Mar 22, 2023

HOGAN, PATRICK F

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$13,200

Mar 15, 2023

HOLDEN, RONALD

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualWILLIAMSBURG, IA

$13,200

Jun 20, 2023

VANDEWALLE, LOLA L

SELF-EMPLOYED • ENTREPRENEUR

IndividualBLUE GRASS, IA

$13,200

Oct 16, 2023

GLEESON, JOHN W

KLINGER COMPANIES, LLC • CEO

IndividualSIOUX CITY, IA

$11,600

Feb 15, 2023

SMITH, DYAN

HOMEMAKER • HOMEMAKER

IndividualNAPLES, FL

$10,000

May 13, 2024

Rep. Carter, Earl L. "Buddy" [R-GA-1]

ID: C001103

Top Contributors

SAVANNAH TOYOTA

OrganizationSAVANNAH, GA

$1,000

Oct 26, 2024

SAVANNAH TOYOTA

OrganizationSAVANNAH, GA

$1,000

Sep 26, 2024

TYBEE MARKET

OrganizationTYBEE ISLAND, GA

$500

Mar 6, 2024

SMITH, BYRON L.

IndividualRICHMOND HILL, GA

$5,000

Nov 5, 2024

MUNOZ, DONALD

NUCANA • CFO

IndividualWESTON, MA

$4,665

May 31, 2024

RICKS, DAVID A.

ELI LILLY AND COMPANY • CEO

IndividualINDIANAPOLIS, IN

$3,300

Sep 30, 2023

SADOWSKI, GARY T.

SADOWSKI CO • CPA

IndividualSAVANNAH, GA

$3,300

Aug 25, 2023

STEERE, WILLIAM C. JR.

NONE • RETIRED

IndividualBONITA SPRINGS, FL

$3,300

Aug 3, 2023

HENNESSY, MARK W.

HENNESSY AUTOMOBILE COMPANIES • PRESIDENT

IndividualATLANTA, GA

$3,300

Nov 4, 2024

KIMBELL, JEFFREY

SELF-EMPLOYED • HEALTH CARE CONSULTANT

IndividualPARK CITY, UT

$3,300

Oct 30, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Latta, Robert E. [R-OH-5]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 66 nodes and 42 connections (58 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $127,250

Top Donors - Rep. Latta, Robert E. [R-OH-5]

Showing top 22 donors by contribution amount

5 Orgs17 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 7 helped.

+Automotive (Legacy)confidence 0.90
The bill amends title 49 to establish safety standards and testing protocols for automated driving systems (ADS) and ADS-equipped vehicles, which supports the automotive industry by providing regulatory clarity and enabling deployment of advanced vehicle technologies.
+Electric Vehicles & Batteriesconfidence 0.85
The bill facilitates testing and deployment of ADS-equipped vehicles, which are often electric or hybrid, thereby supporting the EV industry by enabling innovation and commercial use of autonomous electric vehicles.
+Cybersecurityconfidence 0.85
Sec. 30130(b)(4)(H) requires a cybersecurity plan for ADS-equipped vehicles, including policies, risk mitigation, and incident response, directly benefiting cybersecurity firms that provide automotive security solutions.
+Telecommunicationsconfidence 0.80
The bill includes provisions for connected vehicle security and data sharing (Sec. 6), which relies on telecommunications infrastructure for vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communication, benefiting telecom companies involved in connected vehicle technologies.
+Semiconductors & Hardwareconfidence 0.80
ADS-equipped vehicles require advanced sensors, computing hardware, and semiconductors; the bill's safety standards and testing requirements create demand for these components, benefiting semiconductor and hardware manufacturers.
+AI & Cloud Infrastructureconfidence 0.75
Automated driving systems rely on AI for perception, planning, and control; the bill's focus on ADS safety and performance supports AI development and cloud infrastructure used for training and validating autonomous systems.

+ 1 more industry not shown.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Latta, Robert E. [R-OH-5])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

Telecommunications$13,200
from 4 contributions
- ERGEN, CANDY MRS.$6,600
- ERGEN, CHARLES MR.$6,600

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 Transportation

Strong

Vector: 68%

Pages: 658-660AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The SELF DRIVE Act closely aligns with Project 2025's DOT goals by updating vehicle safety standards, tasking NHTSA with testing/performance guidelines, and aiming to safely integrate automated vehicles while emphasizing safety and innovation. Both prioritize safety, regulatory clarity, and facilitating AV deployment, though the bill does not explicitly address tech-neutrality or voluntary data sharing emphasized in Project 2025."

Key themes:automated vehicle safety standardsNHTSA testing and evaluation guidelinesregulatory framework for AV deploymentsecurity of connected vehiclesfacilitating AV integration into transportation sy

Department of Transportation

Strong

Vector: 67%

Pages: 658-660AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The SELF DRIVE Act closely aligns with Project 2025's DOT objectives by updating motor vehicle safety standards for ADS-equipped vehicles, requiring NHTSA to develop testing guidelines, and incorporating security measures—all aimed at safely integrating automated vehicles while maintaining innovation and safety as priorities."

Key themes:automated vehicle safety standardstesting and evaluation guidelinessecurity of connected vehiclesregulatory framework for AV integrationinnovation-friendly safety approach

— 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: 63%

Pages: 661-663AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both texts involve the Department of Transportation and vehicle regulation, but the SELF DRIVE Act focuses on autonomous vehicle safety standards while the Project 2025 excerpt centers on fuel economy standards, opposing EV promotion, and limiting FHWA scope, resulting only tangential overlap."

Key themes:DOT regulationvehicle safetyfuel economy

— 628 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise translate into a loss of auto industry jobs for American workers: It will also mean a significant increase in traffic deaths and injuries. As fewer new cars are purchased, the price of used cars will rise, and more Americans will be left driving older cars, which traffic statistics show are much less safe than newer vehicles. NHTSA itself has acknowledged that the Biden Administration’s fuel economy standards will generate hundreds of additional fatalities and thousands of additional injuries on U.S. highways. Because older cars also produce more harmful air pollution, the aging of America’s fleet will also have negative consequences for air quality. In addition, the Biden Administration’s efforts to accelerate EV sales by reg- ulatory fiat work against the national security interests of the United States in contravention of Congress’s goals under EPCA. Increasing the production of EVs will make the U.S. more dependent on China and other foreign countries that control the supply and processing of rare earth minerals that are needed for EV batteries. And the faster deployment of EVs will put a major strain on America’s vulnerable power grid, requiring large investments in critical infrastructure and a big boost in the nation’s electricity production, including from gas-fired and oil- fired power plants. In exchange for all of these harmful effects—on traffic safety, consumer choice, American jobs, the nation’s air quality, and U.S. national security—the Biden fuel economy regulations are predicted to have no meaningful effect on global tem- perature trends over the long term.8 The next Administration must return the federal fuel economy program to the limits established by Congress. The standards issued by NHTSA must be reset at reasonable levels that are technologically feasible for ICE automobiles and con- sistent with an increase in domestic auto production and healthy growth in the sale of safer and more affordable new vehicles. To achieve these goals, the next Administration should: l Reduce proposed fuel economy levels. The Administration should consider returning to the minimum average fuel economy levels specified by Congress for model year 2020 vehicles: levels aimed at achieving a fleet-wide average of 35 miles per gallon. Consideration should be given to maintaining the standards at those levels for the near term in order to promote the objectives laid out by Congress. l Ensure that DOT again exercises priority in the setting of fuel economy standards. Any EPA limits on carbon dioxide emissions, even if authorized under the Clean Air Act, must support and work in harmony with DOT standards and must not override them or usurp DOT’s regulatory role under EPCA. For example, EPA could regulate air conditioning systems and leave engine standards to DOT. — 629 — Department of Transportation l Revoke the special waiver granted to California by the Biden Administration. California has no valid basis under the Clean Air Act to claim an extraordinary or unique air quality impact from carbon dioxide emissions, and EPCA is clear that under no circumstances may a state agency regulate fuel economy in place of DOT. The federal government should therefore exercise its preemptive authority over CARB and take all steps necessary to invalidate any inconsistent fuel economy requirements imposed by CARB, including its ban on sales of internal combustion engines. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has jurisdiction over the inter- state highway system, which is vital for the transportation of goods and people throughout the country. The FHWA, in conjunction with state DOTs, works to ensure the quality and safety of highways and bridges. However, over the course of decades, presidential Administrations and Con- gress have caused the FHWA to go beyond its original mission. The variety of infrastructure projects now eligible for funding through the FHWA include fer- ryboat terminals, hiking trails, bicycle lanes, and local sidewalks. In many cases, such projects should be the sole responsibility of local or state governments, not dependent on FHWA funding. For local projects, federal involvement adds red tape and bureaucratic delays rather than value. The Biden Administration has broadened the FHWA’s scope by emphasizing the priorities of progressive activists instead of pursuing practical goals. These policies include a focus on “equity,” a nebulous concept that in practice means awarding grants to favored identity groups, as well as imposing obligations on states concern- ing carbon dioxide emissions from highway traffic—areas not encompassed within FHWA’s statutory authorities. Furthermore, the Biden Administration’s embrace of the “Vision Zero” approach to safety often means actively seeking congestion for automobiles to reduce speeds. Finally, the Administration has sought to use a “guidance memo” to impose policies not enacted by Congress, most notably to make it harder for growing states to expand highway capacity. Instead, the next Administration should: l Seek to refocus the FHWA on maintaining and improving the highway system. l Remove or reform rules and regulations that hamper state governments. l Reduce the amount of federal involvement in local infrastructure decisions.

Department of Transportation

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 658-660AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the SELF DRIVE Act and the Project 2025 DOT section involve NHTSA and vehicle safety regulation, but the Act focuses on autonomous vehicle standards while Project 2025 centers on opposing stringent fuel economy/EV mandates; there is minimal direct thematic overlap."

Key themes:vehicle safetyconnected vehicle securityNHTSA oversighttransportation technology

— 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 — 627 — Department of Transportation limits for new motor vehicles for air pollutants that are found to pose a danger to humans. However, there is no reason to believe Congress ever contemplated that EPA’s authority to address automotive air pollution might be used to displace or supersede NHTSA’s fuel economy mandate under EPCA. Congress chose to assign the power to set fuel economy standards to DOT rather than EPA. This was not only because DOT understands the technologies and economics of the auto industry, but also because NHTSA is the nation’s leading motor vehicle safety regulator, and Congress sought to ensure that fuel economy requirements would not adversely affect highway safety. Unfortunately, the Biden Administration has flouted these statutory limitations in nearly every respect. The predictable result is higher expected transportation costs for Americans. l In pursuit of an anti–fossil fuel climate agenda never approved by Congress, the Biden Administration has raised fuel economy requirements to levels that cannot realistically be met by most categories of ICE vehicles. The purpose is to force the auto industry to transition away from traditional technologies to the production of electric vehicles (EVs) and compel Americans to accept costly EVs despite a clear and persistent consumer preference for ICE-powered vehicles. In further support of this agenda, federal regulators administer a scheme of generous fuel economy credits that subsidize EV producers such as Tesla at the expense of legacy automakers. l Moreover, and contrary to Congress’s design, the Biden EPA has been given preeminence in the regulation of fuel economy through the setting of carbon dioxide emissions limits for new motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act. Because carbon dioxide emissions levels correspond to mileage in automobiles powered by fossil fuels, these EPA rules are de facto fuel economy requirements that apply independently of NHTSA’s standards. l The Biden Administration has also granted California a special waiver under the Clean Air Act that permits the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to issue its own fuel economy directives, notwithstanding EPCA’s prohibition on state standards. Under this waiver, CARB has ordered automakers to phase out the sale of ICE-powered automobiles in California and transition to the production of zero-emission vehicles by 2035. The Clean Air Act allows other states to follow California’s requirements; thus, CARB is effectively determining fuel economy policies for the entire nation. As a result of these regulatory actions, automobiles will be significantly more expensive to produce, there will be fewer affordable new vehicle options for Amer- ican families, and fewer new vehicles will be sold in the U.S. That will do more than

Department of Transportation

Minimal

Vector: 62%

Pages: 670-672AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The SELF DRIVE Act focuses on autonomous vehicle regulations, while the Project 2025 DOT section addresses railroad brake inspections, dispatcher certification, maritime administration reorganization, and Jones Act reform—topics unrelated to AVs."

Key themes:Department of Transportationtransportation safetyregulatory framework

— 637 — Department of Transportation to track brake inspections on rolling stock electronically instead of by using paper air brake slips, which would enable extending the interval between brake inspections for trains and eliminating restrictions on the ability to place/remove blocks of cars in trains. l FRA will be proposing certification requirements for dispatchers and signal employees despite the failure of the Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) to identify any safety benefit. l FRA is planning to propose emergency escape breathing apparatus requirements for train crews even though FRA staff long ago concluded that the costs of these requirements would far outweigh their very minimal benefits. It is vital that the integrity of FRA’s research program be preserved. In 2022, FRA switched the management of the Transportation Technology Center (TTC) in Pueblo, Colorado, from a subsidiary of the Association of American Railroads (AAR) to Ensco, Inc. FRA seems determined to direct research to TTC, even when there are better choices with respect to the research in question, in an effort to support TTC financially and justify its decision to change management at TTC. This change in approach threatens the collaborative approach to research between FRA and the railroads that has existed for decades. FRA should make its decisions on where to spend its research dollars solely on the merits of improving the safety and efficiency of the railroad industry. MARITIME POLICY The Maritime Administration (MARAD) was established by President Harry Truman in 1950 and was transferred to DOT in 1981. A principal function is “main- tain[ing] the overall health of the U.S. Merchant Marine,”15 which is important both to national defense and to foreign and domestic commerce. MARAD is also in charge of the United States Merchant Marine Academy and operates ships and funding for the six state maritime academies. MARAD would be better served by being transferred from DOT to the Depart- ment of Homeland Security (DHS). MARAD is the only DOT modal administration that does not regulate the industry that it represents: The maritime industry is regulated by the U.S. Coast Guard (ships and personnel) and by the Federal Mari- time Commission (cargo rates and competitive practices). Furthermore, MARAD has responsibilities both in peacetime commerce and operationally in wartime/crisis sealift through its responsibility to manage the National Defense Reserve Fleet and 45-ship Ready Reserve Force for the U.S. Navy. These missions are unique to MARAD within DOT. As a result, MARAD’s missions — 638 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise and purpose, and therefore its funding priorities, are not well understood and his- torically have been minimalized in planning and budgeting. MARAD, including its subordinate Service Academy (the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy) should be transferred to the Department of Defense (if the Coast Guard is located there because DHS has been eliminated) or to the Department of Home- land Security. In this way, the two agencies charged with oversight and regulation of the Maritime sector—MARAD and the United States Coast Guard—would be aligned under the same department where operational efficiencies could be real- ized more easily. Serious consideration should be given to repealing or substantially reforming the Jones Act,16 which would require legislation. The economic costs of the Jones Act, which is notionally in place to promote a robust Merchant Marine, vastly exceed its effect on the supply of domestic ships. For instance, no liquified natural gas (LNG) can be shipped from Alaska to the lower 48 states because there are no U.S.-flagged ships that carry LNG. If there are genuine concerns about U.S. fleet capacity in the absence of the Jones Act, it would be possible to do so through an expansion of the Defense Reserve Fleet. Another DHS agency, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), is a frequent user of MARAD Ready Reserve Force shipping during disaster assistance missions. Transferring MARAD to DHS would make coordination and requisition of those vessels a smoother and more rapid process. DHS has responsibility for reviewing and approving Jones Act waivers. This process first requires a market survey of available shipping tonnage that is completed by MARAD. The processing of Jones Act waiver requests would be streamlined if both agencies were in the same department. Finally, DHS as a department is experienced in administering and budgeting for the operation of an existing federal service academy, the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, which is similar to the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy in size. There would be increased efficiencies and better alignment of the missions of these two institutions if they were under one single department that has equity in the industries served by these academies. CONCLUSION Americans need more abundant and affordable transportation. They need more affordable and safer cars as well as physical aspects of transportation such as roads, bridges, airports, ports, and rail lines. The Department of Transportation should be evaluating which aspects of transportation are contributing to the economic competitiveness of the United States and the well-being of Americans—and that therefore should continue to be funded. All too often, DOT’s mission is described as reducing the number of trips, using less fuel, and raising the costs of travel to Americans through increased use of

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. Latta, Robert E.

Precision Agriculture Satellite Connectivity Act

119/hr/1618

NTIA Reauthorization Act of 2025

119/hr/2482

REFINER Act

119/hr/3109

Back to All Bills