ELO Realignment and Strategic Engagement Reform Act of 2026

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/7574

Last Updated: August 19, 2026

ELO Realignment and Strategic Engagement Reform Act of 2026

HR. 7574, 119th Congress — read as touching Law Enforcement & Surveillance Tech.

The sponsor

Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8]

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

The money

$93,473 raised

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

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Homeland Security" section, p. 195-197 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 Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

July 13, 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 ELO Realignment and Strategic Engagement Reform Act of 2026, HR 7574, is a bill that reorganizes the Engagement, Liaison, and Outreach Office within the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Intelligence and Analysis. The main purpose of this bill is to streamline the office's functions, eliminate redundant positions, and improve strategic relationships with priority law enforcement agencies.

The key provisions of this bill include:

* Realigning the ELO Office within the Partner Engagement directorate of I&A * Identifying and eliminating redundant or non-essential positions, programs, or functions * Establishing clear communication protocols, centralizing points of contact, enhancing information-sharing mechanisms, and reducing duplication of outreach across Department components

The affected parties and stakeholders include:

* The Department of Homeland Security, specifically the ELO Office and I&A * Priority law enforcement agencies, including Federal, State, and local agencies identified by the Secretary as key partners for national security, counterterrorism, emergency response, or other mission-critical operations * SLTT entities, which refer to state, local, tribal, and territorial entities that receive intelligence support and convenings from the ELO Office

The potential impact and implications of this bill are significant. By streamlining the ELO Office's functions and eliminating redundant positions, the Department of Homeland Security can improve its efficiency and effectiveness in managing law enforcement and homeland security partnerships. This, in turn, can lead to better coordination and information-sharing between agencies, ultimately enhancing national security and counterterrorism efforts.

However, as a self-serving billionaire political analyst, I must consider the potential implications of this bill on my own wealth and influence. The consolidation of power within the Department of Homeland Security could potentially lead to increased opportunities for privatization and deregulation, which would be beneficial to my interests. Furthermore, the establishment of clear communication protocols and centralized points of contact could facilitate more efficient lobbying efforts, allowing me to exert greater influence over policy decisions.

In conclusion, the ELO Realignment and Strategic Engagement Reform Act of 2026 has the potential to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Department of Homeland Security's partnerships with law enforcement agencies. As a billionaire political analyst, I will continue to monitor the progress of this bill and explore opportunities for privatization and deregulation that may arise from its implementation.

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$93,473

20 donors

PACs

Organizations

Committees

Individuals

$93,473

No PAC contributions found

No organization contributions found

No committee contributions found

WRIGHT, ELIZABETH

1 transaction

$6,600

WOODWARD, JOHN

1 transaction

$6,600

BERGSTROM, ROBERT

1 transaction

$6,600

ERICKSON, GARY

1 transaction

$6,600

HASELDEN, BYRON

1 transaction

$6,600

HASELDEN, EDDIE

1 transaction

$6,600

HASELDEN, MIKE

1 transaction

$6,600

WAGNER, BRUCE

1 transaction

$5,000

DUKE, D. A.

1 transaction

$5,000

MCDONALD, BRUCE

1 transaction

$3,868

MULVIHILL, JAMES

1 transaction

$3,570

TERRY, ROBERT

1 transaction

$3,435

ANGELO JR, ERNEST

1 transaction

$3,300

CADER, ANDREW

1 transaction

$3,300

CRANBERG, CATHY

1 transaction

$3,300

FROST, EDWIN

1 transaction

$3,300

HAUDENSCHILD, CHRIS

1 transaction

$3,300

LEVENSTAM, DAVID

1 transaction

$3,300

MASSEY, JON G.

1 transaction

$3,300

NOVIK, JAY

1 transaction

$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 2 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10]

ID: G000599

Top Contributors

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA

$1,500

May 19, 2023

GOLDSTEIN, DARIN

SDG CAPITAL MANAGEMENT • MANAGER

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

May 31, 2023

GOLDSTEIN, DARIN

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Jun 19, 2023

SCHWARTZ, DAVID

SLATE PROPERTY GROUP • EXECUTIVE

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$5,000

Oct 17, 2023

SCHWARTZ, DAVID

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$5,000

Oct 26, 2023

ADAMS, RICHARD

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Oct 26, 2024

ANDREESSEN, MARC

SELF • ATTORNEY

IndividualLOS ALTOS, CA

$3,300

Oct 23, 2024

BARTH, RICHARD

MARYLAND • PROFESSOR

IndividualBALTIMORE, MD

$3,300

Oct 27, 2024

BLUMENTHAL, VIOLETTE

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualDURHAM, NC

$3,300

Oct 26, 2024

BRUNO, JACQUELINE

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualWHITESTONE, NY

$3,300

Oct 26, 2024

Rep. Pou, Nellie [D-NJ-9]

ID: P000621

Top Contributors

MATSIKOUDIS & FANCIULLO, LLC

OrganizationJERSEY CITY, NJ

$500

Oct 15, 2024

COOK, HAROLD P. III

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualNORTH HALEDON, NJ

$3,300

Oct 22, 2024

MUKHERJI, RAJ

STATE OF NEW JERSEY • SENATOR

IndividualJERSEY CITY, NJ

$3,300

Oct 27, 2024

KRAMER, LAWRENCE

V. PAULIUS & ASSOCIATES • ATTORNEY

IndividualGLEN ROCK, NJ

$3,300

Nov 8, 2024

CURITOMAI, NORBERTO

SPANISH TRANSPORTATION SVC • CEO

IndividualCLIFTON, NJ

$3,300

Oct 25, 2024

KIPIANI, CARLA TURCO

CARLA DEVELOPMENT GROUP • COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

IndividualLYNDHURST, NJ

$3,300

Oct 22, 2024

CRISOSTOMO, YAMILKY

YNC TAX • CEO

IndividualCLIFTON, NJ

$3,300

Oct 20, 2024

AVILA, RENE A.

GI AUTO SALVAGE • PRESIDENT

IndividualPINE BROOK, NJ

$3,300

Oct 28, 2024

COLGAN, BILL

GP MANAGEMENT, LLC • PARTNER

IndividualBLOOMFIELD, NJ

$3,300

Oct 24, 2024

KIPIANI, PAUL

CARLA DEVELOPMENT GROUP • COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

IndividualFRANKLIN LAKES, NJ

$3,300

Oct 22, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 39 nodes and 47 connections

Total contributions: $47

Top Donors - Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8]

Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount

20 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 helped.

+Law Enforcement & Surveillance Techconfidence 0.80
Section 2(a)(3) improves management and coordination of strategic relationships with priority law enforcement agencies, which could benefit the industry.
+Cybersecurityconfidence 0.60
Section 2(a)(3)(C) enhances information-sharing mechanisms, which may involve cybersecurity measures and thus potentially benefit the industry.

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 Homeland Security

Strong

Vector: 67%

Pages: 195-197AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill's focus on reorganizing DHS's Engagement, Liaison, and Outreach (ELO) Office to streamline functions, eliminate redundancy, and enhance strategic coordination aligns closely with Project 2025's call for consolidating external communications and partnership functions—specifically merging the Office of Partnership and Engagement into the Office of Public Affairs to improve efficiency and ensure a unified voice. Both emphasize reducing bureaucratic duplication and improving mission effecti"

Key themes:organizational streamliningeliminating redundancyengagement and outreach reformcentralized communicationmission effectiveness

— 162 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise components as well: CBP, TSA, etc. all have their own intelligence operations and are better situated with their subject-matter experts to make their own assessments. The National Operations Center (NOC) within the Office of Operations Coor- dination (OPS) should absorb those select I&A functions and tactically proficient personnel that need to be maintained (for example, technical support to the National Vetting Center). The remainder of I&A should be eliminated. The OPS entity should maintain IC status, and the only intelligence mission set should be to provide situational awareness and the dissemination of operational information or raw intelligence (no analysis or products) at classified and unclassified levels to executive leadership across the department, not outside of DHS. OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) Needed Reforms OGC should advise principals as to how DHS can execute its missions within the law instead of advising principals as to why they cannot execute regulations, policies, and programs. Instead of each component’s chief counsel reporting to the Headquarters Gen- eral Counsel (with a solid line) and indirectly to his or her component head (with a dotted line), the accountability should be reversed. Due to the different missions throughout the department, the components can better manage the legal issues of their specific mission than headquarters can. Thus, the chief counsel (or equiv- alent) of each component should report directly to the component head, report indirectly to the DHS General Counsel, and be accountable to the component head. The report to the General Counsel is to ensure consistency of advice across DHS. OGC should hire significantly more Schedule C/political appointees who in turn supervise career staff and manage their output. DHS’s mission is politically charged, and the legal function cannot be allowed to thwart the Administration’s agenda by providing stilted or erroneous legal positions and decision-making. OGC should serve as the center of the response to the legal challenges facing the department to ensure a streamlined, consistent response to a litany of issues facing the department. It is important to ensure consistency across all potential legal positions taken by the department, including those arising in litigation, congressio- nal oversight, and inquiries received from the Inspector General, U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), and Congressional Research Service and pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act. OGC should invest in e-discovery software and contract with a vendor to manage the department’s e-discovery. This would be beneficial both in litigation and in responding to congressional oversight. Removing delays in e-discovery processing would also reduce the issuance of subpoenas to the department and the generation of negative press for the Administration that comes from delayed responses. — 163 — Department of Homeland Security The old practice of relying on Executive Secretary taskings to pull documents for congressional requests does not work: It is slow, the metrics for what documents are gathered and how are unclear, and the components do not gather responsive material in an efficient manner. Document gathering should come from the Office of the Chief Information Officer or a relevant technological element within the department that can pull responsive communications quickly. OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS (OLA); OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS (OPA); AND OFFICE OF PARTNERSHIP AND ENGAGEMENT (OPE) DHS’s external communications function should be consolidated and reformed so that the President’s agenda can be implemented more effectively. The Office of Partnership and Engagement should be merged into the Office of Public Affairs. In many Cabinet agencies, outreach to companies and partner organizations is similarly performed by the Office of Public Affairs. This would also accomplish a needed DHS organizational and management reform to decrease the number of direct reports to the Secretary. Both public and legislative affairs staff in the components should report directly to their respective headquarters equivalent. This would help to avoid a failure by the department to speak with one voice. It would also allow the component staff to perform more efficiently, overseen by expert managers in their trade. This would also allow DHS to respond to crises effectively by shifting staff as needed to the most pressing issues and better use underutilized staff at less active components. Only political appointees in OLA should interact directly with congressional staff on all inquiries, including budget and appropriations matters. To prevent congres- sional staff from answer shopping among HQ OLA, the DHS OCFO, and components, DHS legislative affairs appropriations staff should be moved from MGMT OCFO into OLA. Regarding components, budget/appropriations staff should move from component budget offices into component legislative affairs offices. Because dozens of congressional committees and subcommittees either have or claim to have jurisdiction over some DHS function, DHS staff from the Secretary on down spend so much time responding to congressional hearing and briefing requests, letters, and questions for the record that they are left with little time to do their assigned job of protecting the homeland. The next President should reach an agreement with congressional leadership to limit committee jurisdiction to one authorizing committee and one appropriations committee in each cham- ber. If congressional leadership will not limit their committees’ jurisdiction over DHS, DHS should identify one authorizing and appropriations committee in each chamber and answer only to it. To focus more precisely on the DHS mission, OLA staff should also identify outdated and needless congressional reporting requirements and notify Congress

Department of Homeland Security

Moderate

Vector: 69%

Pages: 195-197AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on reorganizing DHS's Engagement, Liaison, and Outreach (ELO) Office to improve efficiency and coordination with law enforcement partners, which aligns thematically with Project 2025's goal of reforming DHS's external communications and engagement functions, particularly the Office of Partnership and Engagement (OPE). However, the bill does not explicitly call for merging OPE into the Office of Public Affairs (OPA) or restructuring legislative affairs as specified in the Project"

Key themes:engagement and outreach reformorganizational efficiencystrategic coordinationstakeholder communicationDHS management reform

— 163 — Department of Homeland Security The old practice of relying on Executive Secretary taskings to pull documents for congressional requests does not work: It is slow, the metrics for what documents are gathered and how are unclear, and the components do not gather responsive material in an efficient manner. Document gathering should come from the Office of the Chief Information Officer or a relevant technological element within the department that can pull responsive communications quickly. OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS (OLA); OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS (OPA); AND OFFICE OF PARTNERSHIP AND ENGAGEMENT (OPE) DHS’s external communications function should be consolidated and reformed so that the President’s agenda can be implemented more effectively. The Office of Partnership and Engagement should be merged into the Office of Public Affairs. In many Cabinet agencies, outreach to companies and partner organizations is similarly performed by the Office of Public Affairs. This would also accomplish a needed DHS organizational and management reform to decrease the number of direct reports to the Secretary. Both public and legislative affairs staff in the components should report directly to their respective headquarters equivalent. This would help to avoid a failure by the department to speak with one voice. It would also allow the component staff to perform more efficiently, overseen by expert managers in their trade. This would also allow DHS to respond to crises effectively by shifting staff as needed to the most pressing issues and better use underutilized staff at less active components. Only political appointees in OLA should interact directly with congressional staff on all inquiries, including budget and appropriations matters. To prevent congres- sional staff from answer shopping among HQ OLA, the DHS OCFO, and components, DHS legislative affairs appropriations staff should be moved from MGMT OCFO into OLA. Regarding components, budget/appropriations staff should move from component budget offices into component legislative affairs offices. Because dozens of congressional committees and subcommittees either have or claim to have jurisdiction over some DHS function, DHS staff from the Secretary on down spend so much time responding to congressional hearing and briefing requests, letters, and questions for the record that they are left with little time to do their assigned job of protecting the homeland. The next President should reach an agreement with congressional leadership to limit committee jurisdiction to one authorizing committee and one appropriations committee in each cham- ber. If congressional leadership will not limit their committees’ jurisdiction over DHS, DHS should identify one authorizing and appropriations committee in each chamber and answer only to it. To focus more precisely on the DHS mission, OLA staff should also identify outdated and needless congressional reporting requirements and notify Congress — 164 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise that DHS will cease reporting on such matters. For other congressional reports, OLA should implement a sunset date so that Congress must regularly demonstrate the need for specific data. In both OPA and OLA, a change in mission and culture is needed. The clients of both components are the President and the Secretary, not the media, external organizations, or Congress. OPA and OLA should change from being compliance correspondents for outside entities airing grievances to serving as messengers and advocates for the President and the Secretary. OFFICE OF OPERATIONS COORDINATION (OPS) OPS was originally conceived by then-Secretary Jeh Johnson as an entity tasked with coordinating cross-DHS assets on an as-needed basis using a joint operations approach. This role is particularly challenging because of the disparate nature of mission sets across DHS. OPS should absorb a very small number of tactical intelligence professionals from I&A as the rest of I&A is shut down. Such intelligence officers would be a subordinate element within OPS placed within the National Operations Center. The intelligence officers would provide tactical intelligence support for upcoming or ongoing opera- tions in addition to liaising with their agency/component counterparts. There would be no strategic intelligence analysis done as part of OPS or its new I&A sub-element. In addition to facilitating all-of-DHS coordination on a task-by-task basis, OPS would be responsible for ongoing situational awareness for the Secretary and Deputy Secretary. In addition to long-term staffing, OPS would have cycling billets from each of the major agencies and components to facilitate its most effective working rela- tionships across DHS. OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES (CRCL) AND PRIVACY OFFICE (PRIV) The Homeland Security Act established only an Officer of CRCL, not an office. The only substantive function Congress then assigned to the officer was to review and assess information alleging abuses of civil rights. Since then, Congress and CRCL itself have significantly expanded CRCL’s scope and size well beyond its original intent or helpful purpose. CRCL now operates and views itself as a quasi- DHS Office of Inspector General. This results in a considerable waste of limited component resources, which are routinely tasked to address redundant, overly burdensome, and uninformed demands from CRCL. It is therefore important to recalibrate CRCL’s scope and reach. The organizational structure of both CRCL and the Privacy Office should be changed to ensure proper alignment with the department’s mission. The Office of General Counsel should absorb both CRCL’s and PRIV’s necessary functions

Department of Homeland Security

Moderate

Vector: 66%

Pages: 192-194AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on reorganizing DHS's Engagement, Liaison, and Outreach (ELO) Office to improve efficiency and coordination with law enforcement partners, which aligns with Project 2025's broader goal of reforming DHS components for better strategic alignment and accountability. However, it does not directly address the specific Project 2025 proposals such as eliminating I&A, restructuring PLCY, or changing FPS reporting lines, resulting in moderate thematic overlap rather than direct implement"

Key themes:DHS reorganizationintelligence coordinationlaw enforcement engagementaccountability and efficiencystrategic partnership alignment

— 160 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Officer’s procurement of innovative technology; and the facilities plan, including the consolidation into the St. Elizabeth’s campus. They should also be prepared to help implement any end to unionization of DHS components in response to an executive order pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 7103.15 Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO). DHS responsibilities to work with Congress have been split between the Office of Legislative Affairs (OLA) and OCFO. OLA deals with the authorizing committees on policy issues, and OCFO works with the appropriations committees on budget planning, execution, and reprogramming. This split creates communication and visibility issues within DHS and inconsistency in answers to Congress. This is an issue not only within the HQ model, but also through- out the components. Either appropriations personnel should be moved to OLA and there should be a “dotted line” reporting structure to OCFO, or a policy that OLA per- sonnel must be included on communications to Congress should be implemented. To avoid “answer shopping” by congressional staff, particularly appropriations staff, all budget communications from the OCFO, including from the CFO him/ herself, should first be provided to the Director of OLA to ensure consistency of information, messaging, and answers. This may be deemed awkward given that the OCFO is a Senate-confirmed position, but it is necessary to avoid inaccuracies and inconsistencies in messaging. Federal Protective Service (FPS). FPS needs federal agents to develop, share, and receive operational information and maintain direct contact with the Secretary in the midst of heightened threats. Before the summer 2020 civil unrest, position- ing FPS under MGMT was justified, but given the current climate, they should not be reporting through MGMT. This may be especially problematic if a Management Directorate Under Secretary lacking law enforcement or military experience is in place when a situation like summer 2020 arises. FPS should report to the Secretary as other components (e.g., FLETC) do. This would add little to the Secretary’s current burden unless or until civil unrest arises, at which point reporting to the Secretary creates a direct line between the primary DHS decision-maker (S1 or S2) and the FPS Director. Regarding operational communication, there should be information-sharing mandates (MOAs)—which are applicable under specific circumstances where fed- eral facilities are involved—between FPS and the U.S. Marshals, U.S. Park Police, and FBI. Agreements with U.S. Capitol Police and Supreme Court Police should also be considered, but it is noteworthy that those entities are jurisdictionally out- side of the executive branch. OFFICE OF STRATEGY, POLICY, AND PLANS (PLCY) Department-Level Reforms. PLCY should perform a complete inventory, analysis, and reevaluation of the department’s domestic terrorism lines of effort to ensure that they are consistent with the President’s priorities, congressional authorization, and Americans’ constitutional rights. — 161 — Department of Homeland Security PLCY should likewise do a complete inventory, analysis, and evaluation of any of the department’s work, in coordination with social media outlets, to censor or otherwise change or affect Americans’ speech. PLCY should comprehensively report on and publish this history in full so that the American people can know the facts. The department should remove all personnel who participated in any of this activity. The department has significant authority and budget to provide grants for var- ious purposes. This effort is diffused across components and lacks central policy thought and coordination. PLCY should set a departmentwide policy that estab- lishes how granting choices are to be made and is consistent with the President’s priorities. PLCY should clear all granting decisions to ensure that they are con- sistent with the new policy. PLCY-Wide Reforms. PLCY should work with Congress to streamline the department’s reporting requirements. Because there has not been a departmen- tal reauthorization bill and these requirements have been added piecemeal over two decades, they significantly overlap and even conflict—wasting resources and distracting from the department’s mission. PLCY should seek the elimination of the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review. Issue-Area Reforms. PLCY should bolster its Immigration Statistics program and make it the one-stop shop for the timely production of all department immi- gration statistics and analysis. OFFICE OF INTELLIGENCE AND ANALYSIS (I&A) The Office of Intelligence and Analysis should be eliminated both because it has not added value and because it has been weaponized for domestic politi- cal purposes. The Intelligence Community (IC) already provides raw intelligence to DHS components. In addition, the FBI, National Counter Terrorism Center, and other agencies where necessary already provide holistic threat assessment products to federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial governments as well as to private-sector entities at both the classified and unclassified levels where appropriate. I&A’s work as an interlocuter between the IC and DHS components’ individual intelligence operations on the one hand and government and the private sector on the other, as well as between the IC and the components, is at best duplicative. At worst, it is used and discussed in the media as a political tool, resulting in more harm than good to the U.S. government and IC writ large. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which is not a member of the IC, should create cyber intelligence products in a collaborative fashion with the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command. Such efforts would lead to timelier usable classified and unclassified products for stakeholders that exceed the quality and capability of I&A’s efforts. This same principle applies to other

Department of Defense

Moderate

Vector: 65%

Pages: 140-142AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on reorganizing DHS's ELO Office to improve coordination with law enforcement and intelligence sharing, which aligns with Project 2025's goal of enhancing DOD-DHS alignment for critical infrastructure and border security. However, the bill does not directly address DOD-specific reforms like restoring intelligence accountability or eliminating peripheral obligations, resulting in moderate thematic overlap."

Key themes:DOD-DHS coordinationintelligence sharingcritical infrastructure protectionborder securityaccountability in engagement

— 107 — Department of Defense 5. Establish true alignment between DOD and DHS both to improve the defense of critical U.S. infrastructure and national border integrity and to develop vital information that enables defense against foreign targeted disruptions.23 l Restore accountability and public trust. In recent years, public trust in Defense Intelligence has been eroded by, for example, flawed assumptions leading up to our Afghanistan withdrawal, flawed Russia–Ukraine assessments, divergences in relations with key Gulf allies, and voids being filled by Russia and China around the world. For trust to be restored and sustained, officials must be held accountable. 1. Restore DIE critical thinking. Establish mechanisms to restore analytic integrity and return to true intelligence-driven operations. The next Administration should eliminate the conflict of interest in the current customer-based model (in which the customer is always right) by enforcing time-tested procedures that guarantee independent analysis, even if it means challenging policymakers’ assumptions. The Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security’s leadership role should be expanded to include providing analytic top-line views and improve DIE transparency by highlighting diverging views. 2. Elevate the DIE’s voice in national policy discussions, commensurate with the DIE’s 75 percent share of the IC budget. Present defense intelligence to senior policymakers, either independently to avoid all-source bias or in consensus products like the National Intelligence Estimates. l Eliminate peripheral intelligence obligations that do not advance military readiness. In 2019, following the catastrophic 2015 data breach at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) accepted transfer of the responsibility to conduct security clearance and suitability investigations for 95 percent of the U.S. government’s civilian workforce. This decision, which grew out of an intention to deconstruct OPM, was wrongheaded on many levels and made the federal bureaucracy dependent on a new overlay of DOD bureaucracy, in a sense instilling DOD control of civilian managers. This function should be returned to OPM except for military security clearance investigations. — 108 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise U.S. ARMY The U.S. Army’s mission is “[t]o deploy, fight and win our nation’s wars by pro- viding ready, prompt and sustained land dominance by Army forces across the full spectrum of conflict as part of the joint force.”24 Today, however, the Army cannot execute its land dominance mission.25 The U.S. Army is at an inflection point that is marked by more than a decade of steadily eroding budgets and diluted buying power, an appreciable degradation in readiness and training capacity, a near crisis in the recruiting and retention of critical personnel, and a bevy of aging weapons systems that no longer provide a qualitative edge over peer and near-peer com- petitors but will not be replaced in the near term. All of these challenges are set against the backdrop of a complex and dynamic global geopolitical environment that is exemplified and exacerbated by the triumph of our adversaries in Afghanistan after a 20-year struggle there as well as recent Russian outrages in the Ukraine and China’s bellicosity both on its borders and in surrounding disputed regions. In spite of these ever-increasing operational pulls, our Army is consistently being asked to do more with fewer resources. The status quo is further marked by a pervasive politically driven top-down focus on progressive social policies that emphasize matters like so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion and climate change, often to the detriment of the Army’s core warfighting mission. Needed Reforms l Rebuild the Army. The total Army budget has decreased by roughly 11 percent since 2018, perilously affecting the service’s readiness and ability to train and to procure new personnel and equipment. Declining budgets and decreased buying power have forced the Army to lower training standards and opportunities to train, propose reductions in end strength, slash military construction programs to historically low levels, and scale back essential modernization programs. 1. Increase the Army budget to remain the world’s preeminent land power. 2. Accelerate the development and procurement of the six current Army modernization priorities (long-range precision fires, the Next- Generation Combat Vehicle, Future Vertical Lift, the Army network, air and missile defense, and soldier lethality) to replace worn out and outdated combat systems and ensure ground combat dominance. 3. Increase funding to improve Army training and operational readiness. 4. Increase the Army force structure by 50,000 to handle two major regional contingencies simultaneously.

Department of Homeland Security

Moderate

Vector: 65%

Pages: 198-200AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on reorganizing DHS's Engagement, Liaison, and Outreach (ELO) Office to improve efficiency and coordination with law enforcement partners, which aligns with Project 2025's broader goal of streamlining DHS components and enhancing interagency coordination on immigration and national security. However, the bill does not directly address specific Project 2025 proposals such as eliminating redundant oversight bodies (e.g., CRCL, CISOMB) or reassigning immigration functions to DHS fr"

Key themes:DHS reorganizationinteragency coordinationimmigration enforcementefficiency and accountabilitystrategic engagement

— 166 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise and manages complaints against agents through the OPR. In addition, CRCL, OIG, GAO, and Congress all perform detention oversight. These multiple bodies place unmanageable and unreasonable burdens on ICE to manage several sometimes inconsistent audits/inspections at the same time. If OIDO remains a DHS component, the Secretary should immediately issue a direc- tive stripping CRCL of its immigration portfolio. OIDO is in a better position with dedicated resources and immigration experts to perform this function than CRCL is. Allowing both offices to conduct detention oversight is duplicative and wasteful. The Secretary should conduct a thorough review of the effectiveness of Direc- tive 0810.1,19 which is widely interpreted as requiring a wholesale referral of cases to OIG. In reality, OIG investigates only a small fraction of them and often sits on cases for longer than the five-day window specified in the directive. Meanwhile, the other agencies wait in limbo to execute their duties. CISOMB. The Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman should be eliminated. The DHS bureaucracy is too large, and the Secretary has too many direct reports. CISOMB’s policy functions can be performed (and sometimes already are) by OIG and GAO. The specialized case work can be moved into USCIS as a special unit, much like the IRS Taxpayer Advocate. This would require a stat- utory change to Section 452 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002.20 If CISOMB continues as a DHS component, a policy should be issued that prohibits CISOMB from assisting illegal aliens to obtain benefits. Currently, approximately 15 percent–20 percent of CISOMB’s workload consists of helping DACA applicants obtain and renew benefits, including work authorization. This is not the role of an ombudsman. In addition, the government should be a neutral adjudicator, not an advocate for illegal aliens. AGENCY RELATIONSHIPS It is critical to the achievement of the President’s policy objectives that all agen- cies and departments touching immigration policy work in sync with one another. While there are numerous areas in which such cooperation is critical, immigration has proven to be the most difficult. Accordingly, several objectives will be necessary for each of the following departments. l Department of Health and Human Services: Agree to move the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) to DHS or, alternatively, implement an aggressive and regular effort by the Secretary of HHS to ensure that ORR is fully pursuing presidential objectives in support of DHS. l Department of Defense: Assist in aggressively building the border wall system on America’s southern border. Additionally, explicitly acknowledge and adjust personnel and priorities to participate actively in the defense — 167 — Department of Homeland Security of America’s borders, including using military personnel and hardware to prevent illegal crossings between ports of entry and channel all cross-border traffic to legal ports of entry. l Department of Justice: Agree to move the Executive Office for Immigration Review and the Office of Immigration Litigation to DHS and/or, alternatively, to treat the administrative law judges (immigration judges and Board of Immigration Appeals) as national security personnel, decertify their union, and move to increase hiring significantly to enable the processing of more immigration cases. l Department of State: Allow DHS to lead international engagement in the Western Hemisphere on issues of security and migration. Additionally, quickly and aggressively address recalcitrant countries’ failure to accept deportees by imposing stiff sanctions until deportees are in fact accepted for return (not just promised to be taken). l Department of Housing and Urban Development: Ensure that only U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents utilize or occupy federally subsidized housing. l Department of Education: Deny loan access to those who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents, and deny loan access to students at schools that provide in-state tuition to illegal aliens. l Department of Labor: Eliminate the two (of four) lowest wage levels for foreign workers. l Department of the Treasury: Implement all necessary regulations both to equalize taxes between American citizens and working visa holders and to provide DHS with all tax information of illegal aliens as expeditiously as possible. l Intelligence Community: Cooperate in the shrinking or elimination of the I&A role in the IC while replacing it with CBP and HSI representation to the IC. AUTHOR’S NOTE: I had the honor of coordinating the efforts of the experts listed as contributors to this book, nearly all of whom have spent more time inside or interacting with the Department of Homeland Security than myself. I wrote only a small portion of the chapter and relied on the contributors’ experience and expertise to give the chapter both its depth and policy impact. No views expressed herein should be attributed to any single contributor.

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. Evans, Gabe

Stop Pills That Kill Act

119/hr/8005

Ratepayer Protection Act

119/hr/9340

Open-Source AI Leadership Act

119/hr/10152

ELO Realignment and Strategic Engagement Reform Act of 2026