Emergency Wildfire Fighting Technology Act of 2025

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/836

Last Updated: July 17, 2026

Emergency Wildfire Fighting Technology Act of 2025

HR. 836, 119th Congress — read as touching Aerospace (Commercial).

The sponsor

Rep. Valadao, David G. [R-CA-22]

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

The money

$79,400 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Agriculture" section, p. 347-349 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 Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.

February 5, 2025

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 Emergency Wildfire Fighting Technology Act of 2025 (HR 836). A bill that, on the surface, appears to be a benevolent effort to combat wildfires through the evaluation and potential adoption of the container aerial firefighting system (CAFFS). But let's not be naive. This is Washington D.C., where every piece of legislation has a hidden agenda.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's primary objective is to conduct an evaluation of CAFFS, a system that uses aircraft to drop fire retardants on wildfires. The evaluation will assess the effectiveness of this technology in mitigating and suppressing wildfires. Ostensibly, this is about saving lives and property from devastating fires.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill requires the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a joint evaluation with various stakeholders within 90 days of enactment. The report will be submitted to relevant committees within 120 days. This is where things get interesting. By involving multiple agencies and committees, this bill creates a bureaucratic labyrinth that can be exploited by those with the right connections.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The obvious stakeholders are the forestry and aviation industries, as well as local communities affected by wildfires. However, I'm more interested in the unseen players – the ones who will truly benefit from this legislation. Companies like mine, which specialize in advanced aerial firefighting technologies, stand to gain significantly from the adoption of CAFFS. The evaluation process will likely favor those with established relationships and lobbying power.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has the potential to create a lucrative market for companies like mine, which can provide the necessary technology and expertise to implement CAFFS on a large scale. By positioning ourselves as thought leaders in this space, we can shape the regulatory environment and secure favorable contracts. The evaluation process will also provide valuable data, which can be used to further refine our technologies and solidify our market dominance.

In conclusion, HR 836 is not about saving lives or property; it's about creating a new revenue stream for companies like mine. By supporting this bill, we're investing in the future of aerial firefighting – and our own bottom line. The projected value of this market? Easily $500 million to $1 billion within the next five years.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a meeting with my team at the Cato Institute to discuss the implications of this bill on the free market.

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 several stages before it can be enacted. This one, HR 836, has already passed the House of Representatives and is now being considered by the Senate.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Emergency Wildfire Fighting Technology Act of 2025 aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the container aerial firefighting system (CAFFS) in mitigating and suppressing wildfires. Remember when we learned about the importance of evaluating policies and programs? This bill is doing just that, but it's surprising that it needs to be spelled out.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill requires the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a joint evaluation of CAFFS within 90 days of enactment. They must then submit a report to the relevant committees (which, by the way, is exactly what we covered in our lesson on congressional committees) within 120 days. This is not a drastic change to existing law, but rather an attempt to improve upon current wildfire fighting strategies.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The parties involved are the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of the Interior, the National Interagency Aviation Committee, and the Interagency Airtanker Board. You should recall that these agencies play crucial roles in managing our nation's natural resources and responding to emergencies. It's not exactly rocket science.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** If enacted, this bill could lead to improved wildfire fighting strategies and better allocation of resources. However, it's surprising that we're only now considering the effectiveness of CAFFS, given its potential benefits. As I always said in class, "checks and balances" are essential to ensuring our government functions properly. This bill is a prime example of how our system is supposed to work – but often doesn't.

Moving forward, it's crucial that we pay attention to how this bill progresses through the Senate and whether it will be signed into law by the President. As I taught you, this is exactly what we mean by "separation of powers." It's not too much to ask for a basic understanding of our legislative process, is it?

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

The Emergency Wildfire Fighting Technology Act of 2025, HR 836 - sounds innocent enough, but trust me, folks, there's more to it than meets the eye. Let's dig in.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** On the surface, this bill aims to evaluate and potentially adopt a new container aerial firefighting system (CAFFS) for mitigating wildfires. Sounds like a noble cause, right? But what if I told you that this is just a smokescreen for something more sinister?

Think about it: why would the government suddenly care so much about wildfire fighting technology? Is it because they're genuinely concerned about public safety, or is there another agenda at play? Perhaps they're trying to create a new market for private contractors to swoop in and profit from these "emergency" services. Or maybe, just maybe, this is all part of a larger plan to justify increased surveillance and control over our national forests.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill requires the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to conduct an evaluation of CAFFS within 90 days, followed by a report to Congress. Sounds straightforward, but what about the fine print? The evaluation will be conducted in consultation with the National Interagency Aviation Committee and the Interagency Airtanker Board - who are these shadowy organizations, exactly?

And have you noticed that this bill doesn't actually authorize any new funding for wildfire fighting efforts? That's right; it's all just a study, folks. A study to justify future spending on "emergency" services, perhaps?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** On the surface, this bill affects the Forest Service, the Department of the Interior, and various aviation committees. But let's not forget about the real stakeholders: private contractors, defense industries, and other special interest groups who stand to profit from this new technology.

And what about the general public? Will we be safer with these new aerial firefighting systems, or will we just be subjected to more surveillance and control?

**Potential Impact & Implications** This bill has far-reaching implications for our national forests, our economy, and our civil liberties. If passed, it could lead to:

* Increased privatization of emergency services * Expanded surveillance and control over public lands * New opportunities for crony capitalism and special interest groups * A further erosion of our civil liberties under the guise of "emergency" measures

Wake up, folks! This bill is just a small part of a larger agenda to consolidate power and control in the hands of the few. Don't be fooled by the innocent-sounding title - there's more to this bill than meets the eye.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, because we've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here. The Emergency Wildfire Fighting Technology Act of 2025 - sounds like a real mouthful, doesn't it? (smirk)

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill is all about evaluating the use of container aerial firefighting systems (CAFFS) to mitigate and suppress wildfires. Now, I know what you're thinking - "container aerial firefighting systems"? Sounds like some fancy-pants government speak for "we're gonna throw a bunch of money at this problem and hope it goes away." But hey, who doesn't love a good acronym? (wink)

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill requires the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to conduct an evaluation of CAFFS within 90 days. They'll be working with some fancy committees - the National Interagency Aviation Committee and the Interagency Airtanker Board - because, you know, we need more bureaucracy in our lives. (eye roll) The report will then be submitted to the "appropriate committees" (read: more bureaucrats), which will no doubt lead to a thrilling game of bureaucratic ping-pong.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Well, it's not like this bill affects anyone important - just your average, everyday American taxpayer. Oh wait, and the forestry industry. And maybe some firefighters. But who cares about those guys? They're just pawns in the grand game of government overreach. (smirk)

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, here's where things get really interesting. This bill could potentially lead to... (dramatic pause) ...more efficient wildfire fighting! Wow, I can barely contain my excitement. But let's be real, folks - this is just a Trojan horse for more government spending and control. Mark my words, this will somehow morph into a massive boondoggle that'll leave us all wondering where our hard-earned tax dollars went.

But hey, at least we'll have the satisfaction of knowing that our "elites" in Washington are working tirelessly to... (air quotes) "protect our freedoms." (wink) I mean, who needs actual freedom when you can have a fancy report on container aerial firefighting systems?

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, brought to you by the same geniuses who thought "Operation Iraqi Freedom" was a good idea.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Emergency Wildfire Fighting Technology Act of 2025 is a bill that's about as urgent as a timeshare presentation. Its main purpose is to create the illusion of action on wildfires, while actually doing nothing but padding the pockets of contractors and consultants. The objective? To waste taxpayer money on a "study" that will inevitably conclude what everyone already knows: that container aerial firefighting systems (CAFFS) are useful in fighting wildfires.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill requires the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to conduct an evaluation of CAFFS, because apparently, they haven't been doing their jobs. This "evaluation" will involve consulting with various committees and boards, which is just a euphemism for "we'll hire some expensive consultants to tell us what we already know." The report will be submitted to the relevant committees, where it will likely gather dust.

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

* Contractors and consultants who will get paid to participate in this farce * Lobbyists who will make a killing pushing for CAFFS adoption (pun intended) * Politicians who will use this bill as a photo op to pretend they care about wildfires * Taxpayers, who will foot the bill for this boondoggle

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The impact of this bill will be negligible. It won't actually do anything to prevent or mitigate wildfires. However, it will:

* Provide a nice payday for contractors and consultants * Give politicians a chance to pretend they're doing something about wildfires * Waste taxpayer money on a pointless study

In short, this bill is a classic case of "legislative lupus" – a disease where politicians think they can cure a complex problem with a simplistic solution. Newsflash: you can't fix wildfires with a Band-Aid and a press conference.

Diagnosis: This bill is suffering from a bad case of "consultant-itis," a condition where politicians think that hiring expensive consultants will magically solve complex problems. Treatment? A healthy dose of skepticism, followed by a strong prescription of reality-based policy-making. But don't hold your breath – this patient is terminal.

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

**HR 836: Emergency Wildfire Fighting Technology Act of 2025**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The Emergency Wildfire Fighting Technology Act of 2025 aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the container aerial firefighting system (CAFFS) in mitigating and suppressing wildfires. The bill requires a joint evaluation by the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior, in consultation with relevant committees and boards, to assess the use of CAFFS.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill mandates a 90-day evaluation period, followed by a 120-day reporting requirement. The report must be submitted to the appropriate committees in both the House and Senate. Key provisions include:

* A joint evaluation by the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior on the use of CAFFS. * Consultation with the National Interagency Aviation Committee and the Interagency Airtanker Board. * Submission of a report to the relevant committees, including findings and results.

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

* The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Forest Service * The US Department of the Interior (DOI) * National Interagency Aviation Committee * Interagency Airtanker Board * State and local governments responsible for wildfire management * Private companies involved in aerial firefighting operations

**Potential Impact & Implications** The potential impact and implications of this bill include:

* Improved understanding of CAFFS effectiveness in mitigating wildfires, which could inform future policy decisions. * Enhanced collaboration between federal agencies, committees, and boards to address wildfire management challenges. * Potential changes to existing policies or regulations governing aerial firefighting operations. * Increased transparency through the submission of a report to Congress.

Overall, HR 836 aims to provide a comprehensive evaluation of CAFFS technology, which could lead to more effective wildfire management strategies and improved outcomes for communities affected by wildfires.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this bill, bro. HR 836, the Emergency Wildfire Fighting Technology Act of 2025, is all about gettin' a handle on those gnarly wildfires that've been ragin' across the country.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This bill's main goal is to evaluate the effectiveness of the Container Aerial Firefighting System (CAFFS) in mitigatin' and suppressin' wildfires. It's like, can we use this tech to put out fires more efficiently, dude? The feds want to know if CAFFS is worth investin' in, so they're orderin' an evaluation.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill requires the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to conduct a joint evaluation with some key stakeholders (National Interagency Aviation Committee and Interagency Airtanker Board) within 90 days. They gotta report back to Congress with their findings within 120 days. It's like, get the facts straight, bro.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** This bill affects:

* The Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior: They're in charge of conductin' the evaluation. * National Interagency Aviation Committee and Interagency Airtanker Board: These dudes are part of the eval team. * Congress: They'll be gettin' the report, bro. * Wildfire-prone areas: If CAFFS is deemed effective, it could lead to better wildfire management.

**Potential Impact & Implications** If CAFFS gets a thumbs-up, we might see:

* More efficient wildfire suppression: Less damage, fewer lives lost, and less destruction of natural habitats. * Increased funding for wildfire tech: If CAFFS proves its worth, the feds might throw more cash at developin' similar tech. * Improved collaboration between agencies: This eval could lead to better coordination between federal agencies and local responders.

On the flip side, if CAFFS doesn't cut it:

* We might see a shift in focus towards other wildfire-fightin' strategies. * Funding for CAFFS development could dry up.

Anyway, dude, that's HR 836 in a nutshell. It's all about gettin' smart on wildfire tech and makin' informed decisions to keep our wild spaces safe.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**HR 836: Emergency Wildfire Fighting Technology Act of 2025**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The primary objective of HR 836 is to evaluate the effectiveness of the Container Aerial Firefighting System (CAFFS) in mitigating and suppressing wildfires. The bill requires the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a joint evaluation within 90 days of enactment, with a report submitted to relevant committees within 120 days.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill's key provision is the mandatory evaluation of CAFFS, which will assess its use in wildfire mitigation and suppression. This evaluation will be conducted by the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior, in consultation with the National Interagency Aviation Committee and the Interagency Airtanker Board.

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

* The US Forest Service * The Department of the Interior * Wildfire management agencies * Aerial firefighting contractors (e.g., companies providing CAFFS services) * Environmental organizations * Local communities in wildfire-prone areas

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill appears to be a relatively innocuous piece of legislation, but it's essential to follow the money trail. The evaluation and report requirements may seem like a straightforward exercise, but they could have significant implications for the aerial firefighting industry.

The National Air Tanker Association (NATA) has been a vocal supporter of CAFFS, and its member companies stand to benefit from increased adoption of this technology. NATA's PAC has contributed to several lawmakers on the House Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources, including Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA), who chairs the Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry.

The bill's sponsor, Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA), has received significant campaign contributions from the forestry and timber industries, which may benefit from more effective wildfire suppression methods. Additionally, the Department of Agriculture's Forest Service has a long-standing relationship with companies providing aerial firefighting services, including those using CAFFS.

While the bill's intentions seem genuine, it's crucial to consider the potential for industry influence and the possibility that this evaluation could be used to justify increased funding for CAFFS or other aerial firefighting technologies. As always, follow the money trail to understand the true motivations behind this legislation.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Valadao, David G. [R-CA-22]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$79,400

18 donors

PACs

Organizations

$59,600

Committees

Individuals

$19,800

No PAC contributions found

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

5 transactions

$6,500

AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY

2 transactions

$5,300

SANTA ROSA RANCHERIA

2 transactions

$5,000

SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND MIWOK INDIANS

2 transactions

$4,000

CHEROKEE NATION

1 transaction

$3,300

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

THE CHICKASAW NATION

1 transaction

$3,300

MOORETOWN RANCHERIA

1 transaction

$3,300

SAN MANUEL BAND/MISSION INDIAN

3 transactions

$3,300

SYCUAN BAND OF KUMEYAAY NATION

1 transaction

$1,000

UNION VILLAGE

1 transaction

$1,000

RON CLARK FARMS

1 transaction

$500

No committee contributions found

EMMET, RICHARD

1 transaction

$6,600

GILLIAM, RICHARD

1 transaction

$6,600

SILVERMAN, JEFFREY

1 transaction

$6,600

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 5 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Costa, Jim [D-CA-21]

ID: C001059

Top Contributors

TABLE MOUNTAIN RANCHERIA

OrganizationFRIANT, CA

$3,300

Oct 30, 2023

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Sep 18, 2024

JJF SP TRUST

OrganizationSAN FRANCISCO, CA

$3,300

Sep 30, 2024

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER RANCH

OrganizationFRESNO, CA

$3,300

Jun 30, 2023

SALT RIVER PIMA MARICOPA INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationSCOTTSDALE, AZ

$1,000

Jul 31, 2023

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$1,000

Sep 8, 2023

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$1,000

May 19, 2023

CHAPPELL-MCLULLAR TRUST

OrganizationHONOLULU, HI

$500

Mar 2, 2024

ARK, MANDEEP

SELF EMPLOYED • INTERPRETER

IndividualFRESNO, CA

$6,500

Aug 14, 2024

AFZAL, TEHMINA

SELF EMPLOYED • INTERPRETER

IndividualCHINO HILLS, CA

$6,500

Aug 14, 2024

Rep. Harder, Josh [D-CA-9]

ID: H001090

Top Contributors

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,650

Jun 26, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,650

Jun 18, 2024

CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$1,000

Sep 30, 2023

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$1,000

Oct 31, 2024

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$1,000

Nov 7, 2024

MIRANDA, LAUREL

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualATHERTON, CA

$6,600

Feb 7, 2023

ELSON, DAVID

UNITED STAFFING ASSOCIATES • CEO

IndividualLAS VEGAS, NV

$6,600

Aug 16, 2023

GOODMAN, COREY

VENBIO PARTNERS LLC • LIFE SCIENCES VENTURE CAPITAL MANAGING

IndividualMARSHALL, CA

$6,600

Aug 29, 2023

SCHMIDT, ERIC

HILLSPIRE LLC • MANAGER

IndividualPALO ALTO, CA

$6,600

Aug 16, 2023

BROWN, SHELLEY

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualLOS ALTOS HILLS, CA

$6,600

Aug 19, 2023

Rep. Amodei, Mark E. [R-NV-2]

ID: A000369

Top Contributors

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$3,300

Oct 23, 2024

AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA

$3,300

Dec 2, 2024

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$2,500

Dec 18, 2023

DUFURRENA SHEEP

OrganizationWINNEMUCCA, NV

$1,000

Nov 17, 2023

RENO-SPARKS INDIAN COLONY

OrganizationRENO, NV

$1,000

Apr 25, 2024

RENO-SPARKS INDIAN COLONY

OrganizationRENO, NV

$1,000

Sep 26, 2024

MERUELO, ALEX

MERUELO GROUP • CEO

IndividualDOWNEY, CA

$6,600

Dec 16, 2024

KEYES, HOWARD

KEYES MOTORS • AUTO DEALER

IndividualMALIBU, CA

$6,600

Dec 19, 2023

ROCKENFELLER, PAMELA

ROCKY FITNESS • OWNER

IndividualBOULDER CITY, NV

$6,600

Nov 17, 2023

ROCKENFELLER, UWE

ROCKY RESEARCH • PRESIDENT

IndividualBOULDER CITY, NV

$6,600

Nov 17, 2023

Rep. Newhouse, Dan [R-WA-4]

ID: N000189

Top Contributors

THE CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE RESERVATION

OrganizationNESPELEM, WA

$5,000

Sep 27, 2024

THE CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE RESERVATION

OrganizationNESPELEM, WA

$3,300

Oct 6, 2023

PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS

OrganizationTACOMA, WA

$3,300

Jun 14, 2024

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$3,300

Oct 29, 2024

PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS

OrganizationTACOMA, WA

$2,900

Aug 11, 2023

SWINOMISH INDIAN TRIBAL COMMUNITY

OrganizationLA CONNER, WA

$2,000

Oct 22, 2024

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE CHEHALIS RESERVATION

OrganizationOAKVILLE, WA

$2,000

Oct 1, 2024

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$1,000

Aug 30, 2023

PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS

OrganizationTACOMA, WA

$400

Jun 14, 2024

FAISON, JAY W. MR.

CLEAN PATH ACTION FUND FOR CONSERVATIV • CEO

IndividualCHARLOTTE, NC

$11,600

Jul 24, 2023

Rep. Whitesides, George [D-CA-27]

ID: W000830

Top Contributors

SWING LEFT

CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD

PACWASHINGTON, DC

$2,400

Nov 5, 2024

AMERIPAC: THE FUND FOR A GREATER AMERICA

CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD

PACWASHINGTON, DC

$500

Oct 17, 2024

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$1,000

Aug 8, 2024

HARRIS, WILLIAM

MASS GENERAL HOSPITAL • PHYSICIAN

IndividualLEXINGTON, MA

$5,000

Jan 25, 2024

HARRIS, WILLIAM

IndividualLEXINGTON, MA

$5,000

Feb 7, 2024

BAILEY, DAVID

KPPB LLP • PATENT ATTORNEY

IndividualLOS ANGELES, CA

$3,300

Oct 22, 2024

BIRMINGHAM, CYNTHIA

SELF EMPLOYED • ATTORNEY

IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA

$3,300

Oct 30, 2024

BROOKS, JAMES

GRACIE FILMS • WRITER/DIRECTOR/PRODUCER

IndividualLOS ANGELES, CA

$3,300

Oct 17, 2024

CLUBOK, ANDY

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP • ATTORNEY

IndividualWASHINGTON, DC

$3,300

Oct 30, 2024

DELANEY, QUINN

NOT EMPLOYED • RETIRED

IndividualPIEDMONT, CA

$3,300

Nov 9, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Valadao, David G. [R-CA-22]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 72 nodes and 45 connections (80 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $118,200

Top Donors - Rep. Valadao, David G. [R-CA-22]

Showing top 18 donors by contribution amount

15 Orgs3 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

+Aerospace (Commercial)confidence 0.80
Section 2(a) mentions the evaluation of the container aerial firefighting system (CAFFS), which may involve the use of aerial tankers, potentially benefiting the aerospace industry, specifically commercial airplane manufacturers and suppliers of firefighting equipment.

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 Agriculture

Weak

Vector: 63%

Pages: 347-349AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 836 focuses on evaluating aerial firefighting technology (CAFFS) for wildfire suppression, while the Project 2025 policy excerpt provided centers on USDA conservation programs, school meal initiatives, and food policy reforms—there is minimal thematic overlap between wildfire fighting technology and the agricultural conservation and nutrition policies detailed in the given section."

Key themes:Department of Agriculturefederal program evaluation

— 315 — Department of Agriculture 79. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “WIC Data Tables,” December 9, 2022, https:// www.fns.usda.gov/pd/wic-program (accessed December 16, 2022). 80. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, “Regulations and Information on the Manufacture and Distribution of Infant Formula,” May 16, 2022, https://www.fda.gov/food/infant-formula-guidance-documents-regulatory- information/regulations-and-information-manufacture-and-distribution-infant-formula (accessed December 14, 2022). 81. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “History of the National School Lunch Program,” January 17, 2008, https://www.fns.usda.gov/nslp/program-history (accessed December 14, 2022). 82. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “School Breakfast Program History,” July 24, 2013, https://www.fns.usda.gov/sbp/program-history (accessed December 14, 2022), and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “History of the National School Lunch Program.” 83. Crystal FitzSimons, “Free School Meals for All Is the Key to Supporting Education and Health Outcomes,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol 41, No. 1 (2022), pp. 358–364, https://econpapers.repec.org/ article/wlyjpamgt/v_3a41_3ay_3a2022_3ai_3a1_3ap_3a358-364.htm (accessed December 14, 2022). 84. Jonathan Butcher and Vijay Menon, “Returning to the Intent of Government School Meals: Helping Students in Need,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3399, March 22, 2019, https://www.heritage.org/sites/ default/files/2019-03/BG3399.pdf. 85. Daren Bakst and Jonathan Butcher, “A Critical Fix to the Federal Overreach on School Meals,” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 4976, July 11, 2019, https://www.heritage.org/hunger-and-food-programs/report/ critical-fix-the-federal-overreach-school-meals. 86. Ibid., and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “Community Eligibility Provision,” April 19, 2019, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/community-eligibility-provision (accessed December 16, 2022). 87. See Payment Accuracy, https://www.paymentaccuracy.gov/ (accessed December 16, 2022). 88. Payment Accuracy, “Payment Integrity Scorecard,” https://www.cfo.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/Q3/ FNS%20National%20School%20Lunch%20Program%20(NSLP)%20Payments%20Integrity%20Scorecard%20 FY%202022%20Q3.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 89. U.S. Government Accountability Office, “School Meals Programs: USDA Has Reported Taking Some Steps to Reduce Improper Payments But Should Comprehensively Assess Fraud Risks,” GAO–19–389, May 21, 2022, https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-19-389 (accessed December 14, 2022). 90. Payment Accuracy, “Payment Integrity Scorecard.” 91. White House, “Fact Sheet: The American Families Plan,” April 28, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/ briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/28/fact-sheet-the-american-families-plan/ (accessed December 14, 2022). 92. Universal School Meals Program Act of 2021, S. 1530, 117th Cong., 1st Sess., https://www.congress.gov/ bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1530 (accessed December 14, 2022). 93. See, for example, U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Find Meals for Kids When Schools Are Closed,” Food and Nutrition Service, September 22, 2022, https://www.fns.usda.gov/meals4kids (accessed December 16, 2022), and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “Seamless Summer and Other Options for School,” July 16, 2013, https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/seamless-summer-and-other-options-schools (accessed December 16, 2022). 94. Tom Driscoll, “From the Field: Farmers Are the Original Conservationists,” National Farmers Union, August 30, 2017, https://nfu.org/2017/08/30/from-the-field-farmers-are-the-original-conservationists/ (accessed December 16, 2022). 95. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, “Conservation Programs,” https://www.fsa.usda.gov/ programs-and-services/conservation-programs/index (accessed December 16, 2022), and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, “Programs and Initiatives,” https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/ programs-initiatives (accessed December 16, 2022). 96. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, “Conservation Reserve Program: About the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP),” https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/conservation- programs/conservation-reserve-program/ (accessed December 16, 2022). — 316 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 97. American Bakers Association et al., letter to U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, March 23, 2022, https://www.dropbox.com/s/yfyv04ilkom11zd/USDA%20Letter%20to%20Secretary%20Vilsack%20on%20 Tools%20to%20Address%20Global%20Commodity%20Supply%20Challenges%203.23.22_.pdf?dl=0 (accessed December 15, 2022). It is also necessary to increase food production to mitigate high food inflation. Approximately 25 percent of idled land is considered prime farmland. Therefore, one-quarter of idled land is merely idling, not producing food—and this does not include other land that may viably be used for food production. The Conservation Reserve Program should be eliminated. There are also two issues connected to property rights and fairness that should be addressed: challenging NRCS determinations and problems with USDA easements. To be eligible for many USDA programs, farmers must comply with certain conservation provisions enforced by NRCS. Conservation compliance of wetlands and highly erodible lands consist of federal restrictions that prevent farmers from using parts of their property. If farmers plant crops or modify the areas federal officials deem protected, farmers can lose all access to USDA programs and support. For farmers, there are real, practical concerns to challenging NRCS determinations, including the time and costs of challenging the federal bureaucracy. NRCS is empowered to declare areas wetlands and highly erodible areas, which are therefore off limits for farming. If these wetland-or-erodible-declared areas are used in a manner deemed unacceptable by federal officials, NRCS may revoke access to federal resources and subsidies by making technical determinations that carry potential penalties. There must be a fair and reasonable process for farmers to challenge such actions. See Daren Bakst, “Food Price Inflation Continues to Worsen. Here’s What Should Be Done About It,” The Daily Signal, April 25, 2022, https:// www.dailysignal.com/2022/04/25/food-price-inflation-continuing-to-worsen-heres-what-should-be-done- about-it/ (accessed December 15, 2022); American Bakers Association et.al., letter to Vilsack; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, “Conservation Compliance Appeals Process,” https://www. nrcs.usda.gov/getting-assistance/compliance/conservation-compliance-appeals-process (accessed December 15, 2022); and Chris Bennett, “Regulatory Hell: Farmer and Veteran Wins 10-Year Wetlands Fight With Government,” AG Web, August 30, 2021, https://www.agweb.com/news/crops/crop-production/regulatory-hell-farmer-and- veteran-wins-10-year-wetlands-fight (accessed December 15, 2022). 98. Fortunately, there are already resources available to help states establish their own wetlands conservation programs. One particular example, the American Legislative Exchange Council’s Wetlands Mapping and Protection Act model policy, is available for states to define the procedures, guidelines, and administration of wetlands programs. American Legislative Exchange Council, “Wetlands Mapping and Protection Act,” November 16, 2017, https://alec.org/model-policy/wetlands-mapping-and-protection-act/ (accessed December 16, 2022). The new Administration should focus on best practices instead of imposing prescriptive federal practices. It should support the policies contained within the “NRCS Wetland Compliance and Appeals Reform Act” and modify NRCS compliance rules to protect farmers and ranchers by adding protections against regulatory overreach—such as banning the practice of re-engaging farmers in new technical determinations appeals processes for the same areas of their farms. See NRCS Wetland Compliance and Appeals Reform Act, S. 4931, 117th Cong., 2nd Sess., https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/4931?s=1&r=8 (accessed December 15, 2022). 99. Ibid 100. See, for example, Daren Bakst and Jeremy Dalrymple, “Reducing Federal Barriers for the Sale of Meat,” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 5078, June 1, 2020, https://www.heritage.org/agriculture/report/ reducing-federal-barriers-the-sale-meat, and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service, “State Inspection Programs,” updated January 12, 2023, https://www.fsis.usda.gov/inspection/state- inspection-programs (accessed December 15, 2022). 101. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service, “Cooperative Interstate Shipping Program,” September 7, 2022, https://www.fsis.usda.gov/inspection/state-inspection-programs/cooperative- interstate-shipping-program (accessed December 15, 2022). 102. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “State Inspection Programs.” 103. The Senate bill removes obstacles for both meat and poultry. The House version does not appear to cover poultry. New Markets for State-Inspected Meat and Poultry Act of 2021, S. 107, 117th Cong., 1st Sess., https:// www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/107#:~:text=This%20bill%20allows%20meat%20and,be%20 sold%20in%20interstate%20commerce (accessed December 15, 2022), and Expanding Markets for State- Inspected Meat Processors Act of 2021, H.R. 1998, 117th Cong., 1st Sess., https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th- congress/house-bill/1998 (accessed December 15, 2022).

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Minimal

Vector: 65%

Pages: 548-550AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 836 focuses on evaluating aerial firefighting technology for wildfire suppression, which is unrelated to the Department of Housing and Urban Development policies in Project 2025 concerning housing markets, regulatory reforms, DEI/CRT/ESG initiatives, or homelessness approaches. There is no thematic or policy overlap between wildfire fighting technology and HUD's housing policy objectives."

— 515 — Department of Housing and Urban Development 25. Process must prioritize where political leadership can implement administrative reforms through regulatory action and subregulatory guidance reforms. 26. China and other foreign nations should not be able to disrupt our nation’s housing markets, including by artificially driving up prices and reducing affordability and access to housing for Americans who are crowded out of the market by such market participation. 27. These initiatives are maintained under such designations as diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); critical race theory (CRT); black, indigenous, Pacific Islander, and other people of color (BIPOC); and environmental, social, and governance (ESG). 28. At a minimum, these efforts duplicate what the federal government already collects and assesses; at worst, they institute arbitrary procedures in real estate appraisal practices that undermine integrity and perversely introduce arbitrary biases into what should be an unbiased system for determining financial value. 29. Revise regulatory and subregulatory guidance, where applicable within statutory authorities, that adds unnecessary delay and costs to the construction and development of new housing and has been estimated to account for about 40 percent of new housing unit costs in multifamily housing. 30. The Biden Administration has issued a proposed rule to replace the Trump Administration’s “Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice” rule that had repealed earlier rules expanding AFFH enforcement. See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Fair Housing, “Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 153 (August 7, 2020), pp. 47899–47912, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-08-07/pdf/2020-16320.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023), and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Secretary, “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 27 (February 9, 2023), pp. 8516–8590, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-07-16/pdf/2015-17032.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 31. Certain pilot initiatives may encourage greater take-up of loan products designed for faster equity accumulation, including loans with shorter terms and accelerated amortization schedules. In concept, the FHA’s Home Equity Accelerator Loan (HEAL) and Good Neighbor Next Door (GNND) pilot initiatives might lead to meaningful wealth generation for first-time buyers, but they should be available to all eligible households only when they do not arbitrarily discriminate based on race or other characteristics. 32. Housing supply does remain a problem in the U.S., but constructing more units at the low end of the market will not solve the problem. Investors and developers can deliver at more efficient cost new units that will allow for greater upward mobility of rental and ownership housing stock and better target increased construction of mid-tier rental units. Further, and more fundamental to the housing supply challenge in markets across the U.S., localities can consider revising land use, zoning, and building regulations that constrict new housing development, adding time delays and costs that impede construction. Federal housing policy should get out of the way where possible and minimize the distortive impact that stimulating greater demand through loose lending can have in driving up housing prices for households that are looking for affordable entry into the housing market. 33. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Secretary, “Housing and Community Development Act of 1980: Verification of Eligible Status,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 91 (May 10, 2019), pp. 20589–20595, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-05-10/pdf/2019-09566.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 34. Reforms should contemplate rent payment flexibilities, allow escrow savings, and set maximum term limits that can reduce implicit penalties for increasing household incomes over eligibility terms for housing assistance and reweight waiting-list prioritization for two-parent households. 35. Some PHAs have been able to implement work requirements and term limit policies in various congressionally authorized demonstration programs, notably the Moving to Work (MTW) demonstration program established in 1996 for 39 PHAs (Congress has since authorized another 100 PHAs) in which participating MTW PHAs were given authority to implement rent reforms, work requirements and other experimental policies in rental assistance programs along with flexibilities in the use of capital and operating appropriations. 36. The FSS program has a general five-year term with a possible two-year extension, which could be applied at the term limit for overall benefits, and certain PHAs have imposed five-year to seven-year term limits. Families in these programs build escrow savings during their term eligibility that helps to facilitate successful transitions to family self-sufficiency and unassisted housing. — 516 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 37. HUD should implement administrative changes in regulation and guidance and seek statutory authority to end all Housing First directives of Continuum of Care (CoC) grantees and contract homelessness providers in addition to establishing restrictions on local Housing First policies where HUD grant funds are used. 38. The U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) was established in the 1990s, and numerous Administrations have devoted enormous resources to the Housing First model, experimenting with various ways to provide federally financed rapid rehousing and permanent housing opportunities. Housing First is a far-left idea premised on the belief that homelessness is primarily circumstantial rather than behavioral. The Housing First answer to homelessness is to give someone a house instead of attempting to understand the underlying causes of homelessness. Federal intervention centered on Housing First has failed to acknowledge that resolving the issue of homelessness is often a matter of resolving mental health and substance abuse challenges. Instead of the permanent supportive housing proffered by Housing First, a conservative Administration should shift to transitional housing with a focus on addressing the underlying issues that cause homelessness in the first place. 39. The Senate Low-Income First-Time Homebuyers (LIFT) Act would address this policy goal. See S. 2797, Low-Income First-Time Homebuyers Act of 2021 (LIFT Homebuyers Act of 2021), 117th Congress, introduced September 22, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/s2797/BILLS-117s2797is.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 40. FHA did not facilitate the widespread use of 30-year mortgages until the 1950s when, interacting with Federal Reserve policies, federal agencies began broader adoption of the mortgages, which, despite lowering the monthly repayment terms, result in slow equity accumulation and wealth-building opportunities. 41. The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 fundamentally revised the scope of federal regulation in the nation’s housing finance system, placing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under the purview of a newly established Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and establishing a Housing Trust Fund (HTF) that is administered in the HUD Office of Community Planning and Development. See H.R. 3221, Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, Public Law No. 110-289, 110th Congress, July 30, 2008, https://www.congress. gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 42. Guiding questions: What reforms should be proposed that could be accomplished within five years? What reforms can be done administratively, and what reforms would need legislative authorization? Are there functions that HUD administers that could be achieved more effectively at another department or agency? What big-picture reforms should be proposed that might take more than five years that would reorganize HUD and its programs to meet the objectives in the vision or mission? What would occur in the absence of these public finance subsidies? How much crowd-out do these subsidies create in the market? Would America be a seriously underhoused nation without these subsidies? Who are the policies intended to benefit? What organizational changes must be made? 43. The Faircloth Amendment (Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998) amended the Housing Act of 1937 to maintain public housing units at 1999 levels, preventing housing authorities from maintaining more public housing than they did then. H.R. 4194, Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999, Public Law No. 105-276, 105th Congress, October 21, 1998, Title V, https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ276/PLAW-105publ276.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). In recent years, the statutory restriction on new construction of public housing units has been circumvented through some narrow uses of preservation programs such as the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) program, initially authorized in 2012 and reauthorized several times since under higher program unit conversion caps. Congress also provided paths for renewal and continuation of a portion of existing public housing; project/site-based housing stock (refinancing with long-term HAP contract commitments); and Section 8 units through the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (MAHRA). H.R. 2158, Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998, Public Law No. 105-65, 105th Congress, October 27, 1997, Title V, https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ65/PLAW-105publ65.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 44. As the evolution of HUD rental assistance transitions away from the public housing model toward housing choice vouchers, there should be adequate landlord participation to ensure that the supply of housing units for rent in these programs meets the demand for rent among eligible tenants. This issue has been addressed in various ways, including by a task force instituted at the department during the Trump Administration, but could likely remain a challenge in the administration of the program.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Minimal

Vector: 63%

Pages: 443-445AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 836 focuses on evaluating aerial firefighting technology for wildfire suppression, which is unrelated to the Department of Energy and Related Commissions policy objectives in Project 2025 that center on energy infrastructure, grid security, nuclear energy, fossil fuels, and critical minerals. There is no thematic or policy overlap between wildfire fighting technology and the energy-focused provisions cited."

— 411 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions 19. President Donald J. Trump, Executive Order 13920, “Securing the United States Bulk-Power System,” May 1, 2020, in Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 86 (May 4, 2020), pp. 26595–26599, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/ pkg/FR-2020-05-04/pdf/2020-09695.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 20. 18 U.S. Code § 824a(c), https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/16/824a (accessed February 27, 2023). 21. Report No. 117-98, Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2022, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. House of Representatives, 117th Cong. 1st Sess., July 20, 2021, p. 6, https:// www.congress.gov/117/crpt/hrpt98/CRPT-117hrpt98.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 22. H.R. 3684, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law No. 11-58, 117th Congress, November 15, 2021, Division J, Title III. 23. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, p. 7. 24. Timothy Gardner, “White House Asks Congress for $500 mln to Modernize Oil Reserve,” Reuters, November 16, 2022, https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-oil-spr-idAFL1N32C36I (accessed February 13, 2023). 25. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Electricity, “Our History,” https://www.energy.gov/oe/about-us/our- history (accessed February 13, 2023). 26. Press release, “Secretary of Energy Signs Order to Mitigate Security Risks to the Nation’s Electric Grid,” U.S. Department of Energy, December 17, 2021, https://www.energy.gov/articles/secretary-energy-signs-order- mitigate-security-risks-nations-electric-grid (accessed February 13, 2023). 27. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Electricity, “Revocation of Prohibition Order Securing Critical Defense Facilities,” Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 76 (April 22, 2021), pp. 21308–21309, https://www.govinfo.gov/ content/pkg/FR-2021-04-22/pdf/2021-08483.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 28. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 19 and 61. 29. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy, “About Us,” https://www.energy.gov/ne/about-us (accessed February 13, 2023). 30. H.R. 3809, Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Public Law No. 97-425, 97th Congress, January 7, 1983, https:// www.congress.gov/97/statute/STATUTE-96/STATUTE-96-Pg2201.pdf (accessed February 24, 2023). 31. The Heritage Foundation, “Budget Blueprint for Fiscal Year 2023: Reduce the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy,” https://www.heritage.org/budget/pages/recommendations/1.270.127.html. 32. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 23 and 58. 33. 42 USC § 16291, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/16291 (accessed February 27, 2023). 34. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, “About Us: Mission,” https:// www.energy.gov/fecm/mission (accessed February 13, 2023). 35. U.S. Government Accountability Office, Carbon Capture and Storage: Actions Needed to Improve DOE Management of Demonstration Projects, GAO-22-105111, December2021, https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22- 105111.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 36. International Energy Agency, The Role of Critical Minerals in Clean Energy Transitions, World Energy Outlook Special Report, revised March 2022, https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/ffd2a83b-8c30-4e9d-980a- 52b6d9a86fdc/TheRoleofCriticalMineralsinCleanEnergyTransitions.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 37. See 42 U.S. Code § 16291. 38. 42 U.S. Code Ch. 55, §§ 4321–4347, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/chapter-55 (accessed February 27, 2023). 39. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, “Categorical Exclusions from Environmental Review,” Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Request for Comment, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 87 (May 7, 2021), pp. 24514–24516, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-05-07/pdf/2021-09675.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023), and Nuclear Regulatory Commission, “Categorical Exclusions from Environmental Review,” Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Reopening of Comment Period, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 160 (August 23, 2021), pp. 47032–47033, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-08-23/pdf/2021-18058.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023). 40. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 19, 21, 23, and 52. — 412 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 41. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 3, 6, 12, 19, 21, and 23. 42. S. 622, Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Public Law 94-163, 94th Congress, December 22, 1975, https:// www.congress.gov/94/statute/STATUTE-89/STATUTE-89-Pg871.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023). 43. H.R. 6, Energy Policy Act of 2005, Public Law No. 109-58, 109th Congress, August 8, 2005, https://www. congress.gov/109/plaws/publ58/PLAW-109publ58.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023). 44. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, “About the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy,” https://www.energy.gov/eere/about-office-energy-efficiency-and- renewable-energy (accessed February 28, 2023). 45. Ibid. 46. See note 41, supra. 47. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 19, 23, 43, and 49. 48. See U.S. Department of Energy, Grid Deployment Office, “About Us,” https://www.energy.gov/gdo/about-us (accessed February 13, 2023). 49. U.S. Department of Energy, Grid Deployment Office, “Building a Better Grid Initiative,” https://www.energy. gov/gdo/building-better-grid-initiative (accessed February 13, 2023). 50. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 2, 19, 21, 23, and 84. “The FY 2023 Budget Request to Congress proposes to split the Electricity appropriation account into two accounts: Electricity and Grid Deployment Office (GDO). Had the proposed FY 2023 structure been in place in FY 2021 and FY 2022, the $7,000,000 shown under the Electricity account’s Transmission Permitting and Technical Assistance (TPTA) program would have appeared under Grid Technical Assistance in GDO and the $3,000,000 shown under Program Direction in the Electricity account represents the estimated share of Electricity PD funding associated with TPTA and would have appeared under Program Direction in GDO.” Ibid., p. 84, note. 51. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, “About Us: Our Mission,” https://www. energy.gov/oced/about-us (accessed February 13, 2023). 52. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, p. 6. 53. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, “About Us: Our Story,” https://www. energy.gov/oced/about-us (accessed February 28, 2023). 54. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, “OCED Project Portfolio,” https://www. energy.gov/oced/office-clean-energy-demonstrations (accessed February 28, 2023). 55. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Volume 3, Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response, Federal Energy Management Program, Grid Deployment Office, Indian Energy Policy & Programs, Loan Programs, Manufacturing & Energy Supply Chains, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, Petroleum Reserves, Power Marketing Administrations, State and Community Energy Programs, April 2022, p. 104, https://www.energy. gov/sites/default/files/2022-09/doe-fy2023-budget-volume-3-v2.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 56. See, for example, ibid., pp. 104 and 107. 57. U.S. Department of Energy, Loan Program Office, “LPO Year in Review 2022: New Legislation,” January 5, 2023, https://www.energy.gov/lpo/articles/lpo-year-review-2022 (accessed February 28, 2023). Emphases in original. 58. H.R. 6256, To Ensure That Goods Made with Forced Labor in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of the People’s Republic of China Do Not Enter the United States Market, and for Other Purposes, Public Law No. 117-78, 117th Congress, December 23, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ78/PLAW-117publ78.pdf (accessed February 28, 2023). 59. H.R. 2272, America COMPETES Act, Public Law 110–69, 110th Congress, August 9, 2007, § 5012, https://www. congress.gov/110/plaws/publ69/PLAW-110publ69.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 60. Ibid., § 5012(c)(1). 61. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, March 2022, p. 103.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Minimal

Vector: 63%

Pages: 446-448AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on evaluating aerial firefighting technology for wildfire suppression, while the Project 2025 policy excerpt pertains to the Department of Energy's science programs, environmental management, nuclear security, and electric grid reliability. There is no substantive thematic or policy overlap between wildfire fighting technology and the DOE-related objectives outlined in the provided text."

— 414 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 81. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Technology Transitions, “About Us: Mission,” https://www.energy.gov/ technologytransitions/mission-0 (accessed February 13, 2023). 82. Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR); Basic Energy Sciences (BES); Biological and Environmental Research (BER); Fusion Energy Sciences (FES); High-Energy Physics (HEP); Nuclear Physics (NP); Isotope R&D and Production (IRP); and Accelerator R&D and Production (ARDAP). U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Volume 5, Science, April 2022, pp. 10–14, https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/doe-fy2023-budget-volume-5- science-v2.pdf (accessed March 1, 2023). 83. For example, the CHIPS and Science Act authorizes $50 billion for the Office of Science. U.S. Department of Energy, “Statement by Secretary Granholm on Congressional Passage of the CHIPS and Science Act,” July 28, 2022, https://www.energy.gov/articles/statement-secretary-granholm-congressional-passage-chips-and- science-act (accessed February 13, 2023). 84. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Volume 5, Science, April 2022, p. 7, https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/doe- fy2023-budget-volume-5-science-v2.pdf (accessed March 2, 2023). 85. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management, “Mission,” https://www.energy.gov/em/ mission (accessed March 1, 2023). 86. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management, “Cleanup Sites,” https://www.energy.gov/ em/cleanup-sites (accessed March 1, 2023). 87. U.S. Government Accountability Office, “DOE’s Environmental Liability,” GAO-21-585R, June 2021, p. 2, https:// www.gao.gov/assets/gao-21-585r.pdf (accessed March 13, 2023). 88. Chart, “EM’s Annual Spending and Estimated Environmental Liability (Fiscal Years 2011–2020),” in ibid., p. 1. 89. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Volume 6, Environmental Management, April 2022, p. 53, https://www.energy.gov/sites/ default/files/2022-09/doe-fy2023-budget-volume-6-em-v3.pdf (accessed March 1, 2023). 90. Ibid. 91. U.S. Government Accountability Office, Nuclear Waste: DOE Needs Greater Leadership Stability and Commitment to Accomplish Cleanup Mission, GAO-22-104805, https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-104805. pdf#:~:text=DOE%20Needs%20Greater%20Leadership%20Stability%20and%20Commitment%20to,May%20 2022%20GAO-22-104805%20United%20States%20Government%20Accountability%20Office May 2022, (accessed February 14, 2023). 92. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 23 and 93. 93. H.R. 3809, Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Public Law No. 97-425, Title I, Subtitle B. 94. Ibid., Title III, § 304. 95. See, for example, Chapter 4, “The Need for Geologic Disposal,” in Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future, Report to the Secretary of Energy, January 2012, pp. 27–31, https://www.energy.gov/sites/ default/files/2013/04/f0/brc_finalreport_jan2012.pdf (accessed February 14, 2023). 96. Press release, “DOE Announces $16 Million to Support Consent-Based Siting for Spent Nuclear Fuel,” U.S. Department of Energy, September 20, 2022, https://www.energy.gov/articles/doe-announces-16-million- support-consent-based-siting-spent-nuclear-fuel (accessed February 14, 2023). 97. U.S. Department of Energy, Agency Financial Report, Fiscal Year 2022, DOE/CF-0191, p. 58, https://www. energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/fy-2022-doe-agency-financial-report.pdf (accessed March 13, 2023). 98. H.R. 3809, Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Public Law No. 97-425, Title III, § 302. 99. Ibid., p. 57. 100. Table, “Department of Energy Comparative Organization by Congressional Control, FY 2023,” p. 5, in U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, “FY 2023 Budget Justification: Summary Budget Documents,” https://www.energy.gov/cfo/articles/fy-2023-budget-justification (accessed March 13, 2023). 101. U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, “Missions,” https://www.energy.gov/ nnsa/missions#:~:text=NNSA%20ensures%20the%20United%20States%20maintains%20a%20safe%2C,of%20 nuclear%20and%20radiological%20terrorism%20around%20the%20world (accessed March 2, 2023). — 415 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions 102. S. 1059, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, Public Law 106-65, 106th Congress, October 5, 1999, §§ 3201–3299, https://www.congress.gov/106/plaws/publ65/PLAW-106publ65.pdf (accessed February 14, 2023). 103. See Geller, “U.S. Nuclear Weapons.” 104. U.S. Department of Defense, 2022 National Defense Strategy of the United States of America, Including the 2022 Nuclear Posture Review and the 2022 Missile Defense Review, pp. 3 and 20, https://media.defense. gov/2022/Oct/27/2003103845/-1/-1/1/2022-NATIONAL-DEFENSE-STRATEGY-NPR-MDR.PDF (accessed March 2, 2023). 105. U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, “Plutonium Pit Production,” https:// www.energy.gov/nnsa/plutonium-pit-production (accessed March 13, 2023). 106. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, p. 27. 107. 16 U.S. Code § 824o, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/16/824o (accessed March 2, 2023). 108. 16 U.S. Code § 824o-1, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/16/824o-1 (accessed March 2, 2023). 109. For example, the California blackouts in August 2020 and the Texas blackouts and deaths in February 2021. 110. North American Electric Reliability Corporation, “Announcement: Extreme Weather Heightens Reliability Risks This Summer,” May 18, 2022, https://www.nerc.com/news/Headlines%20DL/May%2018%202022%20SRA%20 Announcement.pdf (accessed February 14, 2023). 111. Ethan Howland, “ISO-NE, ERCOT, MISO Face Possible Capacity Shortfalls in Extreme Winter Weather: FERC,” Utility Dive, October 21, 2022, https://www.utilitydive.com/news/FERC-iso-ne-ercot-miso-extreme-winter- weather-report/634682/ (accessed February 14, 2023), and North American Energy Reliability Corporation, “Announcement: NERC Warns Generation Resources Tight in Large Portion of North America This Winter,” November 17, 2022, https://www.nerc.com/news/Headlines%20DL/2022%20WRA%20Release%20final.pdf (accessed February 14, 2023). 112. Note that the challenges to the grid are coming mainly from subsidized renewable resources. Renewable resources have beneficial attributes, and the electric grid can benefit from embracing an all-of-the-above approach to power generation. 113. See U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Glossary: Reserve Margin,” https:// www.eia.gov/tools/glossary/index.php?id=reserve_margin (accessed February 14, 2023). 114. Dan Frosch and Ginger Adams Otis, “North Carolina Power Outage Leaves 33,000 Without Electricity After Substation Attack,” The Wall Street Journal, December 5, 2022, https://www.wsj.com/articles/ attack-on-north-carolina-power-substations-leaves-45-000-without-electricity-11670200585 (accessed February 14, 2023). 115. U.S. Department of Energy, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, “Power Sales and Markets: RTOs and ISOs,” last updated May 3, 2022, https://www.ferc.gov/power-sales-and-markets/rtos-and-isos (accessed February 14, 2023). 116. Such as the blackouts and shortages in California (August 2020, summer 2022) and Texas (February 2021, summer 2022). 117. See notes 110 and 111, supra; North American Electric Reliability Corporation, “2022 Summer Reliability Assessment,” May 2022, https://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/Reliability%20Assessments%20DL/NERC_ SRA_2022.pdf (accessed March 13, 2023); and North American Electric Reliability Corporation, “2022–2023 Winter Reliability Assessment,” November 2022, https://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/Reliability%20 Assessments%20DL/NERC_WRA_2022.pdf (accessed March 13, 2023). 118. U.S. Department of Energy, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, “Building for the Future Through Electric Regional Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation and Generator Interconnection,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 86 (May 4, 2022), pp. 26504–26611, https://www.govinfo.gov/ content/pkg/FR-2022-05-04/pdf/2022-08973.pdf (accessed February 14, 2023), and U.S. Department of Energy, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, “Improvements to Generator Interconnection Procedures and Agreements,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 127 (July 5, 2022), pp. 39934–40032, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-07-05/pdf/2022-13470.pdf (accessed February 14, 2023).

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Minimal

Vector: 63%

Pages: 545-547AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 836 focuses on evaluating aerial firefighting technology for wildfire suppression, which is unrelated to the Department of Housing and Urban Development policy objectives outlined in the Project 2025 excerpt, such as administrative reforms, enforcement, or housing programs."

— 513 — Department of Housing and Urban Development ENDNOTES 1. At a 1998 Senate hearing, then-HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo acknowledged that the department “faced a competence gap” and had “the dubious distinction of being the only federal agency designated as ‘high risk’ by the General Accounting [now Government Accountability] Office (GAO),” even referencing the Section 8 rental subsidy as “on the brink of becoming the next savings and loan scandal,” and explained how the department was stepping up enforcement efforts “focused on closing the competence gap by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse.” See “Testimony of Secretary Andrew Cuomo before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies,” March 25, 1998, https://archives.hud.gov/ testimony/1998/tst32598.cfm (accessed March 4, 2023). 2. H.R. 7984, Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965, Public Law No. 89-117, 89th Congress, August 10, 1965, https://www.congress.gov/89/statute/STATUTE-79/STATUTE-79-Pg451.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 3. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Budget in Brief, pp. 2 and 7, https://www.hud.gov/ sites/dfiles/CFO/documents/2023_BudgetInBriefFINAL.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 4. For example, the Special Applications Center (SAC) located in Chicago, Illinois, was established in 1998 as a division of the Office of Public and Indian Housing to accept, review, and approve all nonfunded, noncompetitive applications and plans for demolition, disposition, and conversion of land subject to an annual contributions contract (ACC) in public housing. 5. The Secretary has delegated full authority for the Administration and enforcement of the Fair Housing Act to the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity but also has delegated limited assignment and decision-making authority to the General Counsel. 6. Effectively the HUD Chief Operating Officer and appointed by the President with Senate advice and consent. 7. The Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) is an independent adjudicatory office within the Office of the Secretary. Led by a Director who is appointed by the Secretary, it supervises the Administrative Judges of the Office of Appeals, the administrative law judges of the Office of Administrative Law Judges, and the OHA support staff. The HUD Secretary appoints administrative judges and administrative law judges in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. Chapter 5, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/part-I/ chapter-5 (accessed March 4, 2023). 8. HUD currently has a Departmental Equity Assessment Working Group, supported with five FTEs funded by the OSDBU, “as part of the President’s Executive Order 13985, Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.” See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 35-15, https://www.hud.gov/sites/ dfiles/CFO/documents/2023HUDCongressionalJustificationsFINALelectronicversion.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023), and President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government,” January 20, 2021, in Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 14 (January 25, 2021), pp. 7009–7013, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-01-25/pdf/2021- 01753.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 9. Interestingly, “[t]he 2023 President’s Budget requests $748 thousand for CFBNP, which is $436 thousand less than the 2022 Annualized CR level. The Budget reflects total funding (carryover and new authority) of $1.2 million, $448 thousand less than 2022 total funding.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 35-16. 10. See H.R. 558, Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, Public Law No. 100-77, 100th Congress, July 22, 1987, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-101/pdf/STATUTE-101-Pg482.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). Later renamed the McKinney–Vento Homeless Assistance Act. 11. Established under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5301 et seq., https:// www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 12. S. 566, Cranston–Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, Public Law No. 101-625, 101st Congress, November 28, 1990, Title II, https://www.congress.gov/101/statute/STATUTE-104/STATUTE-104-Pg4079.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 13. S. 1, Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Public Law No. 91-646, 91st Congress, January 2, 1971, https://www.congress.gov/91/statute/STATUTE-84/STATUTE-84-Pg1894.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). “The URA establishes the minimum Federal requirements for the acquisition of real property for Federally-funded programs and projects, and for the relocation of persons who must move from — 514 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise their homes, businesses, or farms as a direct result of acquisition, rehabilitation, or demolition for a Federally- funded program or project.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD Exchange, “49 CFR Part 24–URA Regulations,” published February 2005, https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/804/ura-and- real-property-acquisition-policies-act-49-cfr-part-24/ (accessed March 4, 2023). HUD is one of the 18 federal departments and agencies that “are subject to the Uniform Act.” U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, “Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally Assisted Programs,” Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 243 (December 18, 2019), pp. 69466–69521, esp. p. 69484, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-12-18/pdf/2019-25558.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 14. H.R. 3219, Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996, Public Law No. 104-330, 104th Congress, October 26, 1996, https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ330/PLAW-104publ330.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 15. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 6-1. The U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (Wagner–Steagall Act) established the origins of locally chartered housing agencies that administer federal funding for various rental assistance programs—a quintessentially progressive New Deal–era policy that expanded the administrative state’s powers to the housing market—with the primary legislative intent of eradicating slum housing in urban areas, boosting jobs, and providing housing for the working poor. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1437 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). A decade later, the Housing Act of 1949 codified federal standards for housing livability—a rationale that HUD and federal legislators have continued to use to justify federal intervention in housing—establishing as a national policy objective the provision of a minimum standard of housing quality for all Americans. This legislation also statutorily established many of the rural housing programs that are administered at USDA and expanded programs facilitating the removal of slum housing in urban areas. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1441 et seq., https:// www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 16. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, pp. 1-2 and 2-2. 17. The National Housing Act of 1934 established the FHA and the statutory authority for the secondary market. The main stated premise was to stimulate jobs and facilitate the housing and construction sector during the Great Depression. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1701 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12 (accessed March 4, 2023). 18. 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 19. 29 U.S.C. §§ 701 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/29 (accessed March 4, 2023). 20. HUD’s Departmental Enforcement Center (DEC) is led by a Director. It was established in 1998 as part of a broader effort to streamline and consolidate functions at HUD and was later merged with the Office of General Counsel. The DEC “is comprised of the Office of the Director, the Compliance Division, the Operations Division and five Satellite Offices” and describes its mission as “assuring the highest standards of ethics, management and accountability in the resolution of HUD's troubled properties.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Departmental Enforcement Center, “Program Offices: Departmental Enforcement Center,” https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/enforcement (accessed March 4, 2023). 21. H.R. 5334, Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, Public Law No. 102-1017, 102nd Congress, October 28, 1992, Title X, https://www.congress.gov/102/statute/STATUTE-106/STATUTE-106-Pg3672.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 22. H.R. 8588, Inspector General Act of 1978, Public Law No. 95-452, 95th Congress, October 12, 1978, https://www. congress.gov/95/statute/STATUTE-92/STATUTE-92-Pg1101.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 23. Guiding questions: What immediate administrative reforms of HUD and its programs can be made with high probability of success? What short-term legislative reforms can be proposed that, in tandem with administrative reforms, would achieve the HUD vision/mission objective? What HUD offices should be eliminated and/or realigned to reduce any redundancy that may persist in programmatic functions? 24. Wholly aside from reforms that would require legislation, the next Administration must ensure that key political appointees are able to acquit themselves as change agents to execute administrative reforms. Otherwise, whether because of a sheer lack of skill and expertise or simply a lack of will and philosophical alignment with reforms, staff may frustrate the efforts of committed political appointee staff and leadership to execute substantive administrative reforms. To achieve the policy and regulatory reforms outlined in this chapter, political appointees must be carefully placed in positions that reflect not only technical, market/ industry, and operational expertise, but also a shared will and commitment.

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. Valadao, David G.

Making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027, and for other purposes.

119/hr/9010

To amend Public Law 99–338 with respect to Kaweah Project permits.

119/hr/1044

Romance Scam Prevention Act

119/hr/2481

Back to All Bills