Condemning the persecution of Christians in Nigeria and standing ready to support President Donald J. Trump in taking decisive action to end the existential threat that persecuted Christians face in Nigeria.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hres/866

Last Updated: November 12, 2025

Condemning the persecution of Christians in Nigeria and standing ready to support President Donald J. Trump in taking decisive action to end the existential threat that persecuted Christians face in Nigeria.

HRES. 866, 119th Congress.

The sponsor

Rep. Moore, Riley M. [R-WV-2]

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

The money

$91,000 raised

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

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Agency for International Development" section, p. 294-296 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Invalid Date

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed Senate

🏛️

House Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

**Analysis of HRES 866**

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I'll dissect this congressional bill through the lens of its potential impact on my business empire and the global landscape.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This resolution aims to condemn the persecution of Christians in Nigeria and express support for President Trump's efforts to address this issue. The primary objective is to pressure the Nigerian government to take decisive action against radical Islamic terrorists and protect Christian communities.

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

1. Condemns the persecution of Christians in Nigeria. 2. Expresses support for President Trump's actions to address this issue. 3. Calls on the US government to use diplomatic, economic, and security tools to pressure the Nigerian government to: * End impunity for perpetrators of religiously motivated violence. * Protect Christian communities and clergy from further attacks. * Return internally-displaced persons to their homelands. * Repeal blasphemy laws and release prisoners detained for their faith.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The key stakeholders include:

1. The Nigerian government, which will face increased pressure to address the persecution of Christians. 2. Christian communities in Nigeria, who may benefit from increased protection and support. 3. Radical Islamic terrorist groups, such as Boko Haram and ISWAP, which may face increased scrutiny and opposition. 4. US businesses with interests in Nigeria, including my own ventures, which may be impacted by changes in diplomatic relations or economic sanctions.

**Potential Impact & Implications** From a business perspective, this bill has limited direct implications for my empire. However, it's essential to consider the potential ripple effects:

1. **Geopolitical instability**: Increased tensions between the US and Nigeria could lead to market volatility and affect trade relationships. 2. **Regulatory changes**: Potential sanctions or diplomatic measures against Nigeria may impact businesses operating in the region. 3. **Humanitarian efforts**: The bill's emphasis on humanitarian aid and support for persecuted Christians may create opportunities for my philanthropic endeavors.

In conclusion, while this bill doesn't directly target my business interests, it's crucial to monitor its progress and potential implications for global markets and diplomatic relations. As a visionary leader, I'll continue to adapt and evolve my strategies to navigate the ever-changing landscape of geopolitics and regulation.

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 resolution is a formal expression of opinion or intention by the legislative body. In this case, HRES 866 aims to condemn the persecution of Christians in Nigeria and express support for President Trump's efforts to address the issue.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this resolution is to bring attention to the severe human rights abuses faced by Christians in Nigeria, particularly at the hands of Boko Haram, ISWAP, and Fulani militant groups. The objectives are threefold:

1. To condemn the persecution and targeted killing of Christians in Nigeria. 2. To express support for President Trump's efforts to address this issue. 3. To call upon the US government to take decisive action to protect Christian communities and clergy.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This resolution does not propose any changes to existing law, but rather serves as a statement of intent and a call to action. However, it does:

1. Urge the Nigerian Government to end impunity for perpetrators of religiously motivated violence. 2. Call upon the US government to use diplomatic, economic, and security tools to pressure Nigeria to protect Christian communities and clergy. 3. Encourage coordination with international partners to deliver humanitarian aid directly to victims.

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

1. Christians in Nigeria, particularly those living in areas controlled by Boko Haram, ISWAP, and Fulani militant groups. 2. The Nigerian Government, which is accused of failing to act in defense of Christians. 3. The US government, which is being called upon to take action to protect Christian communities and clergy.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this resolution is largely symbolic, as it does not propose any concrete legislative changes. However, if passed, it could:

1. Raise awareness about the plight of Christians in Nigeria and put pressure on the Nigerian Government to address the issue. 2. Influence US foreign policy towards Nigeria, potentially leading to increased diplomatic efforts or economic sanctions. 3. Embolden other countries to take a stronger stance against religious persecution.

Now, I hope this summary has been enlightening for you all. As we covered in 8th grade civics class, resolutions like this one are an important part of the legislative process, and it's essential to understand their purpose and implications.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

My fellow truth-seekers, gather 'round and listen closely, for I have uncovered a web of deceit and hidden agendas within the seemingly innocuous HRES 866 bill. On the surface, this resolution appears to condemn the persecution of Christians in Nigeria and pledge support for President Trump's efforts to address this issue. But, my friends, do not be fooled.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of this bill is to create a narrative that justifies increased US intervention in Nigerian affairs under the guise of protecting persecuted Christians. This sets the stage for potential military action, economic sanctions, or other forms of coercion against the Nigerian government.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** Section 3 of the resolution calls upon the US Government to use "all available diplomatic, economic, and security tools" to pressure Nigeria into taking specific actions. This is a thinly veiled threat, implying that the US will impose its will on Nigeria through various means, including potential regime change.

The bill also references the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, which allows for sanctions against countries deemed to be violating religious freedom. This provision sets the stage for future economic warfare against Nigeria if it fails to comply with US demands.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The primary beneficiaries of this resolution are Christian groups and organizations in Nigeria, who will receive increased support and protection from the US government. However, this also creates a power imbalance, as Muslim groups may feel marginalized or targeted by the US's actions.

The Nigerian government is also a key stakeholder, as it faces potential economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, and even military intervention if it fails to comply with US demands.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This resolution has far-reaching implications for global politics and international relations. By inserting itself into Nigeria's internal affairs, the US risks exacerbating existing tensions and creating new conflicts. The bill also sets a precedent for future interventions in other countries under the guise of protecting persecuted minorities.

Furthermore, this resolution may be part of a larger strategy to create a narrative that justifies increased US military presence in Africa, potentially as a counterbalance to Chinese influence on the continent.

In conclusion, my fellow truth-seekers, HRES 866 is not what it seems. Beneath its surface-level condemnation of Christian persecution lies a complex web of hidden agendas, power plays, and potential regime change. Stay vigilant, for the truth is often hidden in plain sight.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, we've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here. HRES 866 is all about condemning the persecution of Christians in Nigeria and... (dramatic pause) ...supporting President Trump's "decisive action" to end this existential threat. (Smirk) Because, you know, no one knows more about decisive action than our fearless leader.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This resolution is all about standing up for persecuted Christians in Nigeria and holding the Nigerian government accountable for its failure to protect them. It's a noble cause, folks, but let's be real – this is also a clever way to bash the Biden administration for removing Nigeria from the Country of Particular Concern list back in 2021.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill doesn't actually change any existing law, but it does call on the US government to use all available diplomatic, economic, and security tools to pressure the Nigerian government into action. This includes ending impunity for perpetrators of religiously motivated violence, protecting Christian communities, and repealing blasphemy laws. (Wink) Because who needs due process when you've got a good ol' fashioned witch hunt?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Well, this one's a no-brainer – persecuted Christians in Nigeria are the clear winners here. But let's not forget about President Trump, who gets to look like a hero for taking "decisive action" (again, with the decisive action). The Nigerian government, on the other hand, is probably not too thrilled about being called out for its human rights abuses.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has all the makings of a classic conservative rallying cry – it's got freedom, it's got Christianity, and it's got a healthy dose of outrage. But let's be real, folks – this is mostly just a symbolic gesture. It won't actually change much on the ground in Nigeria, but it'll sure make for some great TV. And who knows? Maybe President Trump will even get to tweet about it.

(Smirk) So there you have it, folks – HRES 866: because freedom isn't free, and neither is a good PR stunt.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

(sigh) Oh joy, another exercise in Congressional grandstanding. Let's dissect this farce.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This resolution is a masterclass in moral posturing, condemning the persecution of Christians in Nigeria while pretending to care about human rights. The real purpose? To curry favor with Evangelical voters and score cheap points against the Biden administration for removing Nigeria from the "Country of Particular Concern" list.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The resolution is a laundry list of empty condemnations, calling on the Nigerian government to do things it has no intention of doing. The only concrete action proposed is to support President Trump (yes, that's right, Trump) in taking "decisive action" – code for "we have no idea what we're doing, but let's sound tough." No actual policy changes or legislative teeth are proposed.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: Evangelical voters, Nigerian Christians, and the occasional politician looking to score points. Oh, and let's not forget the Nigerian government, which will likely ignore this resolution while continuing to persecute Christians with impunity.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Zero. Zilch. Nada. This resolution is a feel-good exercise in futility. It won't change the situation on the ground in Nigeria, nor will it pressure the Nigerian government to take meaningful action. The only impact will be to further polarize American politics and provide a fleeting PR boost for the sponsors of this resolution.

Diagnosis: **Legislative Theater-itis**, a chronic condition characterized by grandstanding, empty rhetoric, and a complete lack of substance. Symptoms include:

* Overuse of buzzwords like "existential threat" and "human rights" * Failure to propose concrete policy changes or legislative solutions * Pandering to special interest groups (in this case, Evangelical voters) * Ignoring the complexities of international relations and geopolitics

Treatment: **Reality Check**. A healthy dose of skepticism, critical thinking, and a willingness to engage with the actual issues at hand might help alleviate symptoms. However, given the entrenched nature of Legislative Theater-itis in Washington D.C., I wouldn't hold my breath.

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

**Main Purpose and Objectives**

HRES 866 is a resolution that condemns the persecution of Christians in Nigeria and expresses support for President Donald J. Trump's efforts to address this issue. The main purpose of the bill is to raise awareness about the severe violence and human rights abuses faced by Christians in Nigeria, particularly at the hands of Boko Haram, the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP), and Fulani militant groups.

**Key Provisions and Changes to Existing Law**

The resolution:

1. Condemns the persecution of Christians in Nigeria and the Nigerian Government's failure to act in defense of Christians. 2. Expresses support for President Trump's efforts to address this issue, including his decision to designate Nigeria as a "Country of Particular Concern" (CPC) under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. 3. Calls on the US Government to use diplomatic, economic, and security tools to pressure the Nigerian Government to: * End impunity for perpetrators of religiously motivated violence * Protect Christian communities and clergy from further attacks * Return internally-displaced persons to their homelands, particularly amongst Christian communities * Repeal blasphemy laws and release all prisoners detained for their faith 4. Encourages coordination with international partners to deliver humanitarian aid directly to victims through trusted non-governmental and faith-based organizations.

**Affected Parties and Stakeholders**

1. Christians in Nigeria: The resolution specifically highlights the persecution faced by Christians in Nigeria, who are being targeted by Boko Haram, ISWAP, and Fulani militant groups. 2. Nigerian Government: The resolution criticizes the Nigerian Government's failure to act in defense of Christians and calls on them to take concrete steps to address this issue. 3. US Government: The resolution expresses support for President Trump's efforts to address this issue and calls on the US Government to use its diplomatic, economic, and security tools to pressure the Nigerian Government. 4. International partners: The resolution encourages coordination with international partners to deliver humanitarian aid directly to victims.

**Potential Impact and Implications**

1. Increased awareness: The resolution raises awareness about the severe violence and human rights abuses faced by Christians in Nigeria, which could lead to increased attention and action from policymakers and civil society organizations. 2. Pressure on Nigerian Government: The resolution's call for the US Government to use diplomatic, economic, and security tools to pressure the Nigerian Government may lead to increased pressure on the government to address this issue. 3. Humanitarian aid: The resolution's encouragement of coordination with international partners to deliver humanitarian aid directly to victims could lead to increased support for affected communities. 4. Implications for US-Nigeria relations: The resolution's criticism of the Nigerian Government and call for action may have implications for US-Nigeria relations, potentially leading to increased tensions or cooperation on this issue.

Overall, HRES 866 is a symbolic resolution that aims to raise awareness about the persecution of Christians in Nigeria and express support

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this congressional bill, HRES 866, and get into the nitty-gritty.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

This resolution is all about condemning the persecution of Christians in Nigeria and calling on President Trump to take decisive action to end it. The main objective is to raise awareness about the dire situation faced by Nigerian Christians and to push for concrete actions from the US government to support them.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill doesn't introduce new laws, but rather:

1. Condemns the persecution of Christians in Nigeria. 2. Calls on President Trump to take action against the Nigerian government's failure to protect Christians. 3. Urges the US government to use diplomatic, economic, and security tools to pressure Nigeria to: * End impunity for perpetrators of religiously motivated violence. * Protect Christian communities and clergy from attacks. * Return internally displaced persons (IDPs) to their homelands. * Repeal blasphemy laws and release prisoners detained for their faith.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill affects:

1. Nigerian Christians: The primary beneficiaries of this resolution, who face severe persecution and violence. 2. The Nigerian government: Criticized for its inaction and denial of religious persecution. 3. President Trump: Called upon to take decisive action against Nigeria's human rights abuses. 4. US government agencies: Encouraged to coordinate with international partners to deliver humanitarian aid directly to victims.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

If this resolution is passed, it could:

1. Raise awareness about the plight of Nigerian Christians and put pressure on the Nigerian government to act. 2. Lead to increased diplomatic efforts from the US to address human rights abuses in Nigeria. 3. Result in economic sanctions or other measures against the Nigerian government if they fail to comply with US demands. 4. Strengthen international cooperation to deliver humanitarian aid directly to victims.

However, it's worth noting that this is a non-binding resolution, meaning it doesn't have the force of law. It's more of a statement of intent and a call to action from Congress.

In conclusion, HRES 866 is a powerful statement against religious persecution in Nigeria, but its impact will depend on follow-up actions from the US government and international partners.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

HRES 866 is a resolution condemning the persecution of Christians in Nigeria and expressing support for President Donald J. Trump's efforts to address this issue. The bill aims to raise awareness about the systematic targeting of Christian communities by Boko Haram, ISWAP, and Fulani militants, as well as the Nigerian government's failure to protect them.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The resolution:

1. Condemns the persecution of Christians in Nigeria and calls for decisive action from President Trump. 2. Urges the US government to use diplomatic, economic, and security tools to pressure the Nigerian government to: * End impunity for perpetrators of religiously motivated violence. * Protect Christian communities and clergy from further attacks. * Return internally displaced persons to their homelands, particularly amongst Christian communities. * Repeal blasphemy laws and release all prisoners detained for their faith. 3. Encourages coordination with international partners to deliver humanitarian aid directly to victims through trusted NGOs and faith-based organizations.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

1. Persecuted Christians in Nigeria: The resolution aims to raise awareness about their plight and advocate for their protection. 2. Nigerian government: The bill criticizes the government's failure to protect Christian communities and calls for reforms. 3. US government: The resolution encourages the use of diplomatic, economic, and security tools to pressure the Nigerian government. 4. International partners: The bill promotes coordination with international organizations to deliver humanitarian aid.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

1. Increased awareness about the persecution of Christians in Nigeria, potentially leading to greater international pressure on the Nigerian government to address this issue. 2. Potential sanctions or diplomatic measures against the Nigerian government if it fails to reform its policies and protect Christian communities. 3. Humanitarian aid may be delivered more effectively through trusted NGOs and faith-based organizations, benefiting persecuted Christians. 4. The resolution's emphasis on repealing blasphemy laws could lead to greater freedom of speech and religion in Nigeria.

**Monied Interest Analysis**

While there are no explicit mentions of PACs or industry lobby groups backing this bill, it is likely that Christian advocacy groups and human rights organizations have played a role in shaping the legislation. The resolution's focus on religious persecution and blasphemy laws may also be influenced by conservative Christian groups, which often prioritize issues related to religious freedom.

**Committee Capture and Conflicts of Interest**

The Committee on Foreign Affairs, to which this bill was referred, has historically been influenced by various special interest groups, including those focused on human rights, international development, and national security. However, there is no clear evidence of committee capture or conflicts of interest related to this specific bill.

**Hidden Motivations and Backroom Deals**

While the resolution's primary objective appears to be raising awareness about the persecution of Christians in Nigeria, some critics may argue that it serves as a vehicle for conservative Christian groups to promote their agenda on religious freedom.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Moore, Riley M. [R-WV-2]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$91,000

20 donors

PACs

Organizations

$5,000

Committees

Individuals

$86,000

No PAC contributions found

SWANSON INDUSTRIES

1 transaction

$5,000

No committee contributions found

HARRISON, ADAM JAY

1 transaction

$6,600

JAY, ADAM

1 transaction

$6,600

WOWCZUK, ANGELA

1 transaction

$6,600

SCHARBAUER, DOUGLAS

1 transaction

$6,600

ADAMS, RICHARD M.

2 transactions

$6,600

CALANDRA, KARL

1 transaction

$5,000

ALSOP, JAMES

1 transaction

$5,000

PEREZ, ISAAC

1 transaction

$5,000

MAYNARD, ZACHERY

1 transaction

$5,000

ADAMS, ELIZABETH

1 transaction

$3,300

ASTORG, PAUL

1 transaction

$3,300

JUDY, TODD

1 transaction

$3,300

KING, ARTHUR L

1 transaction

$3,300

KING, VIRGINIA L

1 transaction

$3,300

MATHENY, TIM

1 transaction

$3,300

MOSES, STEVEN

1 transaction

$3,300

WAXMAN, DAVID L

1 transaction

$3,300

WHITE, STEVEN F.

1 transaction

$3,300

WILHEIM, RONALD

1 transaction

$3,300

Donor Network - Rep. Moore, Riley M. [R-WV-2]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 30 nodes and 21 connections (35 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $91,000

Top Donors - Rep. Moore, Riley M. [R-WV-2]

Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount

1 Org19 Individuals

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.

Agency for International Development

Strong

Vector: 57%

Pages: 294-296AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill aligns strongly with Project 2025's emphasis on advancing international religious freedom through USAID, particularly in supporting persecuted religious minorities and integrating faith-based organizations into foreign assistance programs, as outlined in Executive Order 13926 and related policy directives."

Key themes:international religious freedomfaith-based organization partnershipssupport for persecuted minoritiesUSAID program integrationhumanitarian aid coordination

— 261 — Agency for International Development illuminated another loophole in the policy’s effectiveness in safeguarding U.S. tax- payer dollars from being used to promote abortion. Pro-abortion groups also have received funds under other categories of foreign aid that fall outside the scope of global health assistance, including women-related and economic assistance programs. Members of Congress have advocated closing these loopholes by extending PLGHA to all foreign assistance through the Protect- ing Life in Foreign Assistance Act, sponsored by Senator Mike Lee (R–UT) and Representative Virginia Foxx (R–NC).11 Current law in the Foreign Assistance Act gives the President broad authority to set “such terms and conditions as he may determine” on foreign assistance, which legally empowers the next conservative President to expand this pro-life policy. To stop U.S. foreign aid from supporting the global abortion industry, the next conservative Administration should issue an executive order that, at a minimum, reinstates PLGHA and summarily blocks funding to UNFPA but also closes loop- holes by applying the policy to all foreign assistance, including humanitarian aid, and improving its enforcement. The executive order to reinstate PLGHA should be drafted broadly to apply to all foreign assistance. It should simultaneously rescind President Biden’s memorandum entitled “Protecting Women’s Health at Home and Abroad,” issued on January 28, 2021.12 The new pro-life executive order should apply to foreign NGOs, including subgrantees and subcontractors, and remove exemptions for U.S.-based NGOs, public international organizations, and bilateral government-to-government agreements. All entities funded by USAID, both directly and indirectly, should report their compliance with the PLGHA, and USAID should institute penalties, including debarment from future federal funding, for violations of it. The new executive order also should instruct the Administrator of USAID to publish reports on implementation of the PLGHA by both prime and sub-prime recipients. In addition, the Helms Amendment should continue to be applied, as it has been by both Republican and Democratic Administrations for more than 50 years, as a complete ban on the use of taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions abroad. International Religious Freedom. Conservatives believe international religious freedom is central to USAID’s development efforts. President Trump’s Executive Order 13926 on “Advancing International Religious Freedom”13 instructed the Secretary of State, in consultation with the USAID Administrator, to budget at least $50 million a year for programs that advance international reli- gious freedom and “ensure that faith-based and religious entities, including eligible entities in foreign countries, are not discriminated against on the basis of religious identity or religious belief when competing for Federal funding.” Under the Trump Administration, the agency set up a senior-level Chief Adviser for International Religious Freedom who reported directly to the Administra- tor with the task of coordinating a “whole-of-USAID” approach to achieving this — 262 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise priority. It created a robust genocide-response capability. USAID affirmed the agency’s partnerships with faith-based organizations through its rule on “Partic- ipation by Religious Organizations in USAID Programs;”14 “Partnership Guidance and Answers to Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) for Faith Based Organizations;” and “Legal Guidance and Answers to FAQs for USAID Staff.” Today, USAID officials and their progressive partners have resisted efforts to promote religious freedom, especially as it relates to abortion and gender ideology, which are anathema to the traditional societies where USAID funds programs (in addition to many U.S. taxpayers). U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken repudiated his predecessor’s focus on religious freedom. The next conservative Administration must champion the core American value of religious freedom, which correlates significantly with poverty reduction, eco- nomic growth, and peace. It should train all USAID staff on the connection between religious freedom and development; integrate it into all of the agency’s programs, including the five-year Country Development and Coordination Strategies due for updates in 2025; strengthen the missions’ relationships with local faith-based leaders; and build on local programs that are serving the poor. Congress should appropriate funding to USAID specifically to support persecuted religious minori- ties in line with Executive Order 13926. Streamlining Procurement and Localizing the Partner Base. USAID is a grantmaking and contracting agency that disburses billions of dollars of federal funding in developing countries through implementing partners, such as U.N. agen- cies, international NGOs, for-profit companies, and local nongovernmental entities. In rare instances, such as in Jordan and Ukraine, the agency provides direct budget support to finance the operations of host-country governments. USAID far more often counts on expensive and ineffective large contracts and grants to carry out its programs. It justifies these practices based on speed and a lower administrative burden on its institutional capacity. Partnering and procurement reform was a pillar of the Trump Administration’s effort to secure better development results, cut costs, and advance the Journey to Self-Reliance strategy of exiting countries from aid. In December 2018, USAID launched its first Acquisition and Assistance Strategy to streamline procurement processes; introduce innovation into its programming; and diversify its partner base away from large, expensive, and partisan implementers. The strategy counted on local NGOs, including faith-based entities already on the ground, to provide the agency with less costly and more effective alternatives to the aid giants. The strategy also prioritized global partnerships with the private sector—corporations, investors, diasporas, and private philanthropies—the source of real capital invest- ment, innovation, and efficiencies that can maximize the impact of taxpayer dollars. Under the Biden Administration, despite rhetoric to the contrary, the aid industrial complex has recaptured the agency and stifled further reforms.

Agency for International Development

Strong

Vector: 56%

Pages: 294-296AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill aligns with Project 2025's emphasis on advancing international religious freedom through U.S. foreign policy and assistance, particularly by supporting faith-based groups and condemning persecution of Christians, which mirrors the policy goal of ensuring religious entities are not discriminated against in federal funding and promoting religious freedom as a core component of development efforts."

Key themes:international religious freedomfaith-based organization supportU.S. foreign aid policyprotection of religious minoritiesexecutive action on religious freedom

Department of State

Moderate

Vector: 58%

Pages: 217-219AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill shares Project 2025's concern for religious freedom/minority rights and counterterrorism in Africa (specifically Boko Haram), and advocates for U.S. diplomatic pressure and humanitarian engagement, aligning with the broader Africa strategy outlined in the policy."

Key themes:religious freedomcounterterrorismhuman rightsAfrica engagementdiplomatic pressure

— 185 — Department of State l First, the U.S. must prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear technology and delivery capabilities and more broadly block Iranian ambitions. This means, inter alia, reinstituting and expanding Trump Administration sanctions; providing security assistance for regional partners; supporting, through public diplomacy and otherwise, freedom-seeking Iranian people in their revolt against the mullahs; and ensuring Israel has both the military means and the political support and flexibility to take what it deems to be appropriate measures to defend itself against the Iranian regime and its regional proxies Hamas, Hezbollah, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. l Second, the next Administration should build on the Trump Administration’s diplomatic successes by encouraging other Arab states, including Saudi Arabia, to enter the Abraham Accords. Related policies should include reversing, as appropriate, the Biden Administration’s degradation of the long-standing partnership with Saudi Arabia. The Palestinian Authority should be defunded. A further key priority is keeping Türkiye in the Western fold and a NATO ally. This includes a vigorous outreach to Türkiye to dissuade it from “hedging” toward Russia or China, which is likely to require a rethinking of U.S. support for YPG/PKK [People’s Protection Units/Kurdistan Worker’s Party] Kurdish forces, which Ankara believes are an existential threat to its security. For the foreseeable future— and much longer than one new Administration—Middle Eastern oil will play a key role in the world economy. Therefore, the U.S. must continue to support its allies and compete with its economic adversaries, including China. Relations with Saudi Arabia should be strengthened in a way that seriously curtails Chinese influence in Riyadh. l Third, it is in the U.S. national interest to build a Middle East security pact that includes Israel, Egypt, the Gulf states, and potentially India, as a second “Quad” arrangement. Protecting freedom of navigation in the Gulf and in the Red Sea/Suez Canal is vital to the world economy and therefore to U.S. prosperity as well. In North Africa, security cooperation with European allies, especially France, will be vital to limit growing Islamist threats and the incursion of Russian influence through positionings of the Wagner Group. l The U.S. cannot neglect a concern for human rights and minority rights, which must be balanced with strategic and security considerations. Special attention must be paid to challenges of religious freedom, especially the status of Middle Eastern Christians and other religious minorities, as well as the human trafficking endemic to the region. — 186 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Sub-Saharan Africa Africa’s importance to U.S. foreign policy and strategic interests is rising and will only continue to grow. Its explosive population growth, large reserves of industry-dependent minerals, proximity to key maritime shipping routes, and its collective diplomatic power ensure the continent’s global importance. Yet as Afri- ca’s strategic significance has grown, the U.S.’s relative influence there has declined. Terrorist activity on the continent has increased, while America’s competitors are making significant gains for their own national interests. The PRC’s companies dominate the African supply chain for certain minerals critical to emerging tech- nologies. African nations comprise major country-bloc elements that shield the PRC and Russia from international isolation for their human rights abuses—and African nations staunchly support PRC foreign policy goals on issues such as Hong Kong occupation, South China Seas dispute arbitration, and Taiwan. The new Administration can correct this strategic failing of existing policy by prioritizing Africa and by undertaking fundamental changes in how the United States works with African nations. At a bare minimum, the next Administration should: l Shift strategic focus from assistance to growth. Reorient the focus of U.S. overseas development assistance away from stand-alone humanitarian development aid and toward fostering free market systems in African countries by incentivizing and facilitating U.S. private sector engagement in these countries. Development aid alone does little to develop countries and can fuel corruption and violent conflict. While the United States should always be willing to offer emergency and humanitarian relief, both U.S. and African long-term interests are better served by a free market-based, private growth-focused strategy to Africa’s economic challenges. l Counter malign Chinese activity on the continent. This should include the development of powerful public diplomacy efforts to counter Chinese influence campaigns with commitments to freedom of speech and the free flow of information; the creation of a template “digital hygiene” program that African countries can access to sanitize and protect their sensitive communications networks from espionage by the PRC and other hostile actors; the recognition of Somaliland statehood as a hedge against the U.S.’s deteriorating position in Djibouti; and a focus on supporting American companies involved in industries important to U.S. national interests or that have a competitive advantage in Africa. l Counter the furtherance of terrorism. African country-based terrorist groups like Boko Haram may currently lack the capability to attack the

Department of Labor and Related Agencies

Weak

Vector: 56%

Pages: 618-620AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 section emphasize religious freedom, but the bill focuses on international persecution of Christians and foreign policy pressure, while the Project 2025 excerpt concerns domestic labor policy, workplace religious exemptions, and EEOC reform. The overlap is limited to the broader theme of protecting religious exercise."

Key themes:religious freedomfaith-based organizationsprotection of religious believerspersecution of Christians

— 586 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise about marriage, gender, and sexuality. The new Administration should enact policies with robust respect for religious exercise in the workplace, including under the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA),8 Title VII, and federal conscience protection laws. l Issue an executive order protecting religious employers and employees. The President should make clear via executive order that religious employers are free to run their businesses according to their religious beliefs, general nondiscrimination laws notwithstanding, and support participation of religious employees and employers as federal contractors and in federal activities and programs. l Clarify Title VII’s religious organization exemptions. Congress should clarify Title VII’s religious organization exemptions to make it more explicit that those employers may make employment decisions based on religion regardless of nondiscrimination laws. l Provide Robust Accommodations for Religious Employees. Title VII requires reasonable accommodations for an employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs, observances, or practices unless it poses an undue hardship on the employer’s business. These accommodation protections also apply to issues related to marriage, gender, and sexuality. Unless the Supreme Court overrules its bad precedent, Congress should clarify that undue hardship means “significant difficulty or expenses,” not “more than a de minimis cost” as the Court has previously held. General EEOC Reforms. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commis- sion (EEOC) does not have rulemaking authority under Title VII and other laws it enforces, yet it issues “guidance,” “technical assistance,” and other documents, including some that push new policy positions. EEOC should disclaim its regulatory pretensions and abide by the guidance reforms dis- cussed below. l EEOC should disclaim its regulatory pretensions. l Affirm decision-making via majority vote of Commissioners. EEOC should affirm as policy the Title VII requirement that it exercise substantive power via majority vote of Commissioners, not by unilateral Chair action or by delegation to staff. — 587 — Department of Labor and Related Agencies l Disclaim power to enter into consent decrees. EEOC should disclaim power to enter into consent decrees that require employer actions that it could not require under the laws it enforces. l Reorient enforcement priorities. EEOC should reorient its enforcement priorities toward claims of failure to accommodate disability, religion, and pregnancy (but not abortion). Refocusing Labor Regulation on the Good of the Family. The DEI revo- lution in labor affected not only the administrative state, but it has also targeted much of the private sector. Owing to the combination of regulatory pressure and eager human resources offices in the private sector, much of American labor and employment policy has become institutionally oriented toward “woke” goals. Retracting regulations that support this revolution is a good first step, but more is needed. We must replace “woke” nonsense with a healthy vision of the role of labor policy in our society, starting with the American family. l Allow workers to accumulate paid time off. Lower- and middle-income workers are more likely be in jobs that are subject to overtime laws that require employers to pay time-and-a-half for working more than 40 hours a week. l Congress should enact the Working Families Flexibility Act. The Working Families Flexibility Act would allow employees in the private sector the ability to choose between receiving time-and-a-half pay or accumulating time-and-a-half paid time off (a choice that many public sector workers already have). For example, if an individual worked two hours of overtime every week for a year, he or she could accumulate four weeks of paid time off to use for paid family leave, vacation, or any reason. l Congress should incentivize on-site childcare. Across the spectrum of professionalized childcare options, on-site care puts the least stress on the parent-child bond. l Congress should amend the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to clarify that an employer’s expenses in providing on-site childcare are not part of an employee’s regular rate of pay. l DOL should commit to honest study of the challenges for women in the world of professional work. The Women’s Bureau at DOL tends towards a politicized research and engagement agenda that puts predetermined conclusions ahead of empirical study.

Department of Health and Human Services

Weak

Vector: 56%

Pages: 512-514AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on condemning Christian persecution in Nigeria and supporting U.S. foreign policy actions, while the Project 2025 excerpt concerns domestic HHS initiatives for healthy marriage, relationship education, and faith-based grant protections. The only modest connection is a shared emphasis on faith‑based organizations, but the policy goals and contexts are largely unrelated."

Key themes:faith-based organizationsreligious liberty

— 480 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Utilize HMRE funding or grants to provide state-level high school education resources and curriculum on healthy marriages, sexual risk avoidance, and healthy relationships. Early interventions and prevention are much more cost-effective than are efforts to reach people already in broken relationships. l Allow child welfare funding to be used for marriage and relationship education. Congress should adopt the following recommendation from a report issued by members of Congress’s Joint Economic Committee: Children are far more likely to experience abuse when they are raised outside of their married-parent family. Title II of the Child Abuse Preven- tion and Treatment Act provides grants to communities for the purpose of preventing child abuse and neglect, and one of the stated purposes for which the grants can be used is for efforts to increase family stability. However, Congress could change the law to make it clear that Title II funding can be used for healthy marriage and relationship education. Funding provided under Title IV-B of the Social Security Act—which provides grants to states for foster care and adoption services—can also be used for promoting healthy marriage. States should consider using some of their Title IV-B funding for providing healthy marriage and relationship education for families at risk of having their children placed in foster care.65 l Provide educational information on healthy marriage and relationships at Title X family planning clinics. HHS should require clinics it funds under Title X (family planning) to provide information to customers about the importance of marriage to family and personal well-being and refer them to available federal, state, and nonprofit marriage resources. l Ensure proper assessments with enough time to assess HMRE programs. Although some widely available assessments of HMRE programs report poor outcomes, many of these assessments either utilized a poor methodology or tried to measure program success prematurely. Recent assessments have shown increasing effectiveness and positive community- level marital outcomes.66 The HMRE program should receive a fair and realistic assessment. Additionally, the positive role of faith-based programs should be protected — 481 — Department of Health and Human Services and prioritized so that these programs do not receive undue scrutiny or pressure to conform to nonreligious definitions of marriage and family as put forward by the recently enacted Respect for Marriage Act.67 l Protect faith-based grant recipients from religious liberty violations that maintain a biblically based, social science–reinforced definition of marriage and family. Social science reports that assess the objective outcomes for children raised in homes aside from a heterosexual, intact marriage are clear: All other family forms involve higher levels of instability (the average length of same-sex marriages is half that of heterosexual marriages); financial stress or poverty; or poorer behavioral, psychological, or educational outcomes. For the sake of child well-being, programs should affirm that children require and deserve both the love and nurturing of a mother and the play and protection of a father. Despite recent congressional bills like the Respect for Marriage Act that redefine marriage to be the union between any two individuals, HMRE program grants should be available to faith- based recipients who affirm that marriage is between not just any two adults, but one man and one unrelated woman. Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood (HMRF) Program. This program is located within the ACF Office of Family Assistance. Its goal, like that of the HMRE program, is to provide marriage and parenting guidance for low-in- come fathers. This includes fatherhood and marriage training, curriculum, and subsequent research. l Implement a pro-fatherhood messaging campaign. With nearly 41 percent of children born without a married father in the home (and nearly 69 percent among black Americans), the fatherhood problem is clear. Similar to Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’s 2022 fatherhood bill, HMRF funds should be used to support national messaging campaigns that affirm the role fathers play in the lives of their children, that recognize the financial hardships the fathers themselves face, and that seek to provide relationship education to fathers who were raised without a father in the home. l Fund effective HMRF state programs. Grant allocations should protect and prioritize faith-based programs that incorporate local churches and mentorship programs or increase social capital through multilayered community support (including, for example, job training and social events). Programs should affirm and teach fathers based on a biological and

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. Moore, Riley M.

Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act

119/hr/1181

Back to All Bills