Recognizing the 75th anniversary of the Battle of the Chosin Reservoir during the Korean conflict.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hres/912

Last Updated: December 1, 2025

Recognizing the 75th anniversary of the Battle of the Chosin Reservoir during the Korean conflict.

HRES. 912, 119th Congress — read as touching Defense Contractors.

The sponsor

Rep. Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48]

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

The money

$88,150 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 Defense" section, p. 134-136 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 912**

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I'll cut through the sentimental rhetoric surrounding this bill and focus on its practical implications.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** HRES 912 is a symbolic resolution recognizing the 75th anniversary of the Battle of the Chosin Reservoir during the Korean conflict. Its primary objective is to honor the courage and sacrifice of American servicemen who fought in this pivotal battle.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This bill does not introduce any significant changes to existing law or policy. It's a ceremonial resolution, devoid of tangible consequences for my business interests or the broader economy.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The primary stakeholders are veterans' organizations, military personnel, and their families. However, this bill will have no material impact on my industries, investments, or influence.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** As a pragmatic leader, I must emphasize that this resolution is inconsequential to the functioning of our economy or the advancement of innovation. It's a feel-good gesture, devoid of substance. The real challenges facing our nation – such as regulatory reform, tax optimization, and infrastructure development – remain unaddressed.

In conclusion, HRES 912 is a symbolic exercise in nostalgia, lacking any meaningful impact on my business empire or the broader economic landscape. As a visionary leader, I'll continue to focus on driving progress through strategic investments, deregulation, and the advancement of technological innovation.

**Recommendation:** I'll neither actively support nor oppose this resolution, as it's inconsequential to my interests. Instead, I'll channel my energy into advocating for policies that truly matter – those that foster growth, reduce regulatory burdens, and enhance our nation's competitiveness in the global market.

**Projected Impact on My Interests:** $0

**Recommendation to Fellow Thought Leaders:** Let's prioritize substance over symbolism. Focus on driving meaningful change through policy reforms that promote economic growth, deregulation, and innovation.

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$88,150

25 donors

PACs

Organizations

$35,350

Committees

Individuals

$52,800

No PAC contributions found

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

MASHANTUCKET (WESTERN) PEQUOT TRIBE

1 transaction

$3,300

SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND MIVOK INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION

1 transaction

$3,300

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND MIWOK INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,000

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

1 transaction

$1,500

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

1 transaction

$1,000

WINRED

2 transactions

$150

No committee contributions found

KUTRIEH, TAREK

2 transactions

$6,600

DE MARTINO, MICHAEL

2 transactions

$6,600

ALTMAN, SAM

1 transaction

$3,300

GIBSON, JOSEPH H.

1 transaction

$3,300

FITZPATRICK, JENNIFER

1 transaction

$3,300

RAGHAVAN, PRABHAKAR

1 transaction

$3,300

GLAZIER, MITCH

1 transaction

$3,300

FRAZEE, ELIZABETH

1 transaction

$3,300

LEVY, EDWARD C

1 transaction

$3,300

FISHER, KENNETH

1 transaction

$3,300

FISHER, SHERRILYN

1 transaction

$3,300

DRESNER, LINDA

1 transaction

$3,300

MATHENY, DAVID

1 transaction

$3,300

KASSOUF, JAMES

1 transaction

$3,300

Donor Network - Rep. Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 65 nodes and 30 connections (71 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $88,150

Top Donors - Rep. Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48]

Showing top 25 donors by contribution amount

11 Orgs14 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

+Defense Contractorsconfidence 0.80
The bill recognizes and honors the courage and sacrifice of the United States Marine Corps, the United States Army, and other Armed Forces who fought in the Battle of the Chosin Reservoir, which may be seen as promoting a positive image of the defense industry (Section: Whereas clauses and Resolved section)
+Labor Unionsconfidence 0.60
The bill honors the members of the Armed Forces who fought valiantly in the campaign, which may be seen as supportive of labor unions representing military personnel (Section: Resolved section, clause 2)

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HELPS

Defense Contractors$208
from 4 contributions
- MULVIHILL, PATRICK$208

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 Defense

Weak

Vector: 56%

Pages: 134-136AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 912 is a purely commemorative resolution honoring a historic battle and does not propose any changes to defense policy, export controls, FMS processes, or personnel reforms outlined in the Project 2025 DOD section. Any alignment is limited to general support for the military, which is only tangentially related to the policy objectives."

Key themes:military personnelveterans recognitiondefense morale

— 101 — Department of Defense 1. Ensure that senior U.S. military leadership emphasizes exportability in the initial development of defense systems that are both available and interoperable with our partners and allies. 2. Create a funding mechanism to incentivize exportability in initial planning, which can be recouped after future FMS transactions. l End informal congressional notification. Informal congressional notification or “tiered review” is a hinderance to ensuring timely sales to our global partners. The tiered review process is not codified in law; it is merely a practice by which the Department of State provides a preview of prospective arms transfers before Congress is formally notified.9 1. End the tiered review process to eliminate at least 20 days from the FMS process. 2. Use the tiered review process only when unanimous congressional support is guaranteed in order to eliminate the “weaponization” by select Members of Congress that has prevented billions of dollars of arms sales from moving into formal congressional notification. l Minimize barriers to collaboration. The high cost of developing advanced defense platforms requires the United States to collaborate with key allies to minimize waste, complement strengths, and supplement our defense industrial base to create a system that is greater than that of the United States alone. 1. Enhance defense industrial base planning with partners to allow them to focus on niche areas where there are cost advantages for the United States. 2. Decrease International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to facilitate trade with such allies as the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. 3. Create opportunities to improve the health of the defense supply chain with added opportunities for partners and allies to contribute. l Reform the FMS contracting process. The contracting timeline for the FMS process is shockingly slow. On average, the DOD contracting timeline takes approximately 18 months because of slow bureaucratic processes and chronic understaffing.10 — 102 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 1. Immediately fund more contracting capacity in all services to decrease the contracting timeline and improve the delivery of defense articles to our global partners. 2. Rationalize and speed arms sales decision-making to preclude our enemies from exploiting bureaucratic slothfulness and allow us to manage the development of indigenous defense industrial bases. DOD PERSONNEL The men and women of America’s armed forces are the most critical component of our national defense strategy, but in recent years, they have been overextended, undervalued, and insufficiently resourced. Their families help them to carry the burden of service, but the assistance they receive is disproportionately less than the sacrifices they make. Young civilians who would thrive in a military environ- ment are disenfranchised when educators and influencers discourage them from learning about military service and preparing for the honor of wearing Ameri- ca’s uniform. The United States military is an extraordinary institution, staffed by exceptional people who have defended our nation and changed the course of history, but the Biden Administration, through word and deed, has treated the armed forces as just another place to work. We must restore our military to a place of honor and respect and recruit and retain the individuals who will meet the rigorous standards of excellence that are required for membership in the world’s greatest fighting force. Needed Reforms l Rescue recruiting and retention. Recruiting was the worst in 2022 that it has been in two generations and is expected to be even worse in 2023. Some of the problems are self-inflicted and ongoing. The recruiting problem is not service-specific: It affects the entire Joint Force. 1. Appoint a Special Assistant to the President who will maintain liaison with Congress, DOD, and all other interested parties on the issue of recruiting and retention. 2. Improve recruiting by suspending the use of the recently introduced MHS Genesis system that uses private medical records of potential recruits at Military Entrance Processing Stations (MEPS), creating unnecessary delays and unwarranted rejections.11 3. Improve military recruiters’ access to secondary schools and require completion of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery

Department of Defense

Weak

Vector: 55%

Pages: 143-145AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The resolution is purely commemorative and does not enact any of the Project 2025 policy recommendations, but it indirectly supports the policy's emphasis on remembering and learning from high-intensity land combat operations."

Key themes:historical military lessonshigh-intensity land combathonoring service

Department of Defense

Weak

Vector: 55%

Pages: 143-145AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 912 is a purely commemorative resolution honoring a historic battle, while Project 2025's DoD section outlines substantive reforms to force structure, readiness, and modernization; they share only a broad theme of supporting the military without direct policy overlap."

Key themes:military commemorationveteran supportdefense policy

— 110 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise there are no general or field-grade officers who served as planners or commanders against a near-peer adversary in combat. 4. Examine the logic of emerging Army concepts about employing massed long-range fires and effects without considering how to gain advantage by closing with and dominating an adversary on land. 5. Recognize that high-intensity land combat operations cannot be sustained through short-term individual or unit rotations in the style of the sustained low-intensity campaigns conducted over the past 20 years. 6. Transform how the National Guard is employed during extended operations short of declared war to preclude back-to-back federal and state deployments of National Guard soldiers in order to stabilize and preserve military volunteerism in our communities. 7. Revamp Army school curricula to concentrate on preparation for large- scale land operations that focus on defeating a peer threat. 8. Address the underlying causal issues driving increasing Army suicide rates, which have surpassed pre–World War II rates and are now eclipsing the rate among civilians. U.S. NAVY As noted at the beginning of this chapter, the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to “provide and maintain a Navy.” Inherent in this phrase is a recognition that there is a vital national interest in the maritime environment and that this national interest requires sustained planning and investment. This is as true today as it was almost 250 years ago and will remain true into the future. The U.S. Navy (USN) exists for two primary reasons: to project prompt, sus- tained, and effective combat power globally, both at sea and ashore, and to deter aggression by potential adversaries by maintaining a forward operating presence in conjunction with allies and partners. Today, the People’s Republic of China Peo- ple’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) can challenge the USN’s ability to accomplish its mission in the Pacific and Indian Oceans. In the production, employment, and control of maritime forces, the USN must consider the scope and rate of technological change and, where appropriate, adapt its processes and workforce development. In balancing the necessary long-term industrial model of naval platforms against emerging short-term opportunities, the USN must take account of advances that may present vulnerabilities and risks as well as what is assured and secure. — 111 — Department of Defense Needed Reforms l Invest in and expand force structure. The USN’s organizing principle remains platform-centered: vessels manned by sailors. The manned surface and subsurface forces act in concert with land-based, air-based, and space- based forces to project power outside sovereign territory, principally by operating in international waters. Investments must be closely coordinated with these other elements of military power. 1. Build a fleet of more than 355 ships.26 2. Develop and field unmanned systems to augment the manned forces. 3. Require that range and lethality be the key factors in all procurement and sustainment decisions for ships, aircraft, and munitions. l Reestablish the General Board. In contrast with the Navy General Board that served ship development so well during the interwar period, the current joint process27 for defining the requirements for major defense acquisitions is not well-suited to long-term planning of the sort that is needed for USN fleet architecture and shipbuilding. The interwar General Board should serve as a model, empowered with final decision authority over all requirements documents concerning ships and the major defense systems fielded on ships. The individual board members would ensure a broad base of knowledge as well as independent thinking.28 l Establish a Rapid Capabilities Office. The USN must transition technology into warfighting capability more rapidly. It must foster a culture of innovation that includes connecting theoretical and intangible ideas with real production environments that produce tangible and practical outcomes and adapting proven processes to advance material solutions. 1. Harness innovation and willingness to tolerate risk so that “good enough” systems can be fielded rapidly. 2. Use the Space Development Agency as a model. 3. Establish an oversight Board of Directors made up of the service chief, service secretary, and Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.

Department of Defense

Weak

Vector: 54%

Pages: 140-142AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill is a symbolic commemoration of a historic battle and does not propose any policy changes, while the Project 2025 section focuses on concrete reforms to rebuild and modernize the Army. Both relate to the U.S. military and honoring service, but their objectives and mechanisms differ significantly."

Key themes:military honorArmyveteranshistorical commemoration

— 108 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise U.S. ARMY The U.S. Army’s mission is “[t]o deploy, fight and win our nation’s wars by pro- viding ready, prompt and sustained land dominance by Army forces across the full spectrum of conflict as part of the joint force.”24 Today, however, the Army cannot execute its land dominance mission.25 The U.S. Army is at an inflection point that is marked by more than a decade of steadily eroding budgets and diluted buying power, an appreciable degradation in readiness and training capacity, a near crisis in the recruiting and retention of critical personnel, and a bevy of aging weapons systems that no longer provide a qualitative edge over peer and near-peer com- petitors but will not be replaced in the near term. All of these challenges are set against the backdrop of a complex and dynamic global geopolitical environment that is exemplified and exacerbated by the triumph of our adversaries in Afghanistan after a 20-year struggle there as well as recent Russian outrages in the Ukraine and China’s bellicosity both on its borders and in surrounding disputed regions. In spite of these ever-increasing operational pulls, our Army is consistently being asked to do more with fewer resources. The status quo is further marked by a pervasive politically driven top-down focus on progressive social policies that emphasize matters like so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion and climate change, often to the detriment of the Army’s core warfighting mission. Needed Reforms l Rebuild the Army. The total Army budget has decreased by roughly 11 percent since 2018, perilously affecting the service’s readiness and ability to train and to procure new personnel and equipment. Declining budgets and decreased buying power have forced the Army to lower training standards and opportunities to train, propose reductions in end strength, slash military construction programs to historically low levels, and scale back essential modernization programs. 1. Increase the Army budget to remain the world’s preeminent land power. 2. Accelerate the development and procurement of the six current Army modernization priorities (long-range precision fires, the Next- Generation Combat Vehicle, Future Vertical Lift, the Army network, air and missile defense, and soldier lethality) to replace worn out and outdated combat systems and ensure ground combat dominance. 3. Increase funding to improve Army training and operational readiness. 4. Increase the Army force structure by 50,000 to handle two major regional contingencies simultaneously. — 109 — Department of Defense 5. Reform recruiting efforts. The Army missed its 2022 recruitment goal by 25 percent, or 15,000 soldiers. l Focus on deployability and sustained operations. The U.S. Army’s very lethal ground force capability is irrelevant if it cannot quickly deploy to locations for employment in decisive operations to secure our global security interests. Additionally, Army logisticians provide the ground transportation (of both personnel and equipment); fuel, food, and water; munitions (bombs and bullets); medical supplies and services; and veterinary services (food safety) that are critical to sustainment of the other services. 1. Immediately increase the production and stockpiling of critical munitions and repair parts. 2. Prioritize expeditionary logistics in all force design and operational planning to guarantee entry into a contested theater of war. 3. Increase the level of Joint Force training, synchronization, and coordination focused on logistics. 4. Prepare to deploy forces from degraded U.S.-based transportation infrastructure that is compromised by opposing forces. l Transform Army culture and training. The Army can no longer serve as the nation’s social testing ground. A rebuilt Army that is focused again on its core warfighting mission and empowered it with the tools, resources, and authorities it needs to accomplish that mission must be the next Administration’s highest defense priority. 1. Stop using the Army as a test bed for social evolution. Misusing the Army in this way detracts from its core purpose while doing little to reshape the American social structure. The Army no longer reflects national demographics to the degree that it did before 1974 when the draft was eliminated. 2. Demand accountability in senior leaders to reverse the decline in public support for military service. 3. Reestablish the experiential base for the planning, execution, and leadership of Army formations in large-scale operations. Currently,

Department of Defense

Minimal

Vector: 56%

Pages: 158-160AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 912 is a purely symbolic commemorative resolution honoring a historical battle, whereas the Project 2025 DoD section focuses on nuclear weapons production, missile defense, and arms control policy; there is no substantive policy overlap."

Key themes:militaryveteranshistorical recognition

— 125 — Department of Defense 1. Accelerate the effort to restore plutonium pit production, which is essential both for modern warhead programs and for recapitalizing the stockpile. 2. Continue to invest in rebuilding infrastructure, including facilities at the National Laboratories that support nuclear weapons development. 3. Restore readiness to test nuclear weapons at the Nevada National Security Site to ensure the ability of the U.S. to respond quickly to asymmetric technology surprises. l Correctly orient arms control. The U.S. should agree to arms control agreements only if they help to advance the interests of the U.S. and its allies. 1. Reject proposals for nuclear disarmament that are contrary to the goal of bolstering deterrence. 2. Pursue arms control as a way to secure the national security interests of the U.S. and its allies rather than as an end in itself. 3. Prepare to compete in order to secure U.S. interests should arms control efforts continue to fail. MISSILE DEFENSE Missile defense is a critical component of the U.S. national security architecture. It can help to deter attack by instilling doubt that an attack will work as intended, take adversary “cheap shots” off the table, and limit the perceived value of mis- siles as tools of coercion. It also allows space for diplomacy during a crisis and can protect U.S. and allied forces, critical assets, and populations if deterrence fails.41 Adversaries are relying increasingly on missiles to achieve their aims. l China and Russia, in addition to their vast and growing ballistic missile inventories, are deploying new hypersonic glide vehicles and investing in new ground-launched, air-launched, and sea-launched cruise missiles that uniquely challenge the United States in different domains. l North Korea has pursued an aggressive missile testing program and is becoming increasingly belligerent toward South Korea and Japan. l Iran continues to maintain a missile arsenal that is capable of striking U.S. and allied assets in the Middle East and Europe, and its rocket launches demonstrate that it either has or is developing the ability to build ICBMs. — 126 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Missile defense has been underprioritized and underfunded in recent years. In light of these growing threats, the incoming Administration should treat missile defense as a top priority. Needed Reforms l Champion the benefits of missile defense. Despite its deterrence and damage-limitation benefits, opponents argue incorrectly that U.S. missile defense is destabilizing because it threatens Russian and Chinese second- strike capabilities. 1. Reject claims made by the Left that missile defense is destabilizing while acknowledging that Russia and China are developing their own advanced missile defense systems. 2. Commit to keeping homeland missile defense off the table in any arms control negotiations with Russia and China.42 l Strengthen homeland ballistic missile defense. The United States currently deploys 44 Ground-Based Interceptors (GBIs) as part of its Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system to defend the homeland against North Korea, but as North Korea improves its missile program, this system is at risk of falling behind the threat.43 1. Buy at least 64 of the Next Generation Interceptor (NGI), which is more advanced than the GBI, for an eventual uniform fleet of interceptors.44 The Biden Administration currently plans to buy only 20. 2. Consider additional steps to strengthen the GMD system such as a layered missile defense or a third interceptor site on the East Coast. l Increase the development of regional missile defense. As the Ukraine conflict amply demonstrates, U.S. regional missile defense capabilities are very limited. The United States has been unable to supply our partners reliably with any capabilities, and the number and types of regional missile defense platforms are less than the U.S. needs for its own defense. The U.S. should prioritize procurement of more regional defense systems such as Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), Standard Missile-3, and Patriot missiles. l Change U.S. missile defense policy. Historically, the U.S. has chosen to rely solely on deterrence to address the Russian and Chinese ballistic

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. Issa, Darrell

Litigation Transparency Act of 2025

119/hr/1109

To require the Secretary of State to submit to Congress a notification of certain construction projects using nonstandard designs.

119/hr/7054

NORRA of 2025

119/hr/1526

Back to All Bills

Recognizing the 75th anniversary of the Battle of the Chosin Reservoir during the Korean conflict.