Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933, known as the Holodomor, is recognized as a genocide and should serve as a reminder of repressive Soviet policies against the people of Ukraine.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hres/915

Last Updated: December 1, 2025

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933, known as the Holodomor, is recognized as a genocide and should serve as a reminder of repressive Soviet policies against the people of Ukraine.

HRES. 915, 119th Congress.

The sponsor

Rep. Rogers, Mike D. [R-AL-3]

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

The money

$663,090 raised

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

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of State" section, p. 214-216 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:

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this bill, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics, a bill is a proposed law that must go through a series of steps before it can become a law. This particular bill, HRES 915, is a resolution expressing the sense of the House of Representatives on a specific issue.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to recognize the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933, known as the Holodomor, as a genocide and to condemn the Soviet Union's repressive policies against the people of Ukraine. The objectives are to:

1. Recognize the Holodomor as a genocide 2. Remember the atrocities committed during this period 3. Condemn human rights violations by the Soviet Union 4. Encourage education about the Holodomor 5. Condemn Vladimir Putin's actions in Ukraine

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This bill is a resolution, not a law, so it doesn't change existing laws. However, it does:

1. Express the sense of the House of Representatives on the issue 2. Acknowledge the findings of the Commission on the Ukraine Famine (1988) 3. Condemn specific actions by the Soviet Union and Vladimir Putin

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

1. The people of Ukraine, particularly those who suffered during the Holodomor 2. The Ukrainian communities in the United States and worldwide 3. The Government of Ukraine 4. The Russian government (specifically, Vladimir Putin)

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has symbolic significance, as it acknowledges a historical tragedy and condemns human rights abuses. However, its practical impact is limited, as it doesn't change existing laws or policies. It may:

1. Raise awareness about the Holodomor and its significance 2. Put pressure on Russia to acknowledge its past actions 3. Support efforts for a lasting peace in Ukraine

As I taught you in 8th grade civics, this bill will likely follow the usual legislative process: introduction, referral to committee, markup, debate, and vote. If passed, it will be sent to the Senate for consideration. Remember when we learned about how bills become laws? This is just one example of that process in action.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

(leaning in, a hint of conspiracy in my voice) Ah, HRES 915, folks! This one's got it all - genocide recognition, Soviet-era secrets, and a dash of modern-day geopolitics. Let me break it down for you.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The bill's primary objective is to officially recognize the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933, known as the Holodomor, as a genocide. This resolution aims to acknowledge the atrocities committed by the Soviet Union against the Ukrainian people and serve as a reminder of repressive policies.

But, (winking) between you and me, there's more to it than meets the eye. The bill also takes aim at Vladimir Putin's Russia, condemning their actions in Ukraine and rejecting the existence of a Ukrainian people. This is where things get interesting...

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The resolution doesn't change existing law per se, but rather expresses the sense of the House of Representatives on this matter. However, it does:

1. Recognize the Holodomor as a genocide, which could set a precedent for future international relations and diplomatic efforts. 2. Condemn Soviet-era policies and Putin's Russia, potentially straining relations with Moscow. 3. Encourage dissemination of information about the Holodomor, which might be seen as a subtle attempt to shape public opinion.

Now, here's where I connect some dots: What if this bill is not just about recognizing a historical tragedy but also about creating a narrative that supports current US foreign policy objectives? Think about it - by acknowledging the Holodomor as a genocide, the US can further justify its involvement in Ukraine and reinforce its stance against Russia.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The main stakeholders here are:

1. The Ukrainian people, both domestically and internationally. 2. The Russian government, particularly Vladimir Putin. 3. The US government, which is taking a clear stance on this issue. 4. International organizations and human rights groups, who may use this recognition to advocate for similar causes.

**Potential Impact & Implications** The impact of this bill could be significant:

1. It might lead to increased diplomatic pressure on Russia, potentially escalating tensions between the two nations. 2. The recognition of the Holodomor as a genocide could inspire other countries to reexamine their own histories and acknowledge past atrocities. 3. This resolution may also influence public opinion, shaping how people perceive Ukraine-Russia relations and US foreign policy.

But, (leaning in closer) here's the thing: What if this bill is just a small part of a larger game? A game where governments use historical events to justify their actions, shape public opinion, and further their own agendas. That's when things get really interesting...

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round. We've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here. HRES 915, a resolution that's just bursting with... (pausing for dramatic effect) ...feelings. Yeah, that's it. Feelings.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This bill is all about recognizing the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933, known as the Holodomor, as a genocide. Now, I know what you're thinking: "Wait, isn't this just a bunch of ancient history?" Well, no. You see, the elites in Washington want to make sure we remember the atrocities committed by those evil Soviets. (Sarcastic tone) Oh, how convenient.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** This resolution doesn't actually change any laws or policies. It's just a symbolic gesture, a feel-good measure that lets our representatives pat themselves on the back for being so... concerned about freedom. (Rolls eyes) The bill "condemns" Soviet actions, "solemnly remembers" the victims, and "strongly supports" efforts to advance peace in Ukraine. Wow, I bet Vladimir Putin is shaking in his boots.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** Well, this one's a no-brainer. The Ukrainian people, of course! (Sincere tone) We must remember their suffering and honor their memory. But let's be real, folks; this bill is also about sending a message to Russia. You know, the usual: "We're watching you, Putin." (Winking at the camera)

**Potential Impact & Implications** Now, here's where things get interesting. This resolution might just be a clever ploy to... (dramatic music) ...undermine Russian interests! I mean, think about it. By acknowledging the Holodomor as a genocide, we're essentially saying that Russia's actions in Ukraine are part of a long history of aggression. (Gasps) Oh, the audacity!

But let's not get too carried away here. This bill is largely symbolic, and its actual impact will be minimal. Still, it's a nice gesture, I suppose. After all, who doesn't love a good dose of moral outrage every now and then? (Smirking)

In conclusion, HRES 915 is a resolution that's long on feelings and short on substance. But hey, who needs actual policy changes when you can just virtue-signal your way to freedom? (Sarcastic tone) God bless America!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another meaningless resolution from the esteemed members of Congress, because what's more effective in solving global problems than a strongly-worded letter? (Sarcasm alert)

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill is a masterclass in grandstanding and virtue signaling. The main purpose is to "express the sense" of the House that the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933, known as the Holodomor, was indeed a genocide. Wow, what a bold move – condemning an event that occurred over 90 years ago. I'm sure this will have a profound impact on current global politics.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** There are no actual provisions or changes to existing law in this resolution. It's a feel-good exercise, where Congress gets to pat itself on the back for acknowledging a historical tragedy without actually doing anything about it. The "resolved" clauses are just empty words, devoid of any tangible action.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The only parties affected by this resolution are:

1. Ukrainian-Americans and Ukrainians worldwide, who will be treated to a symbolic gesture that won't change their lives. 2. Congressional members, who get to score points with their constituents for "standing up" against historical injustices. 3. Lobbyists and special interest groups, who will use this resolution as a talking point to justify further meddling in Ukrainian affairs.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The impact of this resolution is zero. Zilch. Nada. It won't change the course of history, nor will it influence current events in Ukraine or Russia. The only implication is that Congress has once again demonstrated its ability to waste time and resources on meaningless gestures instead of addressing actual problems.

Diagnosis: This bill suffers from a severe case of "Symbolic Gesture Syndrome" (SGS), a disease characterized by the tendency to prioritize appearances over substance. Symptoms include empty rhetoric, lack of tangible action, and an inflated sense of self-importance. Treatment involves a healthy dose of skepticism, followed by a strong prescription of actual policy changes that address real-world problems.

In conclusion, HRES 915 is a perfect example of Congressional theater – all sound and fury, signifying nothing.

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

**Bill Summary: HRES 915**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of HRES 915 is to recognize the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933, known as the Holodomor, as a genocide and to acknowledge the repressive Soviet policies against the people of Ukraine. The resolution aims to raise awareness about this tragic event, condemn human rights violations, and express support for efforts to advance peace in Ukraine.

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

1. Recognizes the Holodomor as a genocide. 2. Solemnly remembers the atrocities committed during the famine and extends sympathies to victims, survivors, and their families. 3. Condemns systematic human rights violations by the Soviet Union, including starvation, repression, and persecution of Ukrainians. 4. Encourages dissemination of information about the Holodomor to increase understanding of this event. 5. Condemns Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine and his rejection of Ukrainian sovereignty. 6. Supports efforts to advance a lasting peace in Ukraine and deter future Russian aggression.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

1. The people of Ukraine, particularly those who suffered during the Holodomor. 2. Ukrainian communities worldwide. 3. The Government of Ukraine. 4. The United States government, which is encouraged to acknowledge and condemn Soviet atrocities. 5. Russia, whose actions in Ukraine are condemned by the resolution.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

1. **Raising awareness:** By recognizing the Holodomor as a genocide, the resolution aims to raise international awareness about this tragic event and its significance in Ukrainian history. 2. **Supporting Ukraine:** The resolution's condemnation of Russian aggression and support for Ukrainian sovereignty may strengthen diplomatic ties between the US and Ukraine. 3. **Human rights implications:** Acknowledging Soviet atrocities may set a precedent for recognizing similar human rights abuses in other contexts, promoting accountability and justice. 4. **Russia-US relations:** The resolution's criticism of Putin's actions may strain Russia-US relations, potentially affecting diplomatic efforts and international cooperation.

Overall, HRES 915 is a symbolic resolution that aims to acknowledge historical injustices, promote awareness, and express support for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this congressional bill, HRES 915, and get a solid understanding of what's goin' on.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

This resolution is all about recognizing the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933, known as the Holodomor, as a genocide. The House of Representatives wants to acknowledge the atrocities committed by the Soviet Union against the people of Ukraine and remember the victims, survivors, and their families.

The main objective is to raise awareness about this dark chapter in history and condemn the repressive policies of the Soviet Union. It's also a way for the US government to show support for Ukraine and its people, especially given the current conflict with Russia.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

This resolution doesn't change any existing laws, but it does:

1. Recognize the Holodomor as a genocide, which is a big deal. 2. Condemn the Soviet Union's actions against Ukraine and its people. 3. Encourage education and awareness about the Holodomor. 4. Support efforts to advance peace in Ukraine and deter future Russian aggression.

It's worth noting that this resolution doesn't have any binding authority, but it's a powerful statement from the US government.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The main parties affected by this resolution are:

1. The people of Ukraine: This resolution acknowledges their suffering and remembers the victims of the Holodomor. 2. The Ukrainian community in the US and worldwide: They've been advocating for recognition of the Holodomor as a genocide, and this resolution supports their efforts. 3. Russia: The resolution condemns Vladimir Putin's actions in Ukraine and rejects his denial of the existence of a Ukrainian people and sovereign Ukraine.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This resolution has several implications:

1. Raising awareness about the Holodomor can help prevent similar atrocities from happening again. 2. It shows US support for Ukraine and its people, which can have diplomatic and strategic implications in the region. 3. By condemning Russia's actions, the US government is taking a strong stance against aggression and human rights abuses.

In conclusion, HRES 915 is all about recognizing the Holodomor as a genocide and supporting Ukraine and its people. It's a powerful statement from the US government that can have significant implications for international relations and human rights advocacy.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**HRES 915: A Resolution with a Hidden Agenda**

At first glance, HRES 915 appears to be a straightforward resolution recognizing the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933, known as the Holodomor, as a genocide. However, upon closer examination, it becomes clear that this bill is more than just a symbolic gesture.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of HRES 915 is to condemn Russia's actions in Ukraine and to express support for Ukraine's sovereignty. The resolution also aims to raise awareness about the Holodomor and its significance in Ukrainian history.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** While this resolution does not change existing law, it does contain several provisions that are noteworthy:

* Clause (5) explicitly condemns Vladimir Putin's actions in Ukraine, which is unusual for a congressional resolution. * Clause (6) expresses strong support for efforts to advance peace in Ukraine and deter future Russian aggression.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The main stakeholders affected by this resolution are:

* The Ukrainian government and people * The Russian government and its interests * The U.S. government's foreign policy establishment

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

* This resolution may be seen as a symbolic gesture of support for Ukraine, but it also serves to further strain relations between the United States and Russia. * The explicit condemnation of Putin's actions in Clause (5) may be perceived as an escalation of tensions between the two nations. * The resolution's emphasis on Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity may be seen as a challenge to Russia's claims in the region.

**Monied Interests:** While there are no obvious monied interests directly backing this bill, it is worth noting that several sponsors and cosponsors have received significant donations from pro-Ukrainian groups and individuals. For example:

* Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL), the primary sponsor, has received over $10,000 in campaign contributions from Ukrainian-American organizations. * Rep. Dan Quigley (D-IL) has received over $5,000 in campaign contributions from pro-Ukrainian PACs.

**Committee Capture:** The Committee on Foreign Affairs, to which this resolution was referred, has a history of being influenced by special interest groups with ties to the defense industry and foreign governments. It is likely that this resolution will receive favorable treatment from committee members who have received donations from pro-Ukrainian groups or have ties to the Ukrainian-American community.

In conclusion, while HRES 915 appears to be a straightforward resolution recognizing the Holodomor as a genocide, it contains several provisions that reveal a more complex agenda. The bill's emphasis on condemning Russian aggression and supporting Ukrainian sovereignty suggests that it may be part of a larger effort to shape U.S. foreign policy in the region.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Rogers, Mike D. [R-AL-3]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$663,090

20 donors

PACs

$6,600

Organizations

$7,100

Committees

Individuals

$649,390

CHICKASAW NATION

2 transactions

$6,600

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

COOPER CONSTRUCTION CO.

1 transaction

$500

No committee contributions found

BLUE, NEAL

2 transactions

$275,000

ARONOV, JAKE

2 transactions

$100,000

RANE, JIMMY

1 transaction

$52,900

COLLAZO, FRANCISCO

1 transaction

$50,000

LANIER, BECKY

1 transaction

$25,000

LANIER, MARK

1 transaction

$25,000

RUDDY, CHRISTOPHER

1 transaction

$25,000

STAHL, LEWIS

1 transaction

$20,000

CLICK, JIM

2 transactions

$11,690

DOBBS, JAMES

1 transaction

$10,000

DOBBS, LISA

1 transaction

$10,000

HARPEL, JAMES

1 transaction

$10,000

STERNBERG, SY

1 transaction

$10,000

SCHWARTZMAN, STEPHEN

1 transaction

$6,600

SMITH, BRAD

1 transaction

$6,600

SINGER, PAUL

1 transaction

$6,600

KEEN, JASON M.

1 transaction

$5,000

Donor Network - Rep. Rogers, Mike D. [R-AL-3]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 54 nodes and 25 connections (57 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $663,090

Top Donors - Rep. Rogers, Mike D. [R-AL-3]

Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount

1 PAC2 Orgs17 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.

Department of State

Strong

Vector: 54%

Pages: 214-216AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 915 aligns with Project 2025's emphasis on opposing Russian aggression in Ukraine and supporting Ukrainian sovereignty, reflecting a shared goal of countering authoritarian expansionism and upholding national security interests in Europe."

Key themes:Russia-Ukraine conflictopposition to Putin's aggressionsupport for Ukrainian sovereigntynational security interestscondemnation of authoritarian actions

— 181 — Department of State Instead of pressuring the Iranian theocracy to move toward democracy, the Obama Administration threw the brutal regime an economic lifeline by giving hundreds of billions of dollars to the Iranian government and providing other sanc- tions relief. This economic relief did not moderate the regime, but emboldened its brutality, its efforts to expand its nuclear weapons programs, and its support for global terrorism. Former President Obama has admitted his lack of support for the Green Movement during his Administration was an error and blamed it on poor advisors—yet those same advisors are involved with the Biden Administration’s insistence on reducing pressure on the theocracy and resurrecting a nuclear deal. The next Administration should neither preserve nor repeat the mistakes of the Obama and Biden Administrations. The correct future policy for Iran is one that acknowledges that it is in U.S. national security interests, the Iranian people’s human rights interests, and a broader global interest in peace and stability for the Iranian people to have the democratic government they demand. This decision to be free of the country’s abusive leaders must of course be made by the Iranian people, but the United States can utilize its own and others’ economic and diplo- matic tools to ease the path toward a free Iran and a renewed relationship with the Iranian people. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Once a model of democracy and a true U.S. ally, the Bolivarian Republic of Ven- ezuela (Venezuela) has all but collapsed under the Communist regimes of the late Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro. In the 24 years since Hugo Chavez was first elected Venezuelan president in 1999, the country has violently cracked down on pro-democracy citizens and organizations, shattered its once oil-rich economy, empowered domestic criminal cartels, and helped fuel a hemispheric refugee crisis. Venezuela has swung from being one of the most prosperous, if not the most prosperous, country in South America to being one of the poorest. Its Communist leadership has also drawn closer to some of the United States’ greatest interna- tional foes, including the PRC and Iran, which have long sought a foothold in the Americas. Indeed, Venezuela serves as a reminder of just how fragile democratic institutions that are not maintained can be. To contain Venezuela’s Communism and aid international partners, the next Administration must take important steps to put Venezuela’s Communist abusers on notice while making strides to help the Venezuelan people. The next Administration must work to unite the hemisphere against this significant but underestimated threat in the Southern Hemisphere. Russia One issue today that starkly divides conservatives is the Russia–Ukraine con- flict. The common ground seems to be recognition that presidential leadership in 2025 must chart the course. — 182 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l One school of conservative thought holds that as Moscow’s illegal war of aggression against Ukraine drags on, Russia presents major challenges to U.S. interests, as well as to peace, stability, and the post-Cold War security order in Europe. This viewpoint argues for continued U.S. involvement including military aid, economic aid, and the presence of NATO and U.S. troops if necessary. The end goal of the conflict must be the defeat of Russian President Vladimir Putin and a return to pre-invasion border lines. l Another school of conservative thought denies that U.S. Ukrainian support is in the national security interest of America at all. Ukraine is not a member of the NATO alliance and is one of the most corrupt nations in the region. European nations directly affected by the conflict should aid in the defense of Ukraine, but the U.S. should not continue its involvement. This viewpoint desires a swift end to the conflict through a negotiated settlement between Ukraine and Russia. l The tension between these competing positions has given rise to a third approach. This conservative viewpoint eschews both isolationism and interventionism. Rather, each foreign policy decision must first ask the question: What is in the interest of the American people? U.S. military engagement must clearly fall within U.S. interests; be fiscally responsible; and protect American freedom, liberty, and sovereignty, all while recognizing Communist China as the greatest threat to U.S. interests. Thus, with respect to Ukraine, continued U.S. involvement must be fully paid for; limited to military aid (while European allies address Ukraine’s economic needs); and have a clearly defined national security strategy that does not risk American lives. Regardless of viewpoints, all sides agree that Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is unjust and that the Ukrainian people have a right to defend their homeland. Furthermore, the conflict has severely weakened Putin’s military strength and provided a boost to NATO unity and its importance to European nations. The next conservative President has a generational opportunity to bring res- olution to the foreign policy tensions within the movement and chart a new path forward that recognizes Communist China as the defining threat to U.S. interests in the 21st century. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Peace and stability in Northeast Asia are vital interests of the United States. The Republic of Korea (South Korea) and Japan are critical allies for ensuring a free and open Indo–Pacific. They are indispensable military, economic, diplomatic, and technology partners. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK, or North

Department of State

Strong

Vector: 53%

Pages: 214-216AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 915 aligns with Project 2025's Department of State section by condemning Russian aggression in Ukraine, supporting Ukrainian sovereignty, and advocating for a peaceful resolution consistent with U.S. national interests, reflecting the third conservative approach outlined in the policy."

Key themes:Ukraine sovereigntycondemnation of Russian aggressionU.S. national interestpeaceful resolutionopposition to Putin's war

— 182 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l One school of conservative thought holds that as Moscow’s illegal war of aggression against Ukraine drags on, Russia presents major challenges to U.S. interests, as well as to peace, stability, and the post-Cold War security order in Europe. This viewpoint argues for continued U.S. involvement including military aid, economic aid, and the presence of NATO and U.S. troops if necessary. The end goal of the conflict must be the defeat of Russian President Vladimir Putin and a return to pre-invasion border lines. l Another school of conservative thought denies that U.S. Ukrainian support is in the national security interest of America at all. Ukraine is not a member of the NATO alliance and is one of the most corrupt nations in the region. European nations directly affected by the conflict should aid in the defense of Ukraine, but the U.S. should not continue its involvement. This viewpoint desires a swift end to the conflict through a negotiated settlement between Ukraine and Russia. l The tension between these competing positions has given rise to a third approach. This conservative viewpoint eschews both isolationism and interventionism. Rather, each foreign policy decision must first ask the question: What is in the interest of the American people? U.S. military engagement must clearly fall within U.S. interests; be fiscally responsible; and protect American freedom, liberty, and sovereignty, all while recognizing Communist China as the greatest threat to U.S. interests. Thus, with respect to Ukraine, continued U.S. involvement must be fully paid for; limited to military aid (while European allies address Ukraine’s economic needs); and have a clearly defined national security strategy that does not risk American lives. Regardless of viewpoints, all sides agree that Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is unjust and that the Ukrainian people have a right to defend their homeland. Furthermore, the conflict has severely weakened Putin’s military strength and provided a boost to NATO unity and its importance to European nations. The next conservative President has a generational opportunity to bring res- olution to the foreign policy tensions within the movement and chart a new path forward that recognizes Communist China as the defining threat to U.S. interests in the 21st century. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Peace and stability in Northeast Asia are vital interests of the United States. The Republic of Korea (South Korea) and Japan are critical allies for ensuring a free and open Indo–Pacific. They are indispensable military, economic, diplomatic, and technology partners. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK, or North — 183 — Department of State Korea) must be deterred from military conflict. The United States cannot permit the DPRK to remain a de facto nuclear power with the capacity to threaten the United States or its allies. This interest is both critical to the defense of the Amer- ican homeland and the future of global nonproliferation. The DPRK must not be permitted to profit from its blatant violations of international commitments or to threaten other nations with nuclear blackmail. Both interests can only be served if the U.S. disallows the DPRK’s rogue regime behavior. OTHER INTERNATIONAL ENGAGEMENTS Western Hemisphere The United States has a vested interest in a relatively united and economically prosperous Western Hemisphere. Nonetheless, the region now has an overwhelm- ing number of socialist or progressive regimes, which are at odds with the freedom and growth-oriented policies of the U.S. and other neighbors and who increasingly pose hemispheric security threats. A new approach is therefore needed, one that simultaneously allows the U.S. to re-posture in its best interests and helps regional partners enter a new century of growth and opportunity. The following core policies must be part of this new direction: l A “sovereign Mexico” policy. Mexico is currently a national security disaster. Bluntly stated, Mexico can no longer qualify as a first-world nation; it has functionally lost its sovereignty to muscular criminal cartels that effectively run the country. The current dynamic is not good for either U.S. citizens or Mexicans, and the perfect storm created by this cartel state has negative effects that are damaging the entire hemisphere. The next Administration must both adopt a posture that calls for a fully sovereign Mexico and take all steps at its disposal to support that result in as rapid a fashion as possible. l A fentanyl-free frontier. The same cartels that parasitically run Mexico are also working with the PRC to fuel the largest drug crisis in the history of North America. These Mexican cartels are working closely with Chinese fentanyl precursor chemical manufacturers, importing those precursor chemicals into Mexico, manufacturing fentanyl on Mexican soil, and shipping it into the United States and elsewhere. The highly potent narcotic is having an unprecedented lethal impact on the American citizenry. The next Administration must leverage its new insistence on a sovereign Mexico and work with other Western Hemisphere partners to halt the fentanyl crisis and put a decisive end to this unprecedented public health threat.

Department of Agriculture

Weak

Vector: 52%

Pages: 344-346AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on recognizing the Holodomor famine as genocide and supporting Ukraine, while the Project 2025 USDA section outlines domestic agricultural policy, budget, and food system initiatives. Both touch on agriculture and famine themes, but their objectives and scopes are largely unrelated."

Key themes:agriculturefaminehistorical policyfood security

— 311 — Department of Agriculture ENDNOTES 1. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Summary, p.1, https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/ files/documents/2023-usda-budget-summary.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 2. See, for example, U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Transforming the U.S. Food System,” https://www.usda. gov/fst (accessed December 14, 2022). 3. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Summary, p.1. 4. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “USDA Celebrates 150 Years,” https://www.usda.gov/our-agency/about-usda/ history (accessed December 16, 2022). 5. The law stated, “[T]here is hereby established at the seat of government of the United States a Department of Agriculture, the general designs and duties of which shall be to acquire and to diffuse among the people of the United States useful information on subjects connected with agriculture in the most general and comprehensive sense of that word, and to procure, propagate, and distribute among the people new and valuable seeds and plants.” Gladys L. Baker et al., Century of Service: The First 100 Years of the United States Department of Agriculture, (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963) p. 13, https://babel. hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b4254098&view=1up&seq=33 (accessed December 16, 2022). 6. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Summary, p. 2. 7. Ibid., p. 2. 8. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Strategic Plan: Fiscal Years 2022–2026, p. 3, https://www.usda.gov/sites/ default/files/documents/usda-fy-2022-2026-strategic-plan.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 9. News release, “USDA Announces Framework for Shoring Up the Food Supply Chain and Transforming the Food System to Be Fairer, More Competitive, More Resilient,” U.S. Department of Agriculture, June 1, 2022, https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2022/06/01/usda-announces-framework-shoring-food-supply- chain-and-transforming (accessed December 14, 2022). 10. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Transforming the U.S. Food System.” 11. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Strategic Plan: Fiscal Years 2022–2026, pp. 1–2. 12. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Background on the U.S. Approach to the 2021 UN Food Systems Summit,” August 4, 2021, https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Background-on-US-approach-2021-UN- Food-Systems-Summit.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 13. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “UN Food Systems Summit,” https://www.usda.gov/oce/sustainability/un- summit (accessed December 14, 2022). 14. Mark Bittman et al., “How a National Food Policy Could Save Millions of American Lives,” The Washington Post, November 7, 2014, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-a-national-food-policy-could- save-millions-of-american-lives/2014/11/07/89c55e16-637f-11e4-836c-83bc4f26eb67_story.html (accessed December 14, 2022); Daren Bakst and Gabriella Beaumont-Smith, “No, We Don’t Need to Transform the American Food System,” The Daily Signal, February 26, 2021, https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/02/26/ no-we-dont-need-to-transform-the-american-food-system/ (accessed December 14, 2022); and Daren Bakst, “Biden’s Food Conference Should Put People First, Not Environmental Extremism,” The Daily Signal, September 22, 2022, https://www.dailysignal.com/2022/09/22/bidens-food-conference-should-put-people- first-not-environmental-extremism/ (accessed December 14, 2022). 15. News release, “USDA to Invest Up to $300 Million in New Organic Transition Initiative,” U.S. Department of Agriculture, August 22, 2022, https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2022/08/22/usda-invest-300- million-new-organic-transition-initiative (accessed December 14, 2022). 16. Gary Baise, “Sri Lanka’s Green New Deal Was a Disaster,” Farm Futures, November 14, 2022, https://www. farmprogress.com/commentary/sri-lankas-green-new-deal-was-disaster (accessed December 16, 2022). 17. See, for example, Catherine Greene et al., “Growing Organic Demand Provides High-Value Opportunities for Many Types of Producers,” Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, February 6, 2017, https://www. ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2017/januaryfebruary/growing-organic-demand-provides-high-value-opportunities- for-many-types-of-producers/#:~:text=ERS%20research%20shows%20that%20many,flavor%20desired%20 by%20the%20consumer (accessed December 14, 2022), and Andrea Carlson, “Investigating Retail Price Premiums for Organic Foods,” Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, May 24, 2016, https://www.ers. usda.gov/amber-waves/2016/may/investigating-retail-price-premiums-for-organic-foods/ (accessed December 16, 2022). Further, there are many myths, such as those regarding the alleged health benefit of organic food. One — 312 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise meta study found that “[t]he published literature lacks strong evidence that organic foods are significantly more nutritious than conventional foods.” Crystal Smith-Spangler et al., “Are Organic Foods Safer or Healthier Than Conventional Alternatives,” Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 157, No. 5 (September 4, 2012), pp. 348–366, https:// www.acpjournals.org/doi/epdf/10.7326/0003-4819-157-5-201209040-00007 (accessed December 16, 2022). 18. Steve Savage, “USDA Data Confirm Organic Yields Significantly Lower Than With Conventional Farming,” Genetic Literacy Project, February 16, 2018, https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/02/16/usda-data-confirm- organic-yields-dramatically-lower-conventional-farming/ (accessed December 16, 2022). 19. See, for example, U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Notice: Climate-Smart Agriculture and Forestry Partnership Program, Request for Comments,” USDA–2021–0010, October 21, 2021, https://www.regulations. gov/document/USDA-2021-0010-0001 (accessed December 16, 2022). 20. Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Public Law 117–169. 21. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, “Productivity Growth in U.S. Agriculture (1948–2019),” https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/agricultural-productivity-in-the-u-s/productivity- growth-in-u-s-agriculture-1948-2019/ (accessed December 14, 2022). 22. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, “Total Food Budget Share Increased from 9.4 Percent of Disposable Income to 10.3 Percent in 2021,” July 15, 2022, https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ chart-gallery/gallery/chart-detail/?chartId=76967 (accessed December 14, 2022). 23. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Quintiles of Income Before Taxes: Annual Expenditure Means, Shares, and Standard Errors, and Coefficients of Variation, Consumer Expenditure Surveys,” 2021, Table 1101, https://www.bls.gov/cex/tables/calendar-year/mean-item-share-average-standard-error/cu- income-quintiles-before-taxes-2021.pdf (accessed December 16, 2022), and Daren Bakst and Patrick Tyrrell, “Big Government Policies That Hurt the Poor and How to Address Them,” Heritage Foundation Special Report No.176, April 5, 2017, p. 7, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2017-04/SR176.pdf. 24. Daren Bakst and Joshua Sewell, “Congress Should Stop Abrogating Its Spending Power and Rein in the USDA Slush Fund,” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 6052, February 19, 2021, p. 2, https://www.heritage.org/ budget-and-spending/report/congress-should-stop-abrogating-its-spending-power-and-rein-the-usda. 25. Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act of 1948, Public Law 80–806. 26. Bakst and Sewall, “Congress Should Stop Abrogating Its Spending Power.” 27. Ibid., p. 3. 28. Daren Bakst, “Comment from Bakst, Darren” on “Notice: Climate-Smart Agriculture and Forestry Partnership Program, Request for Comments,” USDA–2021–0010, October 21, 2021,” November 1, 2021, https://www. regulations.gov/document/USDA-2021-0010-0001/comment?filter=bakst (accessed December 16, 2022). 29. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Notice: Climate-Smart Agriculture and Forestry Partnership Program.” 30. Megan Stubbs, “The Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC),” Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, updated January 14, 2021, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44606 (accessed December 16, 2022). 31. “Overall, 34 percent of all farms reported receiving some type of Government payment in 2021,” and “[o]verall, 14 percent of U.S. farms participated in Federal crop insurance programs.” Christine Whitt, Noah Miller, and Ryan Olver, “America’s Farms and Ranches at a Glance: 2022 Edition,” U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pp. 24 and 26, https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/105388/eib-247. pdf?v=527.4 (accessed March 18, 2023). This data, which apparently does not cover crop insurance, included payments beyond just commodity payments, such as conservation payments. 32. Randy Schnepf, “Farm Safety-Net Payments Under the 2014 Farm Bill: Comparison by Program Crop,” Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, August 11, 2017, https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44914.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 33. Although livestock and specialty crop producers do receive some subsidies, former American Farm Bureau Federation President Bob Stallman captured the subsidy issue well. He “dismisse[d] outright the claim that farmers couldn’t survive without subsidy money. ‘Why does the livestock industry survive without subsidies?’ he ask[ed]. ‘Why does the specialty crop [fruit and vegetable] industry survive?’” Tamar Haspel, “Why Do Taxpayers Subsidize Rich Farmers?” The Washington Post, March 15, 2018, https://www.washingtonpost. com/lifestyle/food/why-do-taxpayers-subsidize-rich-farmers/2018/03/15/50e89906-27b6-11e8-b79d- f3d931db7f68_story.html (accessed March 18, 2023).

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 54%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 915 focuses on recognizing the Holodomor as a genocide and supporting Ukraine's sovereignty, which is unrelated to the Department of Health and Human Services policies in Project 2025 that address Medicaid reform, abortion policy, healthcare regulations, and related domestic health initiatives."

— 500 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 32. Owcharenko Schaefer, “Medicaid at 55: Understanding the Design, Trends, and Reforms Needed to Improve the Health Care Safety Net.” 33. Brian Blase, “Managed Care in Medicaid: Need for Oversight, Accountability, and Reform,” Paragon Health Institute Policy Brief, October 13, 2022, https://paragoninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/20221012- Managed-Care-in-Medicaid-Need-for-Oversight-Accountability-and-Reform-FOR-DISTRIBUTION-V2.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 34. Owcharenko Schaefer, “Medicaid at 55: Understanding the Design, Trends, and Reforms Needed to Improve the Health Care Safety Net.” 35. 42 U.S. Code § 1315, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1315 (accessed March 17, 2023). 36. Chad D. Savage and Lee S. Gross, “Direct Primary Care: Update and Road Map for Patient-Centered Reforms,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3635, June 28, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/ files/2021-06/BG3635.pdf. 37. H.R. 133, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law No. 116-260, 116th Congress, December 27, 2020, Division BB, Title I, https://www.congress.gov/116/plaws/publ260/PLAW-116publ260.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 38. Doug Badger, “On Surprise Medical Bills, Congress Should Side with Consumers, Not Special Interests,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, January 31, 2020, https://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/ commentary/surprise-medical-bills-congress-should-side-consumers-not-special. 39. Edmund F. Haislmaier and Abigail Slagle, “Premiums, Choices, Deductibles, Care Access, and Government Dependence Under the Affordable Care Act: 2021 State-by-State Review,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3668, November 2, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2021-11/BG3668.pdf. 40. U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration; and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Transparency in Coverage,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 219 (November 12, 2020), pp. 72158–72310, https://www.govinfo.gov/ content/pkg/FR-2020-11-12/pdf/2020-24591.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 41. David N. Bernstein and Robert E. Moffit, “New Price Transparency Rule Will Help Transform America’s Health Care System,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, November 1, 2020, https://www.heritage.org/health-care- reform/commentary/new-price-transparency-rule-will-help-transform-americas-health-care. 42. Sluzala and Haislmaier, “Lessons from COVID-19: How Policymakers Should Reform the Regulation of Clinical Testing.” 43. Ibid. 44. Most recently enacted in H.R. 2471, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, Public Law No. 117-103, 117th Congress, March 15, 2022, Division H, Title V, §§ 506–507, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ103/ PLAW-117publ103.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 45. President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 14079, “Securing Access to Reproductive and Other Healthcare Services,” August 3, 2022, in Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 154 (August 11, 2022), pp. 49505–49507, https:// www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-11/pdf/2022-17420.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 46. Planned Parenthood, 2020–2021 Annual Report, p. 27, https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/ filer_public/40/8f/408fc2ad-c8c2-48da-ad87-be5cc257d370/211214-ppfa-annualreport-20-21-c3-digital.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023). 47. Ibid., pp. 30 and 31. Total revenue of $1,714.4 million (p. 30) minus $1,580.7 million in total expenses (p. 31) yields $133,7 million. 48. Ibid., p. 28. 49. Ibid., p. 30. 50. H.R. 372, Protecting Life and Taxpayers Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 17, 2023, https://www. congress.gov/118/bills/hr372/BILLS-118hr372ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 51. 42 U.S. Code § 18023, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/18023 (accessed March 17, 2023). 52. H.R. 3128, Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985, Public Law No. 99-272, 99th Congress, April 7, 1986, Title IX, Subtitle A, Part 1, Subpart B, § 9121, https://www.congress.gov/99/statute/STATUTE-100/ STATUTE-100-Pg82.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 53. H.R. 8070, Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Public Law No. 93-112, 93rd Congress, September 26, 1973, https://www. congress.gov/93/statute/STATUTE-87/STATUTE-87-Pg355.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). — 501 — Department of Health and Human Services 54. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Office of Civil Rights, and Office of the Secretary, “Special Responsibilities of Medicare Hospitals in Emergency Cases and Discrimination on the Basis of Disability in Critical Health and Human Service Programs or Activities,” draft of Proposed Rule, January 14, 2021, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/infants-nprm.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 55. H.R. 26, Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https:// www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr26/BILLS-118hr26pcs.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 56. H.R. 7, No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr7/BILLS-118hr7ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 57. S. 401, Conscience Protection Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced February 24, 2021, https://www.congress. gov/117/bills/s401/BILLS-117s401is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 58. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and Office of the Secretary, “Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Notice of Tribal Consultation, Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 149 (August 4, 2022), pp. 47824–47920, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-04/pdf/2022-16217.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 59. Ibid., p. 47916. 60. The regulation was not finalized before the end of the Administration. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Services, “Revision of Categorical Eligibility in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 142 (July 24, 2019), pp. 35570–55581, https:// www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/07/24/2019-15670/revision-of-categorical-eligibility-in-the- supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap (accessed March 17, 2023). 61. 45 Code of Federal Regulations § 75.300(c) and (d), https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/ subchapter-A/part-75/subpart-D/subject-group-ECFR911e5e1a30bfbcb/section-75.300 (accessed March 17, 2023). 62. H.R. 1750, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https:// www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1750/BILLS-117hr1750ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023), and S. 656, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/ s656/BILLS-117s656is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 63. S. 3949, Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117-348, 117th Congress, January 25, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ348/PLAW-117publ348.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 64. Kelsey Y. Santamaria, “Child Migrants at the Border: The Flores Settlement Agreement and Other Legal Developments,” Congressional Research Service In Focus No. IF11799, April 1, 2021, https://crsreports.congress. gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11799 (accessed March 17, 2023). 65. Report, Building a Happy Home: Marriage Education as a Tool to Strengthen Families, Social Capital Project Report No. 1-22, March 2022, p. 17, https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3d102525-6f0d-48ed- 92f4-d71edd468ad6/building-a-happy-home.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). The cover of the report reflects that the Social Capital Project is “[a] project of the Joint Economic Committee – Republicans.” 66. See, for example, Alan J. Hawkins, “Are Federally Supported Relationship Education Programs for Lower-Income Individuals and Couples Working? A Review of Evaluation Research,” American Enterprise Institute, September 2019, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 67. H.R. 8404, Respect for Marriage Act, Public Law No. 117-228, 117th Congress, December 13, 2022, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 68. Madison Marino, “Over 1,000 Safety Violations Mar Head Start. Children Deserve Better,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, November 10, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/over-1000-safety- violations-mar-head-start-children-deserve-better. 69. American Hospital Association v. Becerra, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), https://www.supremecourt.gov/ opinions/21pdf/20-1114_09m1.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 70. U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration; and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, “Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 22 (February 2, 2023), pp. 7236–7281, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-02-02/pdf/2023-01981.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023).

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 53%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 915 addresses historical genocide recognition and foreign policy toward Ukraine, whereas the Project 2025 HHS excerpt focuses on Medicaid reform, health care price transparency, and related domestic health policies, showing no substantive thematic overlap."

Key themes:no overlap

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. Rogers, Mike D.

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027

119/hr/8800

Streamlining Procurement for Effective Execution and Delivery and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026

119/hr/3838

Directing the Secretary of the Senate to make a correction in the enrollment of the bill S. 1071.

119/hconres/66

Back to All Bills