National Landslide Preparedness Act Reauthorization Act of 2025

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/s/1626

Last Updated: September 7, 2026

National Landslide Preparedness Act Reauthorization Act of 2025

S. 1626, 119th Congress — read as touching Construction & Engineering.

The sponsor

Sen. Murkowski, Lisa [R-AK]

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

The money

$78,350 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of the Interior" section, p. 572-574 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Held at the desk.

January 6, 2026

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:

The National Landslide Preparedness Act Reauthorization Act of 2025 (S. 1626). A bill that reeks of bureaucratic inefficiency and regulatory overreach.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

This bill aims to reauthorize the National Landslide Preparedness Act, which is a program designed to mitigate landslide hazards across the United States. The main objective is to improve the nation's preparedness for landslides by enhancing data collection, risk assessment, and emergency response efforts.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill makes several changes to existing law, including:

* Expanding the definition of "atmospheric river" and "extreme precipitation event" * Requiring the Secretary of Commerce to assess the risks posed by atmospheric river flooding events and extreme precipitation events * Establishing a national landslide hazards database to identify areas at risk due to various factors, including hydrology, geologic activity, and data-poor areas

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The affected parties include:

* The Department of Commerce * The Secretary of the Interior * Institutions of higher education * Native Hawaiian organizations * Tribal organizations * Communities at risk of landslides

**Potential Impact & Implications**

From a purely economic perspective, this bill is a mixed bag. On one hand, it may lead to increased investment in landslide mitigation efforts, which could benefit companies involved in construction, engineering, and environmental consulting. However, the bill's emphasis on regulation and data collection may also lead to increased costs for businesses operating in high-risk areas.

As a self-interested billionaire, I am more concerned about the potential impact of this bill on my own business interests. Specifically, I worry that the bill's requirements for risk assessment and emergency response planning may lead to increased regulatory burdens on companies like mine, which operate in landslide-prone areas.

Overall, I would rate this bill a 6 out of 10 in terms of its potential impact on my wealth and influence. While it may present some opportunities for profit, the regulatory risks and costs associated with compliance outweigh the benefits.

Recommendation: I would advise lawmakers to consider revising the bill to reduce the regulatory burden on businesses and focus more on incentivizing private sector investment in landslide mitigation efforts. By doing so, we can create a more efficient and effective system that benefits both the public and private sectors.

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Murkowski, Lisa [R-AK]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$299,500

178 donors

PACs

Organizations

$12,350

Committees

Individuals

$287,150

No PAC contributions found

MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE

2 transactions

$4,300

THE CHICKASAW NATION

1 transaction

$2,500

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

2 transactions

$2,000

PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS

1 transaction

$1,000

SUQUAMISH INDIAN TRIBE

1 transaction

$1,000

TOHONO O'ODHAM NATION

1 transaction

$1,000

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

1 transaction

$550

No committee contributions found

BLACK, JULIE R

2 transactions

$6,600

JONES, GEORGE BRADFORD

2 transactions

$6,600

KARP, ALEXANDER C DR

2 transactions

$6,600

LANCE, RYAN M

2 transactions

$6,600

MICHAELS, LAURIE

2 transactions

$6,600

SEGAL, PAUL

2 transactions

$6,600

WALTON, ROB

2 transactions

$6,600

FOX, RICHARD C

2 transactions

$5,700

ARISON, MICKY

3 transactions

$4,800

COX, MEGHAN

2 transactions

$4,300

O'KELLY, SEBASTIAN P

7 transactions

$4,050

PFEFFER, DESIREE

2 transactions

$3,800

ARNOLD, JOHN

1 transaction

$3,300

GIBBONS, LILE

1 transaction

$3,300

GOLDMAN, KEN

1 transaction

$3,300

GUESS, MATTHEW

1 transaction

$3,300

KARSNER, ALEXANDER

1 transaction

$3,300

LOBEL, JULIE

1 transaction

$3,300

LUNDQUIST, ANDREW

1 transaction

$3,300

PFEFFER, MARK

1 transaction

$3,300

ROSE, KELLY

1 transaction

$3,300

BARRETT, SHEILA M

2 transactions

$3,000

BARRETT, THOMAS J

2 transactions

$3,000

EVANS, ROBERT A

2 transactions

$3,000

FOX, RABUN

1 transaction

$3,000

HENDRIX, JOHN

1 transaction

$3,000

INDIAN TRIBE, COWLITZ

1 transaction

$3,000

MCDONNELL, CAROLYN

3 transactions

$3,000

BERTOSON, TODD

1 transaction

$2,500

BODE, DENISE A

1 transaction

$2,500

GIRAUD, CHARLES WILLIAM IV

1 transaction

$2,500

NEESER, GERALD E.

1 transaction

$2,500

O'BRIEN, ANDY

1 transaction

$2,500

RASMUSON, CATHRYN

1 transaction

$2,500

SAN MANUEL, BAND OF MISSION INDI

1 transaction

$2,500

BARRETT, CRAIG

1 transaction

$2,000

DEVORE, JON

4 transactions

$2,000

DOORNENBAL, HEIDI JANSEN

2 transactions

$2,000

EVERTS, ROBERT W

1 transaction

$2,000

JANSEN, GUY

2 transactions

$2,000

JANSEN, JIM

2 transactions

$2,000

JANSEN, VIC

2 transactions

$2,000

JANSEN, VICKI

2 transactions

$2,000

KNUTSON, KAREN

1 transaction

$2,000

OLDS, NICK

1 transaction

$2,000

PAUL, TERRY L

4 transactions

$2,000

WOOLSTON, KRISTINA

1 transaction

$2,000

DOWNS, RAISSA H

2 transactions

$2,000

SILVER, STEVEN

3 transactions

$1,750

ASHLOCK, CAROL S

1 transaction

$1,500

BAKER, BRETT

1 transaction

$1,500

BAKER, BRUCE ANDREW

1 transaction

$1,500

BAKER, MILES C

1 transaction

$1,500

BRADWAY, COURTNEY

1 transaction

$1,500

BUCKALEW, ADAM

1 transaction

$1,500

BUNDRANT, JOSEPH

1 transaction

$1,500

BUNDRANT, MARY SUE

1 transaction

$1,500

DAVIDSON, VALERIE

1 transaction

$1,500

FAWAZ, RAMZI

1 transaction

$1,500

FEATHERLY, WALTER

1 transaction

$1,500

GILLOTT, CHRISTOPHER D

1 transaction

$1,500

HALL, HUNTER

1 transaction

$1,500

IRIZARRY, STEVEN

1 transaction

$1,500

IYER, SWAMINATHAN

1 transaction

$1,500

LAWRENCE, COURTNEY

1 transaction

$1,500

MARSHALL, MEGAN

1 transaction

$1,500

MARTIN, MARGARET

1 transaction

$1,500

MCKECHNIE, ANDREW

1 transaction

$1,500

MCMILLIN, ROBERT

1 transaction

$1,500

PATE, HEWITT

1 transaction

$1,500

PETERSON, MICHAEL

1 transaction

$1,500

POPP, MONICA

1 transaction

$1,500

ROSEN, DEAN

1 transaction

$1,500

STOLPE, CAROL

1 transaction

$1,500

STRONG, MIRANDA

1 transaction

$1,500

THOMPSON, TAYLOR

1 transaction

$1,500

VAN PELT, JASON

1 transaction

$1,500

WALTON, ROBERT

1 transaction

$1,500

WHITE, DERRICK

1 transaction

$1,500

SOUTER, ALEXANDER

2 transactions

$1,300

ANDERSON, TRAVIS K

1 transaction

$1,000

BELL, STEPHEN E

1 transaction

$1,000

BICKWIT, LEONARD JR.

2 transactions

$1,000

BUNDRANT, DIANE L

1 transaction

$1,000

BURNETT, WALLACE DAVID

2 transactions

$1,000

CAMPBELL, CORA

1 transaction

$1,000

CARTER, ZACHARY

1 transaction

$1,000

CHAVEZ, JP

1 transaction

$1,000

CHRISTENSEN-WOODWARD, LORI M

1 transaction

$1,000

CURBELO, CECILIA

1 transaction

$1,000

DALY, JOHN JOSEPH

1 transaction

$1,000

DAUM, ROBERT C

1 transaction

$1,000

DEATON, TYLER

1 transaction

$1,000

DOREMUS, PAUL

2 transactions

$1,000

EPPLIN, ROBERT

1 transaction

$1,000

FERGUSON, JACK

2 transactions

$1,000

FITCH, EMMETT

1 transaction

$1,000

GUERRIERO, PATRICK

1 transaction

$1,000

HALL, PAULI

1 transaction

$1,000

100

HAMBLETON, DAVID

1 transaction

$1,000

101

HELMBRECHT, MICHAEL

1 transaction

$1,000

102

HENDERSCHEDT, JOHN

1 transaction

$1,000

103

HRAP, HEATHER

1 transaction

$1,000

104

HUGHES, MARY

1 transaction

$1,000

105

JARVIS, ALEIX

1 transaction

$1,000

106

KING, ANDREW

2 transactions

$1,000

107

KING, WENDY

1 transaction

$1,000

108

KRECZKO, ALAN

1 transaction

$1,000

109

LANGHOFER, RACHEL

1 transaction

$1,000

110

LEACH, TIMOTHY

1 transaction

$1,000

111

LINK, MICHAEL R

1 transaction

$1,000

112

LONG, RAYMOND

1 transaction

$1,000

113

LYNCH, KARINA V.

1 transaction

$1,000

114

MACKLON, DOMINIC

1 transaction

$1,000

115

MAR, SAM

1 transaction

$1,000

116

MEHRKAM, NOAH B

1 transaction

$1,000

117

MEZA, ROBERT

1 transaction

$1,000

118

MICHELS, DANIEL J

1 transaction

$1,000

119

MOIR, MATTHEW

1 transaction

$1,000

120

NYHOLM, ALLISON

2 transactions

$1,000

121

PEARSON, RACHEL T.

1 transaction

$1,000

122

SATTERBERG, WILLIAM R JR.

1 transaction

$1,000

123

SIRACUSE, CECE

1 transaction

$1,000

124

STOOPS, REED

2 transactions

$1,000

125

SUTTER, BRIAN

1 transaction

$1,000

126

SWEENEY, TARA

1 transaction

$1,000

127

THIESSEN, PAMELA

2 transactions

$1,000

128

TRIBE OF INDIANS, PUYALLUP

1 transaction

$1,000

129

VAN SCOYOC, H STEWART

1 transaction

$1,000

130

WILLIAMS, CHRISTINE V

2 transactions

$1,000

131

WILLIAMS, MICHAEL RYAN

1 transaction

$1,000

132

WILLIAMSON, BRAD

1 transaction

$1,000

133

ZUANICH, ROBERT

1 transaction

$1,000

134

WILT, SINCLAIR

2 transactions

$1,000

135

ZANE, C.J.

1 transaction

$750

136

BALASH, JOSEPH

1 transaction

$500

137

BLACKSMITH, DIANE

1 transaction

$500

138

BURKE, LARRY

1 transaction

$500

139

CANFIELD, CAROLINE

1 transaction

$500

140

CATANZARO, MICHAEL

1 transaction

$500

141

CUSACK, MIKE

1 transaction

$500

142

CUSTER, JASON R

1 transaction

$500

143

EASTON, JOHN

1 transaction

$500

144

EGAN, JAMES B

1 transaction

$500

145

ENLOW, THOMAS D SR.

1 transaction

$500

146

GORTON, KIM

1 transaction

$500

147

HANRAHAN, JOHN T

1 transaction

$500

148

HAWKS, THOMAS

1 transaction

$500

149

IANI, FRANCES S

1 transaction

$500

150

JOHNSTON, JENNIFER

1 transaction

$500

151

KALMIN, JOSEPH

1 transaction

$500

152

MACCHIAROLA, FRANK J

1 transaction

$500

153

MATHISEN, CARL

1 transaction

$500

154

MAXWELL, BRYAN

1 transaction

$500

155

MEISSNER, OLIVER R

1 transaction

$500

156

MILNE, JOHN D

1 transaction

$500

157

O'LEARY, BRIAN

1 transaction

$500

158

PETRIZZO, T.J.

1 transaction

$500

159

REY, MARK

1 transaction

$500

160

ROSENBAUM, JERR

1 transaction

$500

161

SAPRYKINA, NATALIA

1 transaction

$500

162

SCOTT, J. TYLER

1 transaction

$500

163

SHAW, RHOD

1 transaction

$500

164

SMITH, CRAIG F.

1 transaction

$500

165

STEVENSON, ROBERT

1 transaction

$500

166

STEWART, DONALD

1 transaction

$500

167

TRAUTNER, TODD

1 transaction

$500

168

WOOLF, MALCOLM

1 transaction

$500

169

ZAMGOCHIAN, ARAM

1 transaction

$500

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 1 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Sen. Cantwell, Maria [D-WA]

ID: C000127

Top Contributors

SAC FOX TRIBE

OrganizationTAMA, IA

$5,000

Oct 29, 2024

LOWER ELWHA KLALLAM TRIBE

OrganizationPORT ANGELES, WA

$3,360

Mar 31, 2023

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationHIGHLAND, CA

$3,300

Oct 28, 2023

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationHIGHLAND, CA

$3,300

Dec 21, 2023

SAN PABLO LYTTON TRIBE

OrganizationSAN PABLO, CA

$3,300

Nov 16, 2023

SAN PABLO LYTTON TRIBE

OrganizationSAN PABLO, CA

$3,300

Nov 16, 2023

SAULT STE MARIE TRIBE OF CHIPPEWA INDIANS

OrganizationSAULT SAINTE MARIE, MI

$3,300

Dec 14, 2023

SENECA NATION OF INDIANS

OrganizationSALAMANCA, NY

$3,300

Dec 14, 2023

MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE

OrganizationAUBURN, WA

$3,300

May 12, 2023

NISQUALLY INDIAN TRIBE

OrganizationOLYMPIA, WA

$3,300

Jun 30, 2023

Donor Network - Sen. Murkowski, Lisa [R-AK]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 55 nodes and 63 connections

Total contributions: $63

Top Donors - Sen. Murkowski, Lisa [R-AK]

Showing top 21 donors by contribution amount

7 Orgs14 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 helped.

+Construction & Engineeringconfidence 0.80
Section 3(b)(12) increases funding for landslide early warning systems and related activities, which could benefit construction and engineering firms involved in landslide monitoring, assessment, and mitigation projects.
+Electric Utilitiesconfidence 0.70
Section 4 establishes a Next Generation Water Observing System to support flood and drought forecasting, which could aid electric utilities in managing water resources for hydroelectric power and cooling systems, though the connection is indirect.
+Telecommunicationsconfidence 0.60
Sections 3(b)(5)-(6) and 3(d)(2)(B) involve consultation with institutions of higher education and the private sector for emergency response and debris flow early warning systems, which could create opportunities for telecom firms providing data transmission or monitoring technology.

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 the Interior

Weak

Vector: 63%

Pages: 572-574AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on landslide hazard preparedness and atmospheric river risks, while the Project 2025 Interior section emphasizes energy leasing, expedited permitting, and NEPA streamlining; both involve the Department of the Interior but share limited substantive goals."

Key themes:Department of the Interiorhazard assessmentenvironmental reviewinfrastructure resilience

— 540 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 24. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3354: Supporting and Improving the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Program and Federal Solid Mineral Leasing Program, July 6, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/ files/uploads/so_-_3354_signed.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 25. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3355: Streamlining National Environmental Policy Reviews and Implementation of Executive Order 13807, “Establishing Discipline and Accountability in the Environmental Review and Permitting Process for Infrastructure Projects,” August 31, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/ files/elips/documents/3355_-_streamlining_national_environmental_policy_reviews_and_implementation_ of_executive_order_13807_establishing_discipline_and_accountability_in_the_environmental_review_ and_permitting_process_for.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 26. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3358: Executive Committee for Expedited Permitting,” October 25, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so_3358_executive_committee_for_ expedited_permitting_0.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 27. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3360: Rescinding Authorities Inconsistent with Secretary’s Order 3349, “American Energy Independence,” December 22, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/ documents/3360_-_rescinding_authorities_inconsistent_with_secretarys_order_3349_american_energy_ independence.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 28. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3380: Public Notice of the Costs Associated with Developing Department of the Interior Publications and Similar Documents,” March 10, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/sites/ doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so-3398-508_0.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 29. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3385: Enforcement Priorities,” September 14, 2020, https:// www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/signed-so-3385-enforcement-priorities.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 30. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order 3389: Coordinating and Clarifying National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 Reviews,” September 14, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/signed- so-3385-enforcement-priorities.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 31. Bureau of Land Management, “Updating Oil and Gas Leasing Reform: Land Use Planning and Lease Parcel Reviews,” IM 2018–034, January 31, 2018, https://www.blm.gov/policy/im-2018-034 (accessed March 16, 2023). 32. Lease Now Act, S. 4228, 117th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2022). 33. ONSHORE Act, S. 218, 116th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2019). https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate- bill/218/text (accessed March 18, 2023). 34. Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 130 (July 8, 2022), pp. 40859–40863. 35. The Biden Administration’s 2023–2028 proposed program is fatally flawed. Katie Tubb, “Comment for the 2023–2028 National OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed Program,” BOEM–2022–0031, October 6, 2022, http:// thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2022/Regulatory_Comments/BOEM%202023-2028%20lease%20plan%20 comment%20KTubb.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 36. See Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117–169, §§ 50261–50263. 37. Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, Public Law No. 115–97, § 20001, and U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3401: Comprehensive Analysis and Temporary Halt on All Activities in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Relating to the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program,” June 1, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/ documents/so-3401-comprehensive-analysis-and-temporary-halt-on-all-activitives-in-the-arctic-national- wildlife-refuge-relating-to-the-coastal-plain-oil-and-gas-leasing-program.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 38. In 2016, Interior Secretary Sally Jewell instituted a moratorium on new coal leases while conducting a programmatic environmental impact statement under NEPA to address concerns about competition and inconsistency with the Obama Administration’s climate policy. In 2017, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke lifted the moratorium and ended development of a programmatic environmental impact statement. In April 2021, Interior Secretary Debra Haaland rescinded Zinke’s order and initiated a new review of the coal-leasing program. See U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3338: Discretionary Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement to Modernize the Federal Coal Program,” January 15, 2016, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi. gov/files/elips/documents/archived-3338_-discretionary_programmatic_environmental_impact_statement_ to_modernize_the_federal_coal_program.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023); U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3348”; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3398”; and Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 159 (August 20, 2021), pp. 46873–46877. — 541 — Department of the Interior 39. Katie Tubb, “No More Standoffs: Protecting Federal Employees and Ending the Culture of Anti-Government Attacks and Abuse,” testimony before the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, Committee on Natural Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, pp. 2–4, October 22, 2019, https://congress. gov/116/meeting/house/110104/witnesses/HHRG-116-II10-Wstate-TubbK-20191022.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 40. News release, “Secretary Haaland Announces Steps to Establish Protections for Culturally Significant Chaco Canyon Landscape,” U.S. Department of the Interior, November 15, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/ secretary-haaland-announces-steps-establish-protections-culturally-significant-chaco (accessed March 16, 2023); News release, “Biden–Harris Administration Proposes Protections for Thompson Divide,” U.S. Department of the Interior, October 12, 2022, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-harris-administration- proposes-protections-thompson-divide (accessed March 16, 2023); News release, “Biden Administration Takes Action to Complete Study of Boundary Waters Area Watershed,” U.S. Department of the Interior, October 20, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-administration-takes-action-complete-study-boundary- waters-area-watershed (accessed March 16, 2023); and News release, “Interior Department Takes Action on Mineral Leases Improperly Renewed in the Watershed of the Boundary Waters Wilderness,” U.S. Department of the Interior, January 26, 2022, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-department-takes-action- mineral-leases-improperly-renewed-watershed-boundary (accessed March 16, 2023). 41. Endangered Species Act, Public Law 91–135, § 4(b)(2), and Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 244 (December 18, 2020), pp. 82376–82389. 42. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “Governing the Take of Migratory Birds Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.” https://www.fws.gov/regulations/mbta (accessed March 16, 2023). 43. Dino Grandoni and Anna Phillips, “Biden Restores Climate Safeguards in Key Environmental Law, Reversing Trump,” Washington Post, April 19, 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate- environment/2022/04/19/biden-nepa-climate-trump/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 44. Donald Trump, “Executive Order on Creating Schedule F in the Accepted Service,” Executive Order 13957, October 21, 2020, https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-creating- schedule-f-excepted-service/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 45. Kathleen Masterson, “Nevada Wild Horse Population Skyrockets To New High,” KUNR Public Radio, July 22, 2019, https://www.kunr.org/energy-and-environment/2019-07-22/nevada-wild-horse-population-skyrockets- to-new-high (accessed March 20, 2023). 46. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, “Report to Congress: An Analysis of Achieving a Sustainable Horse and Burro Program,” Fact sheet, May 8, 2020, https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/ Final%20Fact%20Sheet%20WHB%20Report%20To%20Congress.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 47. Pendley, Sagebrush Rebel, pp. 45–47. 48. James D. Linxwiler, The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act At 35: Delivering on the Promise, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 53, Chap. 12 (2007), § 12.03(1)(a)(iv), https://www.guessrudd.com/wp-content/ uploads/sites/1600422/2020/05/The-Alaska-Native-Claims-Settlement-Act-at-35.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 49. Ibid., § 12.03(1)(a)(vii). See generally Richard S. Jones, Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (Public Law 92–203): History And Analysis Together With Subsequent Amendments, Report No. 81–127 GOV, June 1, 1981, http://www.alaskool.org/PROJECTS/ANCSA/reports/rsjones1981/ANCSA_History71.htm (accessed March 16, 2023). 50. 43 U.S. Code, Ch. 33. ANCSA also created 12 Native-owned regional corporations and authorized $962 million in “seed money.” Linxwiler, The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act At 35, § 12.03(2)(e). 51. ANCSA provided that the withdrawal of the lands would expire in 1978 if Congress had not designated the lands as federal enclaves. John K. Norman Cole and Steven W. Silver, Alaska’s D-2 Lands, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 6B, Ch. 5, September 1978, and Raymond A. Peck, Jr., And Then There Were None: Evolving Federal Restraints on the Availability of Public Lands for Mineral Development, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 25, Ch. 3, 1979. 52. Andrus used purported authority under the FLPMA to withdraw 40 million acres, and Carter used purported authority under the Antiquities Act of to withdraw 56 million acres. James D. Linxwiler, The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act: The First Twenty Years, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 38 Ch. 2, 1992 at 2.04(8)(c), https://ancsa.lbblawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/ANCSA-Paper-with-Table-of-Contents-1992.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023).

Department of Homeland Security

Weak

Vector: 59%

Pages: 201-204AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on landslide preparedness and hazard mitigation, which is unrelated to the Department of Homeland Security policy excerpt provided, which centers on immigration, border security, and related legal frameworks. There is no substantive overlap in objectives or themes."

Key themes:federal agency coordinationdisaster resilience

— 168 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise ENDNOTES 1. H.R. 5005, Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law No. 107-296, 107th Congress, November 25, 2002, § 101(b)(1), https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ296/PLAW-107publ296.pdf (accessed March 14, 2023). 2. See, for example, “Elon Musk Slams CISA Censorship Network as ‘Propaganda Platform,’” Kanekoa News, December 28, 2022, https://kanekoa.substack.com/p/elon-musk-slams-cisa-censorship-network (accessed March 14, 2023). 3. H.R. 2680, An Act to Amend the Immigration and Nationality Act, and for Other Purposes, Public Law No. 89-236, 89th Congress, October 3, 1965, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-79/pdf/STATUTE-79- Pg911.pdf (accessed March 14, 2023). 4. Added to the Immigration and Nationality Act by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. See H.R. 3610, Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act, 1997, Public Law No. 104-208, 104th Congress, September 30, 1996, Division C, https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ208/ PLAW-104publ208.pdf (accessed March 14, 2023). 5. 8 U.S. Code, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8 (accessed March 14, 2023). 6. 18 U.S. Code, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18 (accessed March 14, 2023). 7. 5 U.S. Code §§ 551–559, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/part-I/chapter-5/subchapter-II (accessed March 14, 2023). 8. Table, “United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Budget Comparison and Adjustments Appropriation and PPA Summary,” in U.S. Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Budget Overview, Fiscal Year 2023 Congressional Justification, p. CIS-4, https://www.uscis.gov/ sites/default/files/document/reports/U.S._Citizenship_and_Immigration_Services%E2%80%99_Budget_ Overview_Document_for%20Fiscal_Year_2023.pdf#:~:text=The%20FY%202023%20Budget%20includes%20 %24913.6M%2C%204%2C001%20positions%3B,of%20%24444.1M%20above%20the%20FY%202022%20 President%E2%80%99s%20Budget (accessed March 14, 2023), and Table, “United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Comparison of Budget Authority and Request,” in ibid., p. CIS-5. 9. H.R. 7311, William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, Public Law No. 110-457, 110th Congress, December 23, 2008, § 235, https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ457/PLAW- 110publ457.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 10. Matter of A-B-, Respondent, 27 I&N Dec. 316 (A.G. 2018), https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1070866/ download (accessed January 18, 2023). 11. Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012), https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/567/387/ (accessed January 18, 2023). 12. Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act [Public Law 93–288; Approved May 22, 1974] [As Amended Through P.L. 117–328, Enacted December 29, 2022], https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/ COMPS-2977/pdf/COMPS-2977.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 13. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Budget Overview, Fiscal Year 2023 Congressional Justification, p. FEMA-24, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2022-03/Federal%20Emergency%20 Management%20Agency_Remediated.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 14. Report, United States Secret Service: An Agency in Crisis, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives, 114th Congress, December 9, 2015, https://republicans-oversight.house.gov/ wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Oversight-USSS-Report.pdf (accessed January 18, 2023). 15. 5 U.S. Code § 7103, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/7103 (accessed March 15, 2023). 16. S. 3418, Privacy Act of 1974, Public Law No. 93-579, 93rd Congress, December 31, 1974, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-88/pdf/STATUTE-88-Pg1896.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 17. H.R. 1428, Judicial Redress Act of 2015, Public Law No. 114-126, 114th Congress, February 24, 2016, https://www. congress.gov/114/plaws/publ126/PLAW-114publ126.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 18. H.R. 1158, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, Public Law No. 116-93, 116th Congress, December 20, 2019, https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1158 (accessed January 18, 2023).

Department of Homeland Security

Weak

Vector: 59%

Pages: 201-204AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on landslide preparedness and hazard mitigation, which is unrelated to the Department of Homeland Security policy excerpts provided, which center on immigration, border security, and internal agency operations. There is no substantive thematic or policy overlap between landslide risk reduction and the DHS priorities outlined in the Project 2025 text."

Key themes:federal agency coordinationdisaster preparedness

Department of the Interior

Weak

Vector: 59%

Pages: 572-574AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on landslide preparedness and hazard mitigation, whereas the Project 2025 DOI section emphasizes energy independence, regulatory streamlining, and reduced climate-related oversight; they share only a general DOI jurisdiction but have divergent policy goals."

Key themes:Department of the Interiorland managementhazard mitigation

— 539 — Department of the Interior ENDNOTES 1. See generally William Perry Pendley, Sagebrush Rebel: Reagan’s Battle with Environmental Extremists and Why It Matters Today (Regnery, 2013), preface, pp. xvi-xxii. 2. U.S. Const. art. IV, § 3, cl. 2. “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States.” 3. In Wyoming, the federal government owns 48 percent of the land; in Wyoming’s Teton County, the federal government owns 97 percent of the land. 4. Pendley, Sagebrush Rebel. 5. Keith Schneider, “The 1992 Campaign; Bush on the Environment: A Record of Contradictions,” New York Times, July 4, 1992, https://www.nytimes.com/1992/07/04/us/the-1992-campaign-bush-on-the-environment-a- record-of-contradictions.html (accessed March 15, 2023). 6. William Perry Pendley, War on the West: Government Tyranny on America’s Great Frontier (Regnery, 1995). 7. William Perry Pendley, “Bureau of Land Management Yesterday and Today: Energy Independence,” Cowboy State Daily, April 5, 2022, https://cowboystatedaily.com/2022/04/05/bureau-of-land-management- yesterday-and-today-energy-independence/ (accessed March 15, 2023). 9. Ibid. 9. William Perry Pendley, “Perspective: Biden’s War on Western Energy,” The Gazette, November 6, 2022, https:// gazette.com/opinion/perspective-biden-s-war-on-western-energy/article_3823a584-5bb2-11ed-a598- 235c22e34687.html (accessed March 15, 2023). 10. Ibid. 11. Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960, Public Law 86–517. 12. Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 159 (August 20, 2021), pp. 46873–46877. 13. Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 19 (February 1, 2021), pp. 7619–7633, and White House, “Executive Order on Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis,” January 20, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/executive-order- protecting-public-health-and-environment-and-restoring-science-to-tackle-climate-crisis/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 14. National Environmental Policy Act, Public Law 91–160. 15. Antiquities Act of 1906, Public Law 59–209. 16. “You know what there’s not is a shall for? ‘I shall manage the land to stop climate change,’ or something similar to that,” Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt testified. “You guys come up with the shalls.” Chris D’Angelo, “Interior Secretary Blames Congress for His Inaction on Climate Change,” High Country News, May 9, 2019. 17. Federal Land Policy and Land Management Act of 1976, Public Law 94–579; Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, Public Law 95–372; and 30 U.S.C. § 21 et seq. 18. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3398: Revocation of Secretary’s Orders Inconsistent with Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis,” April 16, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so-3398-508_0.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 19. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3348: Concerning the Federal Coal Moratorium,” March 29, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/so_3348_coal_moratorium.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 20. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3349: American Energy Independence,” March 29, 2017, https:// www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/so_3349_-american_energy_independence.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 21. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3350: America First Offshore Energy Strategy,” May 1, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/press-release/secretarial-order-3350-offshore-508.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 22. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3351: Strengthening the Department of the Interior’s Energy Portfolio,” May 1, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/press-release/secretarial-order-3351-energy- counselor-508.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 23. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3352: National Petroleum Reserve—Alaska,” May 31, 2017, https:// www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/so-3352.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). — 540 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 24. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3354: Supporting and Improving the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Program and Federal Solid Mineral Leasing Program, July 6, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/ files/uploads/so_-_3354_signed.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 25. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3355: Streamlining National Environmental Policy Reviews and Implementation of Executive Order 13807, “Establishing Discipline and Accountability in the Environmental Review and Permitting Process for Infrastructure Projects,” August 31, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/ files/elips/documents/3355_-_streamlining_national_environmental_policy_reviews_and_implementation_ of_executive_order_13807_establishing_discipline_and_accountability_in_the_environmental_review_ and_permitting_process_for.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 26. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3358: Executive Committee for Expedited Permitting,” October 25, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so_3358_executive_committee_for_ expedited_permitting_0.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 27. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3360: Rescinding Authorities Inconsistent with Secretary’s Order 3349, “American Energy Independence,” December 22, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/ documents/3360_-_rescinding_authorities_inconsistent_with_secretarys_order_3349_american_energy_ independence.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 28. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3380: Public Notice of the Costs Associated with Developing Department of the Interior Publications and Similar Documents,” March 10, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/sites/ doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so-3398-508_0.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 29. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3385: Enforcement Priorities,” September 14, 2020, https:// www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/signed-so-3385-enforcement-priorities.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 30. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order 3389: Coordinating and Clarifying National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 Reviews,” September 14, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/signed- so-3385-enforcement-priorities.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 31. Bureau of Land Management, “Updating Oil and Gas Leasing Reform: Land Use Planning and Lease Parcel Reviews,” IM 2018–034, January 31, 2018, https://www.blm.gov/policy/im-2018-034 (accessed March 16, 2023). 32. Lease Now Act, S. 4228, 117th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2022). 33. ONSHORE Act, S. 218, 116th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2019). https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate- bill/218/text (accessed March 18, 2023). 34. Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 130 (July 8, 2022), pp. 40859–40863. 35. The Biden Administration’s 2023–2028 proposed program is fatally flawed. Katie Tubb, “Comment for the 2023–2028 National OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed Program,” BOEM–2022–0031, October 6, 2022, http:// thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2022/Regulatory_Comments/BOEM%202023-2028%20lease%20plan%20 comment%20KTubb.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 36. See Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117–169, §§ 50261–50263. 37. Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, Public Law No. 115–97, § 20001, and U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3401: Comprehensive Analysis and Temporary Halt on All Activities in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Relating to the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program,” June 1, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/ documents/so-3401-comprehensive-analysis-and-temporary-halt-on-all-activitives-in-the-arctic-national- wildlife-refuge-relating-to-the-coastal-plain-oil-and-gas-leasing-program.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 38. In 2016, Interior Secretary Sally Jewell instituted a moratorium on new coal leases while conducting a programmatic environmental impact statement under NEPA to address concerns about competition and inconsistency with the Obama Administration’s climate policy. In 2017, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke lifted the moratorium and ended development of a programmatic environmental impact statement. In April 2021, Interior Secretary Debra Haaland rescinded Zinke’s order and initiated a new review of the coal-leasing program. See U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3338: Discretionary Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement to Modernize the Federal Coal Program,” January 15, 2016, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi. gov/files/elips/documents/archived-3338_-discretionary_programmatic_environmental_impact_statement_ to_modernize_the_federal_coal_program.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023); U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3348”; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3398”; and Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 159 (August 20, 2021), pp. 46873–46877.

Department of Agriculture

Minimal

Vector: 60%

Pages: 347-349AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on landslide preparedness and hazard mitigation, while the Project 2025 policy excerpt addresses USDA conservation programs, school meals, and food production—there is no thematic or policy overlap between the two."

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

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 Sen. Murkowski, Lisa

Southcentral Foundation Land Transfer Act of 2025

119/s/2098

A bill to designate a mountain in the State of Alaska as Denali.

119/s/573

A bill to extend the authority for modifications to the Second Division Memorial in the District of Columbia.

119/s/1353

National Landslide Preparedness Act Reauthorization Act of 2025