Space Exploration Research Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/s/2351
Last Updated: September 7, 2026

Sponsored by

Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

ID: C001098

Follow the money

The bill

Space Exploration Research Act

S. 2351, 119th Congress — read as touching Aerospace (Commercial).

The sponsor

Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

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

The money

$1,525,021 raised

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

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Executive Office of the President of the United States" section, p. 90-92 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 369.

April 12, 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

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, brought to you by the esteemed members of Congress. The Space Exploration Research Act, or S 2351, is a bill that promises to "supplement existing lease authorities" for NASA, because, you know, the previous lease agreements were just so... restrictive. (Sarcasm alert.)

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to grant NASA more flexibility in leasing its properties to various entities, including private companies, universities, and state governments. The stated objectives are to promote research, education, and training in the space industry, as well as to facilitate the transfer of technology between the public and private sectors. How quaint.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill allows NASA to lease its properties for up to 50 years (down from 99 years, because, you know, that was just too long) to entities that meet certain criteria, such as being a state government, a university, or a private company with a 501(c)(3) exemption. The Administrator of NASA can also delegate these authorities to subordinate officers and employees, because who needs accountability, anyway? The bill also overrides existing laws, including sections of the United States Code, because Congress knows better.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include NASA, private companies, universities, state governments, and anyone else who wants to get their hands on some sweet, sweet government property. The stakeholders are, of course, the taxpayers, who will be footing the bill for this grand adventure in space exploration. Oh, and let's not forget the lobbyists and special interest groups who will be lining up to influence the leasing process.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this bill is to further blur the lines between public and private interests, allowing corporations to profit from government property while minimizing their own risks. It's a classic case of privatization, where the benefits go to the few, and the costs are borne by the many. The implications are far-reaching, including the potential for crony capitalism, corruption, and the further erosion of public trust in government institutions.

In conclusion, the Space Exploration Research Act is a bill that promises much but delivers little. It's a Trojan horse for corporate interests, dressed up in the guise of promoting space exploration and research. The real disease here is the corrupting influence of money and power, which has infected every level of government. And we're just along for the ride, folks, as the politicians and their corporate masters continue to fleece us with impunity. Joy.

Related Topics

Space Exploration & NASA
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$1,525,021
23 donors
PACs
$1,497,892
Organizations
$27,129
Committees
$0
Individuals
$0
1
WINRED
2 transactions
$1,497,892
1
FASKEN MANAGEMENT
1 transaction
$10,000
2
REPUBLICAN PARTY OF HARRISON COUNTY
1 transaction
$4,000
3
FOLAD ENTERPRISES LLC
1 transaction
$2,000
4
JOHNSEY
7 transactions
$1,854
5
BALCH & BINGHAM LLP
1 transaction
$1,000
6
PARTNERS HOTEL GROUP LLC
1 transaction
$1,000
7
KHAT INVESTMENS LLC
1 transaction
$1,000
8
PJB INVESTMENT ADVISORS LLC
1 transaction
$800
9
GRANT MORELAND LP LLC
1 transaction
$750
10
BL PARTNERS GROUP LLC
1 transaction
$750
11
MILLE'S LLC
1 transaction
$500
12
HARRY M BETTIS JR LLC
1 transaction
$500
13
ROBDON L.P.
1 transaction
$500
14
JAMES E. JOHNSON LLC
1 transaction
$500
15
FALSE RIVER VIEW LLC
1 transaction
$500
16
MURDOCK PROPERTIES LLC
1 transaction
$325
17
RESEDA HOLDINGS LLC
1 transaction
$250
18
DIXON RENTAL PROPERTIES LLC
1 transaction
$250
19
ROGERS LIVESTOCK LLC
1 transaction
$250
20
MISRASI CONCRETE LLC
1 transaction
$200
21
JOUETT LLC
1 transaction
$100
22
FORCE CONSTRUCTION OF LA LLC
1 transaction
$100

No committee contributions found

No individual contributions found

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

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

Sen. Padilla, Alex [D-CA]

ID: P000145

Top Contributors

29

1
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$5,000
Dec 24, 2024
2
MOORETOWN RANCHERIA
OrganizationOROVILLE, CA
$3,300
Oct 7, 2024
3
TOLOWA DEE-NI' NATION
OrganizationSMITH RIVER, CA
$3,300
May 7, 2024
4
TULE RIVER TRIBAL COUNCIL
OrganizationPORTERVILLE, CA
$3,300
Aug 12, 2024
5
THE CHICKASAW NATION
OrganizationADA, OK
$2,500
Nov 22, 2023
6
ONEIDA NATION
OrganizationONEIDA, WI
$1,000
Oct 3, 2023
7
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,000
Jun 5, 2023
8
ONEIDA INDIAN NATION
OrganizationONEIDA, WI
$1,000
Jun 21, 2024
9
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,000
May 16, 2024
10
KIMBER, SHELDON
INTERSECT POWER • CEO
IndividualTRUCKEE, CA
$5,000
Apr 27, 2023

Sen. Britt, Katie Boyd [R-AL]

ID: B001319

Top Contributors

26

1
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
OrganizationATMORE, AL
$3,300
Sep 14, 2023
2
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
OrganizationATMORE, AL
$3,300
Oct 11, 2024
3
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$2,500
Oct 29, 2024
4
HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP
OrganizationRICHMOND, VA
$1,000
Jul 25, 2024
5
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,000
May 1, 2024
6
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,000
Nov 9, 2023
7
STRONG, MIRANDA
CALISTA • DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS
IndividualANCHORAGE, AK
$5,000
Sep 20, 2023
8
STEPHENS, TYLER
FIERCE GOVERNMENT RELATIONS • LOBBYIST
IndividualWASHINGTON, DC
$3,300
Jul 1, 2023
9
SINGER, PAUL
ELLIOTT INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT • CO-CEO, CO-CIO, PRESIDENT
IndividualPALM BEACH, FL
$3,300
Jul 6, 2023
10
SINGER, PAUL
ELLIOTT INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT • CO-CEO, CO-CIO, PRESIDENT
IndividualPALM BEACH, FL
$3,300
Jul 9, 2023

Sen. Luján, Ben Ray [D-NM]

ID: L000570

Top Contributors

45

1
LYTTON BAND OF POMO INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA ROSA, CA
$3,300
Dec 5, 2023
2
OTOE-MISSOURIA TRIBE
OrganizationRED ROCK, OK
$3,300
Dec 7, 2023
3
LYTTON BAND OF POMO INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA ROSA, CA
$3,300
Dec 5, 2023
4
TAOS PUEBLO GOVERNOR'S OFFICE
OrganizationTAOS, NM
$3,300
Dec 2, 2024
5
OHKAY OWINGEH TRIBE
OrganizationOHKAY OWINGEH, NM
$3,300
Dec 2, 2024
6
BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA
$3,300
Apr 18, 2023
7
BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA
$3,300
May 22, 2024
8
MESCALERO APACHE TRIBE
OrganizationMESCALERO, NM
$3,300
Sep 25, 2023
9
SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC
$2,500
Jun 25, 2024
10
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$2,000
Mar 21, 2024

Sen. Schiff, Adam B. [D-CA]

ID: S001150

Top Contributors

64

1
KOI NATION OF NORTHERN CA
OrganizationSANTA ROSA, CA
$3,300
Feb 29, 2024
2
PECHANGA BAND OF INDIANS
OrganizationTEMECULA, CA
$3,300
Feb 26, 2024
3
KOI NATION OF NORTHERN CA
OrganizationSANTA ROSA, CA
$3,300
Feb 29, 2024
4
THE CHICKASAW NATION
OrganizationADA, OK
$3,300
Mar 1, 2024
5
THE CHICKASAW NATION
OrganizationADA, OK
$3,300
Mar 1, 2024
6
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$3,300
Sep 6, 2023
7
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS GENERAL FUND
OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA
$3,300
Aug 9, 2023
8
THE CHICKASAW NATION
OrganizationADA, OK
$3,300
Sep 27, 2023
9
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS GENERAL FUND
OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA
$3,300
Aug 9, 2023
10
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$3,300
Jul 21, 2023

Sen. Wicker, Roger F. [R-MS]

ID: W000437

Top Contributors

25

1
EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS
OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC
$25,000
Sep 13, 2024
2
MISSISSIPPI BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS
OrganizationCHOCTAW, MS
$15,000
Nov 5, 2024
3
WT CONSULTANTS LLC
OrganizationJACKSON, MS
$2,500
Jan 12, 2023
4
WAYPOINT CONSULTING, LLC
OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC
$1,000
Mar 26, 2024
5
HEDERMAN BROTHERS, LLC
OrganizationMADISON, MS
$1,000
Oct 9, 2024
6
CHOUEST, GARY
EDISON CHOUEST OFFSHORE, LLC • CEO
IndividualGALLIANO, LA
$100,000
Dec 1, 2023
7
HALE, ROBERT T. JR.
GRANITE TELECOM • CEO
IndividualBOSTON, MA
$100,000
Jun 28, 2023
8
BLUE, J. NEAL
GENERAL ATOMICS • CEO
IndividualLA JOLLA, CA
$50,000
Dec 21, 2023
9
HALE, ROBERT T. JR.
GRANITE TELECOM • CEO
IndividualBOSTON, MA
$50,000
Apr 12, 2024
10
DUFF, THOMAS M.
SOUTHERN TIRE MART • PRESIDENT
IndividualHATTIESBURG, MS
$50,000
Sep 30, 2024

Donor Network - Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 31 nodes and 37 connections

Total contributions: $37

Top Donors - Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

Showing top 23 donors by contribution amount

1 PAC22 Orgs

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 5 helped.

  • Section 2(a)(1)(B) allows leasing NASA real property to entities for the purpose of educating and training individuals for careers in the space industry, which directly benefits aerospace commercial companies by expanding their workforce pipeline and enabling technology transfer per subsection (C).

  • +Defense Contractorsconfidence 0.85

    Section 2(a)(1)(C) facilitates transfer of aeronautical and space technology between the U.S. public and domestic private sectors, which includes defense contractors that often dual-use NASA-developed technologies for military applications.

  • Section 2(a)(1) authorizes leasing for the construction and operation of facilities on NASA real property, directly benefiting construction and engineering firms that would build these facilities.

  • +Big Tech Platformsconfidence 0.75

    Section 2(a)(1)(D) permits leasing for space-related scientific, engineering, medical, or academic activities, which could benefit big tech firms involved in AI, cloud computing, and data analytics for space missions (e.g., AWS, Azure, Google Cloud).

  • Section 2(a)(1)(D) allows leasing for scientific and engineering activities, which increasingly rely on AI and cloud infrastructure for processing space mission data, creating opportunities for AI & cloud providers.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

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

Industries this bill HELPS

  • from 452 contributions
    • BEN-AVI, DORON$3,300
    • HENSLEY, STEVEN$3,300
    • FUHR, PEGGY L. MS.$2,500
    • BARTENS, ANTHONY$1,000
    • COPELAND, TODD$1,000
  • from 93 contributions
    • KIEWIT, SCOTT$8,100
    • RUDD, WILLIAM$3,300
    • KURT, STRATMANN$2,000
    • DEATHERAGE, ROBERT$1,445
    • GOUNDRY, PHILIP$1,000
  • from 83 contributions
    • BIEGUN, STEPHEN$3,300
    • OJAKLI, ZIAD$3,300
    • MCLEMORE, THOMAS$3,000
    • SUTTON, HOWARD$2,000
    • SIMMONS, ROBERT$2,000
  • from 10 contributions
    • MAURER, GREG$3,300
    • ROSSI, NICHOLAS$1,000
    • DIKOVSKY, MICHAEL$210
    • BURKHARD, DANIEL$101
  • from 3 contributions
    • RAJAN, VIJAYAN$3,300
    • KISH, DIRK$750
    • WENNEN, GLENN$250

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.

Executive Office of the President of the United States

Strong
Vector: 63%
Pages: 90-92AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill’s provisions for NASA leasing to states, educational institutions, and private partners support the Project 2025 goal of a whole‑of‑government, commercially‑focused space policy that promotes long‑term stability and innovation in space exploration."

Key themes:space policycommercial space sectorresearch and developmentinteragency collaborationlong-term national interests

— 57 — Executive Office of the President of the United States House, creating the risk that the CEA’s role in the policymaking process will be diminished. A future Administration should consider hiring that reflects the White House calendar (mid-January) and involves the Office of Presidential Personnel. NATIONAL SPACE COUNCIL (NSPC) The National Space Council is responsible for providing advice and recommen- dations to the President on the formulation and implementation of space policy and strategy. It is charged with conducting a whole-of-government approach to the nation’s space interests: civil, military, intelligence, commercial, or diplomatic. Historically, it has been chaired by the Vice President at the President’s direction, and its members consist of members of the Cabinet and other senior executive branch officials as specified by the President in Executive Order 13803.32 The NSpC’s purpose is to ensure that the President’s priorities relative to space are carried out and, as necessary, to resolve policy conflicts among departments and agencies that are related to space. Space projects and programs are risky, complex, expensive, and time consum- ing—although commercial space innovations are lowering costs and accelerating schedules. Nevertheless, while fiscal discipline should not be ignored, long-term policy stability is crucial to investors, innovators, industry, and agencies. Policy stability is easier when policies and programs are aligned with long-term national interests as opposed to those of particular advocacy groups or political factions. The Trump Administration’s major space policies—including the U.S. Space Force, the Artemis program to land the next Americans on the moon, and support for a strong commercial space sector—have endured under the Biden Administration. Major challenges remain in implementation and regulatory reform to keep up with rapidly evolving space markets and competitors. These include the long-term sustainability of space activities in light of increasing orbital debris; creation of space situational awareness services for civil and commercial uses; management of mega-constellations; licensing of new commercial remote sensing capabilities; keeping up with licensing demands due to high launch rates; transitioning Inter- national Space Station operations to multiple, privately owned space platforms; and (most important) accelerating the acquisition and fielding of national security space capabilities in response to an increasingly aggressive China. The Vice President should have a clear understanding with the National Secu- rity Advisor and the White House Counsel that they and their respective staffs will work within the White House to determine the scope and leadership of policy reviews that can overlap multiple areas of responsibility. A similar understanding is necessary with the heads of other policy councils such as the NEC, DPC, and National Science and Technology Council (NSTC). As a result of the President’s direction and the Vice President’s leadership, the NSpC under the Trump Administration was able to coordinate a wide range of

Executive Office of the President of the United States

Strong
Vector: 63%
Pages: 90-92AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill enhances NASA's ability to lease property for research, education, and collaboration, which supports the Project 2025 goals of strengthening the National Space Council's coordination, promoting commercial space innovation, and ensuring long-term policy stability for space activities."

Key themes:space researchcollaborationcommercial space sectorpolicy stabilityNASA leasing

— 57 — Executive Office of the President of the United States House, creating the risk that the CEA’s role in the policymaking process will be diminished. A future Administration should consider hiring that reflects the White House calendar (mid-January) and involves the Office of Presidential Personnel. NATIONAL SPACE COUNCIL (NSPC) The National Space Council is responsible for providing advice and recommen- dations to the President on the formulation and implementation of space policy and strategy. It is charged with conducting a whole-of-government approach to the nation’s space interests: civil, military, intelligence, commercial, or diplomatic. Historically, it has been chaired by the Vice President at the President’s direction, and its members consist of members of the Cabinet and other senior executive branch officials as specified by the President in Executive Order 13803.32 The NSpC’s purpose is to ensure that the President’s priorities relative to space are carried out and, as necessary, to resolve policy conflicts among departments and agencies that are related to space. Space projects and programs are risky, complex, expensive, and time consum- ing—although commercial space innovations are lowering costs and accelerating schedules. Nevertheless, while fiscal discipline should not be ignored, long-term policy stability is crucial to investors, innovators, industry, and agencies. Policy stability is easier when policies and programs are aligned with long-term national interests as opposed to those of particular advocacy groups or political factions. The Trump Administration’s major space policies—including the U.S. Space Force, the Artemis program to land the next Americans on the moon, and support for a strong commercial space sector—have endured under the Biden Administration. Major challenges remain in implementation and regulatory reform to keep up with rapidly evolving space markets and competitors. These include the long-term sustainability of space activities in light of increasing orbital debris; creation of space situational awareness services for civil and commercial uses; management of mega-constellations; licensing of new commercial remote sensing capabilities; keeping up with licensing demands due to high launch rates; transitioning Inter- national Space Station operations to multiple, privately owned space platforms; and (most important) accelerating the acquisition and fielding of national security space capabilities in response to an increasingly aggressive China. The Vice President should have a clear understanding with the National Secu- rity Advisor and the White House Counsel that they and their respective staffs will work within the White House to determine the scope and leadership of policy reviews that can overlap multiple areas of responsibility. A similar understanding is necessary with the heads of other policy councils such as the NEC, DPC, and National Science and Technology Council (NSTC). As a result of the President’s direction and the Vice President’s leadership, the NSpC under the Trump Administration was able to coordinate a wide range of — 58 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise space policy reviews, legislative proposals, and regulatory reforms smoothly. The NSpC generally led on space issues within the EOP, but other White House offices also took on space topics. l As a member of the NSpC, and in coordination with other members, the Office of Science and Technology Policy developed a national space weather strategy, research and development (R&D) plans to mitigate the effects of orbital debris, and protocols for planetary protection to avoid biological contamination of celestial bodies. l The Council of Economic Advisers did research on the economic benefits of space property rights. l OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Reform updated and streamlined commercial launch licensing and commercial remote sensing satellite rules. During the Trump Administration, if a topic was purely military, such as stand- ing up the U.S. Space Command, the NSC took the lead. If a topic cut across military, civil, and commercial sectors, as was the case with cybersecurity in space, the NSpC and NSC would cochair the policy review groups. Trusted, collegial relationships across the White House complex are critical to successful space policy development, implementation, and oversight. Nowhere is this more important than in the relationship between the NSpC staff and OMB staff who oversee civil and national security–related space spending. Teamwork between the NSpC and OMB staff can communicate clear presidential priorities to departments and agencies, facilitating smooth development of the President’s budget request. The NSpC and OMB have many opportunities to collaborate in promoting presidential priorities while finding offsets in lower-priority programs and funding lines. OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY (OSTP) The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) was created by the National Science and Technology Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976.33 Before its creation, Presidents received their advice and counsel on such matters through advisers and boards that had no statutory authority. The Director of OSTP is one of the few Senate-confirmed positions within the Executive Office of the President. Consistent with other laws, the President may delegate to the Director of OSTP directive authority over other elements of the executive branch. Other EOP policy officials and organizations such as the NSC and NEC are formally only advisory with relevant agency directives issued by the President.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Moderate
Vector: 63%
Pages: 425-427AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill supports space research and technology transfer, aligning with Project 2025's emphasis on advancing space-related R&D and transferring innovations to American private interests, though it focuses on NASA rather than DOE entities."

Key themes:space technology developmenttechnology transfer to private sectorresearch collaborationnational security through innovation

— 393 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions l Ensure that R&D funds are used for projects that protect and advance that edge. l Ensure that successful advances, with a focus on new natural resource development technologies, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and space, are transferred swiftly to American interests in the private sector. New Policies l Focus on benefits to Americans. OTT’s operations should be based on the recognition that the new technologies generated by American taxpayers’ investment in DOE are a significant national security asset rather than some neutral scientific gift to humanity. l Increase oversight and coordination. OTT needs to be vigilant in overseeing and coordinating OTT offices associated with each National Lab. For security and economic espionage reasons, the work funded by the American people needs to be protected, and when commercialized, it needs to go to American businesses. OFFICE OF SCIENCE (SC) Mission/Overview The Office of Science (SC) supports and oversees research facilities and pro- grams that cover basic science through its application to the demonstration and deployment of energy technologies. SC oversees 10 of the 17 DOE National Labs and 28 major federal research user facilities. Its mission is to preserve U.S. leader- ship in science, fund and perform basic research, and provide the scientific facilities that the private sector is unable or unwilling to provide. New initiatives include quantum information sciences and artificial intelligence. SC is led by a Senate-con- firmed Director at the Assistant Secretary level and has eight program offices.82 Needed Reforms The next conservative President should commit the United States to scientific dominance to support national and economic security, especially in light of similar efforts by China. To aid in this effort, the Office of Science should: l Return to its primary mission: nonpartisan and basic science. SC’s mission should be international leadership in basic and early applied science and provision of world-leading facilities for this work. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Inflation Reduction Act mark the major — 394 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise reorientation of DOE primarily from defense applications in the NNSA and basic and early applied science across SC and the applied offices to a massive federal research, development, demonstration, and commercialization body.83 Distraction from SC’s basic science mission should be prevented. l Increase the level of accountability. The National Laboratories need to be more directly accountable to the Secretary of Energy and Congress for their work and management. New Policies l Commit to U.S. science dominance. The United States is losing its dominance in scientific discoveries and technological development. China and other adversaries have been stealing American science and technology for years and are now on the verge of dominating science—a development that is fraught with negative strategic and economic implications for the United States. The next Administration must commit itself to ensuring that the U.S. continues to dominate scientific discovery and technological advancement. l Refocus on mission and eliminate duplication and waste. The Administration should work with Congress to rationalize the National Lab network to meet specific national objectives (such as the NNSA laboratories’ role in national defense) and conduct basic research that the private sector would not otherwise conduct. Activities that duplicate those of other government agencies or the private sector should be eliminated. l Properly manage the National Labs’ contributions to the private sector. SC should improve private-sector access to the National Labs, through programs like the GAIN voucher program and consistent with national security considerations, while ensuring that the economic benefits of taxpayer-funded technologies flow back to taxpayers through patent- review sharing or a revolving fund. Budget The Office of Science was appropriated slightly more than $7 billion in FY 2021, and DOE requested slightly less than $7.8 billion for FY 2023.84 OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (EM) Mission/Overview The Office of Environmental Management’s mission is to “complete the safe cleanup of [the] environmental legacy resulting from decades of nuclear

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.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills