USS Frank E. Evans Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/s/3131
Last Updated: September 7, 2026

Sponsored by

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

ID: S001150

Follow the money

The bill

USS Frank E. Evans Act

S. 3131, 119th Congress — read as touching Defense Contractors.

The sponsor

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

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

The money

$99,000 raised

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

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Transportation" section, p. 673-675 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks. Hearings held.

July 20, 2026

Introduced

Committee Review

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.

🗳️

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 congressional masterpiece, carefully crafted to make you feel good while accomplishing absolutely nothing of substance. Let's dissect this legislative abomination.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The USS Frank E. Evans Act is a heartwarming exercise in bureaucratic navel-gazing. Its primary objective is to add the names of 74 crew members killed on June 3, 1969, to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall. Because, you know, it's not like they've been dead for over five decades already.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill requires the Secretary of Defense to authorize the inclusion of these names within a year of enactment. Oh, and there's some obligatory consultation with other authorities to ensure that the nomenclature and placement of names are done correctly. Wow, I bet those meetings will be thrilling.

The only notable change to existing law is the exemption from the Commemorative Works Act (Chapter 89 of title 40, United States Code). Because, clearly, this bill is too important to be bound by the same rules as other commemorative works.

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

* The families of the USS Frank E. Evans crew members, who will finally get to see their loved ones' names on a wall. * The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, which will no doubt receive a nice influx of donations and attention from this feel-good legislation. * The Secretary of Defense, who gets to pretend like they're doing something meaningful with their time.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The impact of this bill is negligible. It's a symbolic gesture that won't change the lives of anyone involved. But hey, it's a great way for politicians to grandstand and pretend like they care about veterans.

In reality, this bill is just another example of legislative theater, designed to distract from more pressing issues. It's a Band-Aid on a bullet wound, a token gesture that ignores the real problems facing our country.

Diagnosis: This bill suffers from a severe case of " Politician-itis," a disease characterized by an excessive need for self-aggrandizement and a complete lack of substance. Symptoms include empty gestures, meaningless legislation, and a healthy dose of hypocrisy.

Treatment: A strong dose of reality, followed by a healthy dose of skepticism and a pinch of contempt for the politicians involved.

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

💰 Campaign Finance Network

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

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$99,000
12 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$99,000
Committees
$0
Individuals
$0

No PAC contributions found

1
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
5 transactions
$16,500
2
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS GENERAL FUND
4 transactions
$13,200
3
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
4 transactions
$13,200
4
PECHANGA BAND OF INDIANS
3 transactions
$9,900
5
THE CHICKASAW NATION
3 transactions
$9,900
6
KOI NATION OF NORTHERN CA
2 transactions
$6,600
7
HABEMATOLEL POMO OF UPPER LAKE
2 transactions
$6,600
8
SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND MIWOK INDIANS
2 transactions
$6,600
9
YOCHA DEHE WINTUN NATION
2 transactions
$6,600
10
SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
1 transaction
$3,300
11
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
1 transaction
$3,300
12
VISTA VELLANO, LLC
1 transaction
$3,300

No committee contributions found

No individual contributions found

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 4 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Sen. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND]

ID: C001096

Top Contributors

26

1
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
OrganizationATMORE, AL
$3,300
Sep 29, 2023
2
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
OrganizationATMORE, AL
$3,300
Jun 14, 2024
3
SISSETON-WAHPETON OYATE
OrganizationAGENCY VILLAGE, SD
$2,500
Jun 21, 2024
4
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,000
Jun 18, 2024
5
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$600
Jun 6, 2023
6
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$400
Jun 6, 2023
7
WALSH, RICHARD
IndividualLAKE WORTH BEACH, FL
$6,700
Oct 16, 2024
8
JORDAN, BORIS
CURALEAF • EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD
IndividualBOCA RATON, FL
$6,600
Sep 15, 2023
9
SMITH, BRAD
MICROSOFT CORPORATION • ATTORNEY
IndividualBELLEVUE, WA
$6,600
Sep 29, 2023
10
KAPLAN, DAVID
ARES MANAGEMENT • CO-FOUNDER
IndividualLOS ANGELES, CA
$6,600
Oct 11, 2023

Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY]

ID: S000148

Top Contributors

24

1
AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY
OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ
$3,300
Dec 29, 2023
2
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,000
Mar 21, 2024
3
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,000
Jun 2, 2023
4
CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA
OrganizationDURANT, OK
$550
Sep 27, 2023
5
MARES, JAN
IndividualWASHINGTON, DC
$3,500
Dec 6, 2024
6
MEZZALINGUA, JOHN
JMA • CEO
IndividualSKANEATELES, NY
$3,300
Dec 21, 2023
7
RIKLIS, MARCIA
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualEAST HAMPTON, NY
$3,300
Dec 15, 2023
8
EISENSTADT, STEVEN
CUMBERLAND PACKING CORP. • EXECUTIVE
IndividualBROOKLYN, NY
$3,300
Dec 21, 2023
9
MEZZALINGUA, JOHN
JMA • CEO
IndividualSKANEATELES, NY
$3,300
Dec 21, 2023
10
EISENSTADT, STEVEN
CUMBERLAND PACKING CORP. • EXECUTIVE
IndividualBROOKLYN, NY
$3,300
Dec 21, 2023

Sen. Wyden, Ron [D-OR]

ID: W000779

Top Contributors

30

1
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$2,000
Dec 12, 2024
2
MOHEGAN TRIBE OF INDIANS OF CONNECTICUT
OrganizationUNCASVILLE, CT
$1,000
Dec 28, 2023
3
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$1,000
Dec 30, 2023
4
SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSIONS INDIANS
OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA
$1,000
Mar 26, 2024
5
SHAKOPEE MDWEKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,000
Jun 12, 2024
6
SHAKOPEE MDWEKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,000
May 31, 2023
7
MS BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS
OrganizationCHOCTAW, MS
$1,000
Dec 31, 2023
8
CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA
OrganizationDURANT, OK
$550
Oct 3, 2023
9
RENO-SPARKS INDIAN COLONY
OrganizationRENO, NV
$500
Jul 18, 2023
10
RENO-SPARKS INDIAN COLONY
OrganizationRENO, NV
$500
Sep 10, 2024

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

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

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 39 nodes and 84 connections

Total contributions: $84

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

Showing top 12 donors by contribution amount

12 Orgs

Industry Impact

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

  • +Defense Contractorsconfidence 0.80

    Section 2(a) authorizes the inclusion of names on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall, which may involve contracts with defense contractors for maintenance or updates to the memorial, potentially benefiting the industry.

  • Section 2(b) mentions adjustments to the nomenclature and placement of names, which could require construction or engineering work on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall, potentially benefiting the industry.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Sen. Schiff, Adam B. [D-CA])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 63 contributions
    • WARREN, FLOYD$1,000
    • LETTRE, MARCEL$1,000
    • SMITH, PATRICIA$962
    • RODGERS, JOHN$500
    • BECKER, JORDAN$500
  • from 36 contributions
    • PETERSON, SARA$337
    • CRISPI, JON$250
    • THOMPSON, JANICE$187
    • COLTER, TOM$132

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 Transportation

Strong
Vector: 56%
Pages: 673-675AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill directly supports the Department of Veterans Affairs' memorial affairs mission by ensuring fallen sailors from the USS Frank E. Evans are honored on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall, aligning with Project 2025's goal of a veteran‑centric VA that properly recognizes and commemorates service members."

Key themes:veteran memorializationhonoring fallen service membersVA memorial affairsVietnam War recognitioncommemorative works

— 641 — 20 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS Brooks D. Tucker MISSION STATEMENT The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is the primary provider of health care, benefits, and memorial affairs for America’s veterans and their families. The VA has the noble responsibility to render exceptional and timely support and services with respect, compassion, and competence. The veteran is at the forefront of every VA process and interaction. The VA must continually strive to be recognized as a “best in class,” “Veteran-centric”1 system with an organizational ethos inspired by and accountable to the needs and problems of veterans, not subservient to the parochial preferences of a bureaucracy. OVERVIEW At the end of the Obama Administration, the VA was held in low esteem both by the veterans it served and by the employees who served these former warriors. Eroding morale caused by the downstream effects of a health care access crisis in 2014 led to the resignation of Secretary Eric Shinseki and extensive oversight investigations by Congress from 2015–2016. By 2020, however, the VA had become one of the most respected U.S. agencies. This significant progress was due in part to the leadership of Secretary Robert Wilkie (2018–2021) and his team of political appointees and career senior executives, many of them veterans, who led the effort to ensure that the VA became “Veteran-centric” in its governance decisions and fostered a more positive work environment. This mindset translated into a department that was better attuned to employees’ and veterans’ needs and experiences in the daily operations of health care, benefits, — 642 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise and memorial affairs. During that period, the VA received the largest number of watershed congressional authorizations to reform its health care and benefits that it had received since the post–Vietnam War years along with historic increases in annual appropriations, which have tripled since the last full year of the George W. Bush Administration. The current VA leadership team of Biden appointees has adopted some of their predecessors’ governance processes. However, they have not sustained the previous Administration’s commitment to a genuine “Veteran-centric” philosophy, most nota- bly with respect to the delivery of health care, and harbor a bias toward expanding the unionized federal employee workforce that has not always been aligned with a focus on “Veteran-centric” care. There also is growing concern in Congress and the veteran community that the VA is poorly managing and in some cases disregarding provisions of the VA MISSION [Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Out- side Networks] Act of 20182 that codify broad access for veterans to non-VA health care providers. Efforts to expand disability benefits to large populations without adequate planning have caused an erosion of veterans’ trust in the VA enterprise. Additionally, the current VA leadership is focusing very publicly on “social equity and inclusion” within departmental policy discussions toward ends that will affect only a small minority of the veterans who use the VA. For the first time, the VA is allowing access to abortion services, a medical procedure unrelated to military service that the VA lacks the legal authority and clinical proficiency to perform. In addition to continuing the grotesque culture of violence against the child in the womb, these sociopolitical initiatives and ideological indoctrinations distract from the department’s core missions. DEPARTMENTAL HISTORY Following the Civil War, state veterans homes were established to provide med- ical and hospital treatment for all injuries and diseases. When the United States entered World War I in 1917, “Congress established a new system of Veterans benefits, including programs for disability compensation, insurance for service personnel and Veterans, and vocational rehabilitation for the disabled”3 that was overseen by three different federal programs: the Veterans Bureau, the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Pensions, and the National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers. In 1921, Congress combined those programs into the Veterans Bureau. Following World War II, a national VA hospital system, much of which remains operational today, was established to care for millions of returning veterans. Following the Vietnam War, the VA’s federally owned and operated hospital network expanded again to meet the needs of the volunteer and draftee population. In the past two decades, the VA has purposely transitioned to leasing medical prop- erties rather than building expensive new facilities that can take years to complete and often experience budget overruns. As the nature of health care has evolved

Department of Veterans Affairs

Moderate
Vector: 55%
Pages: 688-691AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill seeks to honor fallen sailors by adding their names to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, which aligns with the Department of Veterans Affairs' broader mission of recognizing and commemorating veterans' service and sacrifice."

Key themes:veteran recognitionmemorializationhonoring fallen service membersVA commemoration efforts

— 655 — Department of Veterans Affairs ENDNOTES 1. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Division, VHA Directive 1003, “VHA Veteran Patient Experience,” April 14, 2020, pp. 1 and B-1. 2. S. 2372, VA Mission Act of 2018, Public Law No. 115-182, 115th Congress, June 6, 2018, https://www.congress. gov/115/plaws/publ182/PLAW-115publ182.pdf (accessed January 30, 2023). 3. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, VA History Office, “VA History,” last updated May 27, 2021, https://www. va.gov/HISTORY/VA_History/Overview.asp (accessed January 28, 2023). 4. 38 U.S. Code § 1116, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/38/1116 (accessed January 28, 2023). 5. S. 3373, Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022 (Honoring Our PACT Act of 2022), Public Law No. 117-168, 117th Congress, August 10, 2022, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ168/PLAW-117publ168.pdf (accessed January 28, 2023). 6. H.R. 2471, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, Public Law No. 117-103, 117th Congress, March 15, 2022, Division S, Title I, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ103/PLAW-117publ103.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). Known variously as the Department of Veterans Affairs Nurse and Physician Assistant Retention and Income Security Enhancement Act and the VA Nurse and Physician Assistant RAISE Act. 7. See note 5, supra.

Department of Defense

Minimal
Vector: 56%
Pages: 149-151AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill concerns memorial recognition for fallen sailors, while Project 2025's DoD section focuses on transforming Marine Corps force structure and equipment; there is no substantive policy overlap."

Key themes:Department of Defensemilitary personnel

— 116 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 1. Transform USMC force structure. a. Eliminate all USMC law enforcement battalions. b. Transform at least one Marine Infantry Regiment into a Marine Littoral Regiment. c. Reduce the size of remaining infantry battalions. 2. Divest systems or equipment that are better suited to heavier U.S. Army units. a. Maintain divestment of M1 Abrams tanks. b. Eliminate the majority of tube artillery (M777) batteries. c. Reduce the number of Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicles and the number of their replacements. 3. Use funds made available by divestment of systems to support new systems that are geared to the likely needs of future conflicts. a. Increase the number of rocket artillery batteries (HIMARS). b. Increase the number of upgraded Light Armored Vehicle (LAV) companies. c. Increase the number of Unmanned Aerial Systems and anti-air systems (including counter-UAS systems). d. Develop long-range strike missiles and anti-ship missiles for the Corps. e. Modernize USMC infantry equipment. l Transform the USMC personnel paradigm. More than other services, the USMC relies heavily on junior noncommissioned officers (NCOs) to staff key positions across the force but especially in combat arms. For example, E-4s routinely hold squad leader billets when the Army normally has E-6s in those billets. The nature of more distributed operations and the increasingly complex responsibilities of a Marine Corps rifle squad and platoon under Force Design 2030 will only put more responsibility on the backs of squad leaders and platoon sergeants, increasing the need for more senior Marines in those critical positions. Additionally, the Corps needs to improve its retention of junior NCOs after their first enlistments (the Marines have much lower rates of reenlistment than other branches).33 1. Align the USMC’s combat arms rank structure with the U.S. Army’s (squad leader billets are for E-6s, and platoon sergeant billets are for E-7s). — 117 — Department of Defense 2. Create better incentives to retain talented junior NCOs, especially in infantry and other critical military occupational specialties. 3. Reduce unnecessary deployments to increase dwell time in order to enable more robust primary military education. l Align Navy amphibious shipbuilding with Force Design 2030. The U.S. Navy has struggled for decades to maintain an amphibious fleet that could support USMC war plans around large-scale amphibious operations. In addition, amphibious shipbuilding has often had to compete against other priorities within a constrained budget and limited shipbuilding capacity. 1. Develop and produce light amphibious warships (LAWs) to support more distributed amphibious operations, especially in the Pacific.34 2. Maintain between 28 and 31 larger amphibious warships as opposed to the 25 specified in current Navy shipbuilding plans and the 38 specified before 2020.35 U.S. SPACE FORCE U.S. space forces conduct global space operations to sustain and enhance air, land, and sea effectiveness, lethality, and superiority by providing secure broad- band global communications (precision position, navigation, and timing accuracy); attack warning and threat tracking and targeting capability (real-time intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance information); and their assured continuity of operations both by defending U.S. assets and by conducting offensive operations that are capable of imposing unacceptable losses on adversaries that might seek to attack them. The U.S. Space Force (USSF) was established to assure continuous global and theater combat support from space, to deter attacks against U.S. space assets, and to prevail in space should deterrence fail. The USSF posture was conceived as a balance of offensive and defensive deterrent capabilities designed for maximum effectiveness. Needed Reforms l Reverse the Biden Administration’s defensive posture. The Biden Administration has eliminated almost all offensive deterrence capabilities and instead will rely solely on defensive capabilities of disaggregation, maneuver, and reconstitution—the most costly, the slowest, and ultimately the most fragile architecture selection.

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