The bill
USMMA Athletics Act of 2026
S. 3266, 119th Congress.
Sponsored by
Sen. Wicker, Roger F. [R-MS]
ID: W000437
Follow the money
The bill
S. 3266, 119th Congress.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
25 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
The alignment
This bill's text tracks the "Department of Transportation" section, p. 670-672 of the Mandate for Leadership.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Held at the desk.
August 9, 2026
📍 Current Status
Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.
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!
**Summary of S. 3266: USMMA Athletics Act of 2026**
**1. Main Purpose & Objectives** The stated purpose of the USMMA Athletics Act of 2026 is to “support the athletic programs of the United States Merchant Marine Academy.” In reality, this is a bureaucratic workaround dressed up as patriotism and school spirit. The true objective is to create a taxpayer-funded, government-sanctioned nonprofit corporation that can circumvent standard procurement rules, accept private donations without oversight, and lease federal property—all under the noble guise of helping midshipmen play soccer and lift weights. It’s less about athletics and more about creating a slush fund with a varsity jacket.
**2. Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to create a New York–based 501(c)(3) corporation wholly owned by the U.S. government, with the Secretary holding all voting stock. This entity can: - Enter into sole-source contracts (bypassing competitive bidding rules under Title 41). - Use cooperative agreements to acquire property, services, or travel (evading standard federal acquisition rules under Title 31). - Lease underutilized federal real property at USMMA for up to five years, with proceeds funneled back into the corporation. - Accept transfers of nonappropriated fund assets (like bank accounts and equipment) from existing DOT athletic support mechanisms—except real estate, because even this bill has limits on how brazen it can be. - Accept funds, supplies, and services from the corporation without violating anti-deficiency laws (via a loophole in 31 U.S.C. § 1342). - Allow DOT employees to serve on the board (unpaid, except for travel), but capped at one-third of seats to maintain the illusion of independence.
In short: it creates a government-owned, government-controlled nonprofit that operates outside standard accountability mechanisms—because why follow the rules when you can just rebrand them?
**3. Affected Parties & Stakeholders** - **United States Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA):** Gets a new funding stream for athletics, potentially freeing up appropriated funds for other uses (or neglect). - **Department of Transportation (DOT):** Gains a flexible tool to move money and assets around with less scrutiny—useful for rewarding allies or avoiding budgetary headaches. - **Taxpayers:** On the hook for indirect support via tax-exempt status, leased federal property, and potential future bailouts if the “nonprofit” mismanages funds. - **Contractors & Vendors:** Stand to gain from no-bid sole-source contracts—because nothing says “fair competition” like a government-owned nonprofit picking winners. - **Athletes:** May get nicer locker rooms or better travel budgets—assuming the money isn’t siphoned into administrative overhead or consultant fees.
**4. Potential Impact & Implications** This bill is a masterclass in regulatory arbitrage. By creating a government-owned 501(c)(3), Congress and the DOT are essentially building a tax-exempt shadow entity that can accept private donations, engage in preferential contracting, and hold federal property—all while avoiding the transparency and accountability standards that apply to both government agencies and legitimate nonprofits.
The implications are troubling: it opens the door for similar “support corporations” across other federal academies or agencies, eroding procurement integrity under the banner of morale and wellness. It’s not corruption—it’s *innovation* in the same way that embezzlement is “creative accounting.”
Ultimately, the USMMA Athletics Act of 2026 doesn’t just support athletic programs—it supports the atrophy of good governance, one no-bid contract at a time. Congratulations, midshipmen: your gain is the taxpayer’s subtle, creeping suspicion that something’s rotten in the state of New York—and it’s not just the cafeteria mystery meat.
Sen. Wicker, Roger F. [R-MS]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
This bill has 1 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: K000377
Top Contributors
24
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 36 nodes and 40 connections
Total contributions: $40
Showing top 21 donors by contribution amount
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.
AI Analysis:
"The bill supports the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA), which falls under MARAD within DOT, aligning with Project 2025's discussion of MARAD's role and potential restructuring. While the bill does not directly address the Project 2025 proposals to transfer MARAD to DHS or DOD, reform the Jones Act, or change FRA policies, it does strengthen a core MARAD function—supporting the service academy—thereby showing moderate thematic alignment with maritime policy objectives."
— 637 — Department of Transportation to track brake inspections on rolling stock electronically instead of by using paper air brake slips, which would enable extending the interval between brake inspections for trains and eliminating restrictions on the ability to place/remove blocks of cars in trains. l FRA will be proposing certification requirements for dispatchers and signal employees despite the failure of the Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) to identify any safety benefit. l FRA is planning to propose emergency escape breathing apparatus requirements for train crews even though FRA staff long ago concluded that the costs of these requirements would far outweigh their very minimal benefits. It is vital that the integrity of FRA’s research program be preserved. In 2022, FRA switched the management of the Transportation Technology Center (TTC) in Pueblo, Colorado, from a subsidiary of the Association of American Railroads (AAR) to Ensco, Inc. FRA seems determined to direct research to TTC, even when there are better choices with respect to the research in question, in an effort to support TTC financially and justify its decision to change management at TTC. This change in approach threatens the collaborative approach to research between FRA and the railroads that has existed for decades. FRA should make its decisions on where to spend its research dollars solely on the merits of improving the safety and efficiency of the railroad industry. MARITIME POLICY The Maritime Administration (MARAD) was established by President Harry Truman in 1950 and was transferred to DOT in 1981. A principal function is “main- tain[ing] the overall health of the U.S. Merchant Marine,”15 which is important both to national defense and to foreign and domestic commerce. MARAD is also in charge of the United States Merchant Marine Academy and operates ships and funding for the six state maritime academies. MARAD would be better served by being transferred from DOT to the Depart- ment of Homeland Security (DHS). MARAD is the only DOT modal administration that does not regulate the industry that it represents: The maritime industry is regulated by the U.S. Coast Guard (ships and personnel) and by the Federal Mari- time Commission (cargo rates and competitive practices). Furthermore, MARAD has responsibilities both in peacetime commerce and operationally in wartime/crisis sealift through its responsibility to manage the National Defense Reserve Fleet and 45-ship Ready Reserve Force for the U.S. Navy. These missions are unique to MARAD within DOT. As a result, MARAD’s missions — 638 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise and purpose, and therefore its funding priorities, are not well understood and his- torically have been minimalized in planning and budgeting. MARAD, including its subordinate Service Academy (the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy) should be transferred to the Department of Defense (if the Coast Guard is located there because DHS has been eliminated) or to the Department of Home- land Security. In this way, the two agencies charged with oversight and regulation of the Maritime sector—MARAD and the United States Coast Guard—would be aligned under the same department where operational efficiencies could be real- ized more easily. Serious consideration should be given to repealing or substantially reforming the Jones Act,16 which would require legislation. The economic costs of the Jones Act, which is notionally in place to promote a robust Merchant Marine, vastly exceed its effect on the supply of domestic ships. For instance, no liquified natural gas (LNG) can be shipped from Alaska to the lower 48 states because there are no U.S.-flagged ships that carry LNG. If there are genuine concerns about U.S. fleet capacity in the absence of the Jones Act, it would be possible to do so through an expansion of the Defense Reserve Fleet. Another DHS agency, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), is a frequent user of MARAD Ready Reserve Force shipping during disaster assistance missions. Transferring MARAD to DHS would make coordination and requisition of those vessels a smoother and more rapid process. DHS has responsibility for reviewing and approving Jones Act waivers. This process first requires a market survey of available shipping tonnage that is completed by MARAD. The processing of Jones Act waiver requests would be streamlined if both agencies were in the same department. Finally, DHS as a department is experienced in administering and budgeting for the operation of an existing federal service academy, the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, which is similar to the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy in size. There would be increased efficiencies and better alignment of the missions of these two institutions if they were under one single department that has equity in the industries served by these academies. CONCLUSION Americans need more abundant and affordable transportation. They need more affordable and safer cars as well as physical aspects of transportation such as roads, bridges, airports, ports, and rail lines. The Department of Transportation should be evaluating which aspects of transportation are contributing to the economic competitiveness of the United States and the well-being of Americans—and that therefore should continue to be funded. All too often, DOT’s mission is described as reducing the number of trips, using less fuel, and raising the costs of travel to Americans through increased use of
AI Analysis:
"The bill focuses on creating a nonprofit corporation to support USMMA athletics, while the Project 2025 policy discusses transferring MARAD/USMMA to DOD/DHS and reforming the Jones Act; they share only a tangential connection through the USMMA/MARAD reference."
— 638 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise and purpose, and therefore its funding priorities, are not well understood and his- torically have been minimalized in planning and budgeting. MARAD, including its subordinate Service Academy (the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy) should be transferred to the Department of Defense (if the Coast Guard is located there because DHS has been eliminated) or to the Department of Home- land Security. In this way, the two agencies charged with oversight and regulation of the Maritime sector—MARAD and the United States Coast Guard—would be aligned under the same department where operational efficiencies could be real- ized more easily. Serious consideration should be given to repealing or substantially reforming the Jones Act,16 which would require legislation. The economic costs of the Jones Act, which is notionally in place to promote a robust Merchant Marine, vastly exceed its effect on the supply of domestic ships. For instance, no liquified natural gas (LNG) can be shipped from Alaska to the lower 48 states because there are no U.S.-flagged ships that carry LNG. If there are genuine concerns about U.S. fleet capacity in the absence of the Jones Act, it would be possible to do so through an expansion of the Defense Reserve Fleet. Another DHS agency, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), is a frequent user of MARAD Ready Reserve Force shipping during disaster assistance missions. Transferring MARAD to DHS would make coordination and requisition of those vessels a smoother and more rapid process. DHS has responsibility for reviewing and approving Jones Act waivers. This process first requires a market survey of available shipping tonnage that is completed by MARAD. The processing of Jones Act waiver requests would be streamlined if both agencies were in the same department. Finally, DHS as a department is experienced in administering and budgeting for the operation of an existing federal service academy, the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, which is similar to the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy in size. There would be increased efficiencies and better alignment of the missions of these two institutions if they were under one single department that has equity in the industries served by these academies. CONCLUSION Americans need more abundant and affordable transportation. They need more affordable and safer cars as well as physical aspects of transportation such as roads, bridges, airports, ports, and rail lines. The Department of Transportation should be evaluating which aspects of transportation are contributing to the economic competitiveness of the United States and the well-being of Americans—and that therefore should continue to be funded. All too often, DOT’s mission is described as reducing the number of trips, using less fuel, and raising the costs of travel to Americans through increased use of — 639 — Department of Transportation renewables. These goals are not compatible with what should be DOT’s purpose: to make travel easier and less expensive. That is what the American people want, and that is what DOT should provide. AUTHOR’S NOTE: The preparation of this chapter was a collective enterprise of individuals involved in the 2025 Presidential Transition Project. All contributors to this chapter are listed at the front of this volume, but Steven Bradbury, David Ditch, and Robert Poole deserve special mention. The author alone assumes responsibility for the content of this chapter, and no views expressed herein should be attributed to any other individual.
AI Analysis:
"The bill deals with establishing a nonprofit to support a federal academy's athletics and related contracting authorities, while the Project 2025 SBA section focuses on reforming small business financing, size standards, and capital access programs; the only connection is a tangential overlap in federal contracting mechanisms."
— 757 — Small Business Administration largely duplicates private-sector venture capital to the extent that the sector receiving much of its support is software and information technology, which already receive the lion’s share of venture capital investment.65 In addition, Congress should reform the SBIC program to make its financing more favorable to capital-intense investments and small manufacturers. The Health, Economic Assistance, Liability Protection, and Schools (HEALS) Act, introduced in 2020,66 and American Innovation and Manufacturing Act, introduced in 2021,67 would allow SBIC to offer longer-term financing to manufacturers and make the program more fiscally sustainable. Small-Business Size Standard Modernization. Many small-business pro- grams both inside and outside the SBA use the SBA’s definition of “small business.” Under the Small Business Act, the SBA is tasked with defining what counts as a small business and ensuring that the definition varies from industry to industry to reflect differences in regular size by industry. However, the SBA’s small-business size standards reflect a one-size-fits-all approach under which all businesses within its size standard are considered small businesses for all eligible purposes, from gov- ernment contracting preferences to eligibility for SBA loans through private banks. At the same time, the SBA is an outlier among competing economies in not considering medium-sized enterprises along with small businesses, often referred to collectively as small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Medium-sized and regional businesses are increasingly critical to maintaining competition. The next Administration should: l Encourage Congress to create a “medium-sized business” classification with its eligibility for programs confined to access to capital programs from projects for which credit elsewhere does not exist. SBA POLICY PRIORITIES FOR 2025 AND BEYOND Legislation. The new Administration can support SBA reform legislation pro- posed in Congress that aligns with key measures outlined in this chapter. It also can support legislative initiatives that would help SBA to focus on its core statutory activities such as capital access, federal contracting opportunities, and regulatory advocacy. For example: l The IMPROVE the SBA Act68 would strengthen accountability, transparency, and oversight of the SBA and aligns with many of the reforms outlined in this chapter. — 758 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l The Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act69 would require federal agencies to perform more thorough RFA economic analysis and provide a rationale for proposed regulations. It also would waive fines for certain first-time paperwork violations. l The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act70 (SBREFA) panel process allows small businesses to provide input on agency rulemakings, gives participating small businesses greater procedural rights, and allows for judicial review of agency violations of the SBREFA panel process. SBREFA panel requirements should be extended to all federal agencies. l The Fair and Open Competition Act71 would disallow the use of project labor agreements (PLAs) in federal contracting as required in President Biden’s Executive Order 14063,72 which puts small businesses at a competitive disadvantage and works against the SBA’s governmentwide contracting goal for small businesses. l The JOBS Act 4.073 would advance regulatory improvements and modernization of various Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rules to enhance capital formation and access. ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUES AND BUDGET Administrator and Key Staff. The position of Administrator should not be considered a symbolic or messaging-related position as some past Administrations have viewed it. Rather, the Administrator should have the requisite experience, skills, and knowledge to ensure that the SBA fulfills its statutory authorities. Because much of the SBA’s statutory authority relates to financing and reg- ulatory policy, and in order to make the SBA a more effective agency within the Administration, the Administrator and his or her key staff should have experience in small-business finance and investment and/or administrative law. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the SBA was often forced to outsource key deci- sions and administrative follow-through to the Department of the Treasury. The SBA Administrator and leadership team must share the President’s mission and vision and execute the Administration’s policies effectively. Budget The next Administration should undertake a comprehensive review of the effectiveness of its various loan and grant programs and provide a report to Congress within six months. The report should rank programs by cost-effective- ness. In the interim, the roughly $1 billion overall agency budget should be held constant until the report is considered, after which Congress should terminate
Showing 3 of 5 policy matches
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.