A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 14855 South Van Dyke Road in Plainfield, Illinois, as the "Staff Sergeant Jose Duenez Jr. Post Office Building".

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/s/3373
Last Updated: September 14, 2026

Sponsored by

Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL]

ID: D000622

Follow the money

The bill

A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 14855 South Van Dyke Road in Plainfield, Illinois, as the "Staff Sergeant Jose Duenez Jr. Post Office Building".

S. 3373, 119th Congress.

The sponsor

Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL]

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

The money

$73,510 raised

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

The alignment

40% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Homeland Security" section, p. 205-207 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. 582.

September 13, 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 of S. 3373: The Staff Sergeant Jose Duenez Jr. Post Office Building Designation Act**

**1. Main Purpose & Objectives** The sole purpose of S. 3373 is to rename a specific United States Postal Service facility in Plainfield, Illinois, after Staff Sergeant Jose Duenez Jr., presumably in honor of his military service. This is a ceremonial, symbolic act—essentially a legislative participation trophy. The bill’s objective is not to reform postal operations, improve mail delivery, or address any systemic issue. It is to affix a name to a building so that politicians can appear patriotic without doing anything remotely substantive. Think of it as legislative Botox: it smooths over the wrinkles of public indifference with a cheap, temporary injection of feel-good symbolism.

**2. Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill amends nothing of consequence. It contains two sections: - **Section 1(a)**: Officially designates the USPS facility at 14855 South Van Dyke Road as the “Staff Sergeant Jose Duenez Jr. Post Office Building.” - **Section 1(b)**: Mandates that all future legal references to that facility use the new name—because apparently, the federal code needed another layer of redundant nomenclature to confuse GIS systems and bewilder retirees trying to mail their Social Security checks.

This is not lawmaking; it’s legislative graffiti with a federal stamp of approval. No regulations are changed, no funding is allocated, and no operational impact occurs. The Postal Service will continue to lose money, misdeliver packages, and operate under archaic mandates—now just with a longer sign out front.

**3. Affected Parties & Stakeholders** - **Honoree’s Family & Veterans Groups**: Receive a nice plaque and a moment of bipartisan back-slapping. Emotionally valuable, politically free. - **USPS Employees**: Must update letterhead, email signatures, and internal directories—another unfunded mandate wrapped in patriotism. - **Taxpayers**: Fund the negligible cost of new signage and the opportunity cost of senators’ time spent on this instead of, say, fixing the Postal Service’s $160 billion unfunded liability. - **Senators Duckworth and Durbin**: Gain a low-risk, high-visibility win to tout in newsletters and re-election ads. “I honored a hero!” they’ll cry, while ignoring the hero’s VA benefits backlog. - **The Public**: Gets a slightly more specific landmark for GPS navigation. Riveting.

**4. Potential Impact & Implications** Impact: Minimal. The bill will likely pass unanimously, as opposing a post office naming is politically suicidal—like voting against motherhood or puppies. It reinforces the dysfunctional norm that Congress prioritizes empty symbolism over hard work. Every hour spent on this bill is an hour not spent addressing postal reform, veteran suicide, or infrastructure decay.

Implication: This is the legislative equivalent of putting a band-aid on a gangrenous limb. It makes everyone feel like they’ve done something noble while the underlying rot festers. The real disease? A Congress that confuses renaming buildings with governing. Prognosis: terminal stupidity, with occasional flare-ups of performative patriotism.

**Verdict**: A harmless waste of time—except that time is the one thing we can’t reprint.

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

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$73,510
22 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$7,510
Committees
$0
Individuals
$66,000

No PAC contributions found

1
AMERICAN EXPRESS
3 transactions
$6,835
2
CITIBUSINESS CARD
3 transactions
$675

No committee contributions found

1
KELLY, MICHAEL
1 transaction
$3,300
2
LISTER, AMANDA
1 transaction
$3,300
3
SUMEY, ROGER
1 transaction
$3,300
4
CHEN, QIANHUI
1 transaction
$3,300
5
CHENG, ANLA
1 transaction
$3,300
6
DU, YUNSON
1 transaction
$3,300
7
DUN, LIOU
1 transaction
$3,300
8
GAO, MEI
1 transaction
$3,300
9
LI, LEI
1 transaction
$3,300
10
LI, MINGJU
1 transaction
$3,300
11
LU, KELLY
1 transaction
$3,300
12
MOOG, THOMAS
1 transaction
$3,300
13
ROE, DAVID
1 transaction
$3,300
14
WANG, MAGGIE
1 transaction
$3,300
15
WANG, SHA
1 transaction
$3,300
16
ZHANG, XIAOQING
1 transaction
$3,300
17
ZHU, GARY
1 transaction
$3,300
18
MOUHOT, SANDRA
1 transaction
$3,300
19
BAKER, RYAN
1 transaction
$3,300
20
BERNSTEIN, JAY
1 transaction
$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

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

Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL]

ID: D000563

Top Contributors

23

1
MIAMI TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA
OrganizationMIAMI, OK
$1,700
Mar 29, 2024
2
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,000
May 17, 2024
3
MIAMI TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA
OrganizationMIAMI, OK
$800
Mar 29, 2024
4
KUJAWSKI, JOHN
SELF-EMPLOYED • ATTORNEY
IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO
$5,000
May 28, 2024
5
KUJAWSKI, JOHN
IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO
$5,000
Jun 4, 2024
6
KUJAWSKI, JOHN
SELF-EMPLOYED • ATTORNEY
IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO
$3,600
May 29, 2024
7
KUJAWSKI, JOHN
IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO
$3,600
Jun 4, 2024
8
BARKER, MARA MILLS
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualCHICAGO, IL
$3,300
Dec 26, 2024
9
BARKER, MARA MILLS
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualCHICAGO, IL
$3,300
Dec 26, 2024
10
CHOWDHURY, SHUVRO
BOWERY ENGINE • ENGINEER
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$3,300
Nov 1, 2024

Donor Network - Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 46 nodes and 53 connections

Total contributions: $53

Top Donors - Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL]

Showing top 22 donors by contribution amount

2 Orgs20 Individuals

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of Homeland Security

Minimal
Vector: 54%
Pages: 205-207AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill is a ceremonial post office naming act with no connection to Department of Homeland Security policy, State Department leadership, or Project 2025's objectives regarding political appointees, ambassadorial reviews, or administrative control."

— 173 — Department of State service and civil service personnel who share the President’s vision and policy agendas—to run the department. This can be done by taking these steps at the outset of the next Administration. Exert Leverage During the Confirmation Process. Notwithstanding the challenges and slowness of the modern U.S. Senate confirmation process, the next President can exert leverage on the Senate if he or she is willing to place State Department appointees directly into those roles, pending confirmation. Doing so would both ensure that the department has immediate senior political leadership and would force the Senate to act on nominees’ appointments instead of being allowed to engage in dilatory tactics that cripple the State Department’s function- ality for weeks, months, or even years. Assert Leadership in the Appointment Process. The next Administration should assert leadership over, and guidance to, the State Department by placing political appointees in positions that do not require Senate confirmation, including senior advisors, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretaries, and Deputy Assistant Sec- retaries. Given the department’s size, the next Administration should also increase the number of political appointees to manage it. To the extent possible, all non-confirmed senior appointees should be selected by the President-elect’s transition team or the new President’s Office of Presiden- tial Personnel (depending on the timing of selection) and be in place the first day of the Administration. No one in a leadership position on the morning of January 20 should hold that position at the end of the day. These recommendations do not imply that foreign service and civil service officials should be excluded from key roles: It is hard to imagine a scenario in which they are not immediately relevant to the transition of power. The main suggestion here is that as many political appoin- tees as possible should be in place at the start of a new Administration. Support and Train Political Appointees. The Secretary of State should use his or her office and its resources to ensure regular coordination among all political appointees, which should take the form of strategy meetings, trainings, and other events. The secretary should also take reasonable steps to ensure that the State Department’s political appointees are connected to other departments’ political appointees, which is critical for cross-agency effectiveness and morale. The sec- retary should capitalize on the more experienced political appointees by using them as the foundation for a mentorship program for less experienced political appointees. The interaction of political appointees must be routine and operational rather than incidental or occasional, and it must be treated as a crucial dimension for the next Administration’s success. Maximize the Value of Career Officials. Career foreign service and civil service personnel can and must be leveraged for their expertise and commit- ment to the President’s mission. Indeed, the State Department has thousands of employees with unparalleled linguistic, cultural, policy, and administrative skills, — 174 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise and large numbers of them have been an enormous resource to the Secretaries of State under which they have served. The secretary must find a way to make clear to career officials that despite prior history and modes of operation, they need not be adversaries of a conservative President, Secretary of State, or the team of political appointees. Reboot Ambassadors Worldwide. All ambassadors are required to submit letters of resignation at the start of a new Administration. Previous Republican Administrations have accepted the resignations of only the political ambassadors and allowed the foreign service ambassadors to retain their posts, sometimes for months or years into a new Administration.5 The next Administration must go further: It should both accept the resignations of all political ambassadors and quickly review and reassess all career ambassadors. This review should commence well before the new Administration’s first day. Ambassadors in countries where U.S. policy or posture would substantially change under the new Administration, as well as any who have evinced hostility toward the incoming Administration or its agenda, should be recalled immediately. The priority should be to put in place new ambassadors who support the Presi- dent’s agenda among political appointees, foreign service officers, and civil service personnel, with no predetermined percentage among these categories. Political ambassadors with strong personal relationships with the President should be pri- oritized for key strategic posts such as Australia, Japan, the United Kingdom, the United Nations, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). RIGHTING THE SHIP Ensuring the State Department is accountable for serving American citi- zens first will require—at a minimum—that the following steps be implemented immediately: Review Retroactively. Before inauguration, the President-elect’s department transition team should assess every aspect of State Department negotiations and funding commitments. Upon inauguration, the Secretary of State should order an immediate freeze on all efforts to implement unratified treaties and international agreements, allocation of resources, foreign assistance disbursements, domestic and international contracts and payments, hiring and recruiting decisions, etc., pending a political appointee-driven review to ensure that such efforts comport with the new Administration’s policies. The quality of this review is more import- ant than speed. The posture of the department during this review should be an unwavering desire to prioritize the American people—including a recognition that the federal government must be a diligent steward of taxpayer dollars. Implement Repair. The State Department must change its handling of international agreements to restore constitutional governance. Under prior Administrations, unnecessary institutional factors in the department caused

Department of State

Minimal
Vector: 53%
Pages: 229-231AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill is a ceremonial designation of a post office to honor a military service member, with no connection to foreign policy, diplomatic strategy, or State Department functions outlined in the Project 2025 policy excerpt."

— 197 — Department of State The ideas and recommendations herein are premised on the belief that a rigorous adherence to the national interest is the most enduring foundation for U.S. grand strategy in the 21st century. AUTHOR’S NOTE: Thanks to the entire State Department chapter team, the leaders and staff of the 2025 Presidential Transition Project, and my colleagues at The Heritage Foundation’s Davis Center. In particular, I would like to acknowledge the following colleagues: Russell Berman, Sarah Calvis, James Carafano, Spencer Chretien, Wesley Coopersmith, Paul Dans, Steven Groves, Simon Hankinson, Joseph Humire, Michael Pillsbury, Max Primorac, Reed Rubenstein, Brett Schaefer, Jeff Smith, Hillary Tanoff, Erin Walsh, and John Zadrozny. — 198 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise ENDNOTES 1. U.S. Department of State, “About the U.S. Department of State: Our History,” https://www.state.gov/about/ (accessed March 9, 2023). 2. The balance of employment is 2,149 eligible family members and 50,223 locally employed staff. U.S. Department of State, “GTM Fact Sheet: Facts About Our Most Valuable Asset—Our People,” Global Talent Management, December 31, 2022, https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/GTM_Factsheet1222. pdf (accessed March 9, 2023). 3. U.S. Commission on National Security, Road Map for National Security: Imperative for Change, Phase III Report, February 15, 2001, p. x, http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/nssg/PhaseIIIFR.pdf (accessed March 9, 2023). 4. See Brett D. Schaefer, “How to Make the State Department More Effective at Implementing U.S. Foreign Policy,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3115, April 20, 2016, https://www.heritage.org/political- process/report/how-make-the-state-department-more-effective-implementing-us-foreign. 5. Historically, roughly one-third of ambassadorial appointments have been political appointments, although Republican Administrations have generally had a higher ratio of political appointments than Democratic Administrations. 6. U.S. Constitution, art. 2, sec. 2, cl. 2. 7. News release, “Secretary Blinken Launches the Office of China Coordination,” U.S. Department of State, December 16, 2022, https://www.state.gov/secretary-blinken-launches-the-office-of-china-coordination/ (accessed March 9, 2023). 8. Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S. Code § 1101 et seq., § 1253. 9. See Michael Pillsbury, The Hundred Year Marathon: China’s Secret Strategy to Replace the United States as a Global Superpower (NY: St. Martin’s Griffin, 2016). 10. For additional context regarding how countering China fits in a more robust U.S. strategy, see James Jay Carafano et al., “Foreign Policy: Strategy for a Post-Biden Era,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3715, July 21, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/defense/report/foreign-policy-strategy-post-biden-era. 11. The Article X for China would follow George Kennan’s Article X for U.S.–Soviet competition. See George F. Kennan, “The Sources of Soviet Conduct,” Foreign Affairs, July 1947, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ russian-federation/1947-07-01/sources-soviet-conduct (accessed March 22, 2023). 12. Dean Cheng et al., “Assessing Beijing’s Power: A Blueprint for the U.S. Response to China Over the Next Decades,” Heritage Foundation Special Report No. 221, February 20, 2010, https://www.heritage.org/asia/ report/assessing-beijings-power-blueprint-the-us-response-china-over-the-next-decades. 13. Eric W. Orts, “The Rule of Law in China,” Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, Vol. 34, No. 1 (January 2001), https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1686&context=vjtl (accessed March 9, 2023). 14. U.S. Department of Defense, Indo–Pacific Strategy Report: Preparedness, Partnerships, and Promoting a Networked Region, June 1, 2019, https://media.defense.gov/2019/Jul/01/2002152311/-1/-1/1/DEPARTMENT-OF- DEFENSE-INDO-PACIFIC-STRATEGY-REPORT-2019.PDF (accessed July 28, 2022). 15. See Jeff Smith, “South Asia: A New Strategy,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3721, August 29, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/asia/report/south-asia-new-strategy. 16. Emma Bryce, “Why Is There So Much Oil in the Arctic?” Live Science, August 3, 2019, https://www.livescience. com/66008-why-oil-in-arctic.html (accessed February 9, 2023). 17. “Changes in the Arctic: Background and Issues for Congress,” Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, updated January 26, 2021, p. 6, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R41153/177 (accessed March 9, 2023). 18. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Science and Technology, “Snapshot: Overcoming the Tyranny of Distance in the Arctic,” April 20, 2020, https://www.dhs.gov/science-and-technology/news/2020/04/20/ snapshot-overcoming-tyranny-distance-arctic (accessed February 9, 2023). 19. U.S. Department of State, “U.S. Contributions to International Organizations, 2021,” September 20, 2022, https://www.state.gov/u-s-contributions-to-international-organizations-2021/ (accessed March 9, 2023), and U.S. Department of State, “U.S. Contributions to International Organizations, 2015,” November 1, 2016, https:// www.state.gov/u-s-contributions-to-international-organizations-2015/ (accessed March 9, 2023). 20. U.S. Department of State, Report on the Commission of Inalienable Rights, https://www.state.gov/wp-content/ uploads/2020/07/Draft-Report-of-the-Commission-on-Unalienable-Rights.pdf (accessed March 9, 2023).

Department of Justice

Minimal
Vector: 52%
Pages: 602-604AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill is a ceremonial post office naming act with no connection to DOJ hiring practices, organizational efficiency, or any of the substantive policy objectives outlined in the Project 2025 Department of Justice section."

— 570 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Undertake a comprehensive review of DOJ hiring practices. The next conservative Administration should conduct a holistic review of hiring practices employed across all DOJ offices and components to ensure that those practices comply with applicable law and policy. All hiring committees associated with hiring for career positions across the department should be assessed for impartiality to ensure that individuals are hired based on merit, aptitude, and legal skill and not based on association with or membership in certain ideologically aligned groups or based on illegal considerations such as race, religion, or sex. Eliminating Redundant Offices and Consolidating Functions to Increase Efficiencies. The next conservative Administration should explore the possibility of consolidating and aligning the functions of the DOJ’s various components and offices in human resources, legal counsel, public relations, and other related areas. While local access to appropriate personnel and resources is important, there are inefficiencies and redundancies across the department that result in a bureaucratic, Rube Goldberg–style design that ultimately hinders the department’s mission. From IT infrastructure to management functions to public relations, DOJ lead- ership should explore consolidation and intradepartmental efficiencies to obtain the best possible support for its critical missions. For example, the Department of Public Affairs has a dual structure of public information officers in which there are some political appointees who lead the office and provide support, but also career appointees who serve as public infor- mation officers for individual divisions (Criminal Division, National Security Division, etc.). The career officials handle the day-to-day work of the division, which entails monitoring important cases, assisting in editing, and distribut- ing press releases, and the political appointees will step in for larger issues that advance the Administration’s initiatives. This could be made more efficient by having political appointees for each division under the supervision of the Direc- tor of Public Affairs. Additionally, given the interplay of function between the Office of Legislative Affairs (OLA) and the Office of Public Affairs, as well as the fact that the Assistant Attorney General for the OLA is a Senate-confirmed position, the two offices should be folded into one for more efficiency and proper coordination. Under an Office of Public and Legislative Affairs, the Assistant Attorney General’s portfolio would encompass both, with one Director/Deputy for Public Affairs and one Director/ Deputy for Legislative Affairs. Pursuing Other Changes in Reporting Chains to Ensure Consistency with the Law and Administration Priorities. The next conservative Administration should undertake a comprehensive review of the DOJ’s current organizational chart and make decisions about its structure—consistent with any authority to do — 571 — Department of Justice so outside of congressional action—to ensure the most efficient accomplishment of the department’s missions. For example: l Is the current reporting structure for the Associate Attorney General’s Office the best and optimal for the achievement of the department’s mission? l Should all of the Deputy Attorney General’s direct reports continue to be direct reports, or would a different structure achieve a better, more efficient outcome in fulfilling the department’s mission? l What should the Office of Legal Policy’s role be in the next conservative Administration? Should it continue to be responsible for assisting with judicial nominations, or should that function be assigned to the Office of Legislative Affairs, which interacts with Congress on a daily basis? Pursuing Legislative Changes for Assistant United States Attorneys’ Compensation. To ensure that the department can attract and retain top legal talent away from Washington, D.C., the next conservative Administration should seek congressional reform of the pay scale used for Assistant United States Attorneys in the field. At a minimum, that reform should include a proposal to com- pensate Assistant United States Attorneys on at least the same basis as attorneys employed by Main Justice who are compensated under the GS scale. Ensuring that the department can attract and retain top legal talent outside of the D.C. market is essential and will help to emphasize the importance of the field’s work in achieving the department’s various missions. Protecting the Integrity of the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the National Institute of Justice. The DOJ’s statistical and research arms should serve the Amer- ican people and not special interests. The Director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics should focus the BJS on producing the statistics of greatest interest to everyday Americans, and hence of policymakers, rather than those of particular interest to crim- inal-justice academics. The Director should insist that such statistics be as accurate as possible and presented as clearly as possible. The intellectually engaged, everyday American citizen should be able to read and understand the BJS’s published statistics and reports rather than having to trust “experts” because the statistics are not clear. The BJS should focus on the core statistics involving crime and punishment, such as those relating to serious crimes committed, imprisonment, time served, recidivism, and the like. It should not pursue the niche political agendas of aca- demics or advocates. Moreover, a clear line should be maintained between official government statistics and third-party contractor reports. There should be no reports that look like official BJS reports but are authored by private entities such as the Urban Institute as happened under the Obama Administration.

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