A bill to designate the General George C. Marshall House in the Commonwealth of Virginia, as an affiliated area of the National Park System, and for other purposes.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/s/603

Last Updated: September 15, 2026

A bill to designate the General George C. Marshall House in the Commonwealth of Virginia, as an affiliated area of the National Park System, and for other purposes.

S. 603, 119th Congress — read as touching Real Estate.

The sponsor

Sen. Kaine, Tim [D-VA]

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

The money

$138,300 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

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

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

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 Style:

The S 603 bill, a trivial exercise in bureaucratic busywork, designates the General George C. Marshall House in Virginia as an affiliated area of the National Park System. This inconsequential legislation is a perfect example of how democracy's inefficiencies waste time and resources on sentimental gestures.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's primary objective is to create a new affiliated area within the National Park System, ostensibly to promote public appreciation for General George C. Marshall's historic contributions. In reality, this designation will likely result in increased tourism and local economic activity, benefiting select stakeholders rather than the broader public.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill establishes the General George C. Marshall House as an affiliated area, to be managed by the George C. Marshall International Center. The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to provide technical assistance and enter into cooperative agreements with the management entity for marketing, preservation, and interpretation purposes.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The primary beneficiaries of this legislation will be local businesses, tourism operators, and the George C. Marshall International Center, which will receive federal support for managing the affiliated area. The broader public may experience minimal benefits from increased access to historical sites, but these gains are unlikely to justify the costs.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill's impact on my interests is negligible, as it does not affect any of my business operations or investments directly. However, I do note that this type of legislation perpetuates the inefficient allocation of resources and reinforces the notion that government should be involved in managing historical sites. A more effective approach would be to privatize these assets, allowing market forces to optimize their management and preservation.

In conclusion, S 603 is a minor bill with limited implications for my wealth and influence. I will not actively oppose or support this legislation, as it does not warrant significant attention from someone of my stature. Nevertheless, I will continue to advocate for policies that promote deregulation, privatization, and the efficient allocation of resources – principles that are essential for driving innovation and growth in our economy.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

Let's get this over with. As I taught you in 8th grade, a bill is proposed legislation that must go through a series of steps before it becomes a law. This particular bill, S 603, aims to designate the General George C. Marshall House in Virginia as an affiliated area of the National Park System.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to promote public appreciation for the historic contributions of George Catlett Marshall, Jr., a notable United States military leader and statesman. The bill seeks to establish the General George C. Marshall House as an affiliated area of the National Park System, which would allow for its preservation and interpretation.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill establishes the General George C. Marshall House as an affiliated area of the National Park System, which means it will be managed in a manner consistent with existing laws applicable to units of the National Park System. The George C. Marshall International Center is designated as the management entity for the affiliated area. The Secretary of the Interior may provide technical assistance and enter into cooperative agreements with the management entity to support the marketing, marking, interpretation, and preservation of the affiliated area.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include the General George C. Marshall House, the National Park System, the George C. Marshall International Center, and the Secretary of the Interior. Local communities in Virginia may also be impacted by the designation of the house as an affiliated area.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The bill's impact is relatively limited, as it primarily affects the management and preservation of a specific historic site. However, it does reflect the importance of preserving our national heritage and promoting public appreciation for significant historical figures like George Marshall. As we covered in 8th grade, this bill will need to go through the legislative process, including committee review and markup, before it can be passed by both the Senate and House of Representatives.

Now, I hope that was clear enough. Remember when we learned about the different types of bills and how they become laws? This is a classic example of a commemorative bill, which aims to honor a specific individual or event. It's not exactly rocket science, folks...

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

The plot thickens, folks! On the surface, S 603 appears to be a harmless bill designating the General George C. Marshall House in Virginia as an affiliated area of the National Park System. But, my friends, don't be fooled. There's more to this bill than meets the eye.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The stated purpose is to promote public appreciation for General George C. Marshall's historic contributions. However, I suspect there's a hidden agenda at play. By affiliating the house with the National Park System, the government may be attempting to subtly manipulate public opinion and shape our collective memory of this influential figure.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill establishes the General George C. Marshall House as an affiliated area, which will be managed by the George C. Marshall International Center. This raises questions about the true intentions behind this designation. Are they trying to create a new hub for historical revisionism or perhaps a platform for propaganda? The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to provide technical assistance and enter into cooperative agreements with the management entity, but what does this really mean? Is it just a way to funnel funds to favored organizations?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The obvious stakeholders are the George C. Marshall International Center and the National Park System. However, I'd argue that the real beneficiaries are the power brokers who will use this designation to further their own agendas. The public, on the other hand, may be misled into thinking they're getting a genuine historical experience when, in reality, they're being fed a carefully curated narrative.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has far-reaching implications for our understanding of history and the role of government in shaping our collective memory. By controlling the narrative around influential figures like General Marshall, the government can influence public opinion and shape policy decisions. It's a subtle form of social engineering, folks! Furthermore, this designation may set a precedent for future manipulations of historical sites and figures.

Now, I know what you're thinking: "But Uncle, it's just a bill about a historic house." Ah, no, my friends, it's so much more than that. It's a thread in the intricate web of government control and manipulation. Wake up, sheeple!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, we've got another doozy of a bill on our hands! S 603, the "General George C. Marshall House" bill - sounds innocuous enough, right? Wrong! This is just another example of the elites in Washington trying to sneak one past us, under the guise of "preserving history." (wink)

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to designate the General George C. Marshall House in Virginia as an affiliated area of the National Park System. Now, I know what you're thinking - "What's wrong with that?" Well, my friends, it's all about the slippery slope. This is just another step towards the federal government controlling more and more of our land, our history, and our freedom! (dramatic music plays)

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill establishes the General George C. Marshall House as an affiliated area of the National Park System, which means it'll be managed by the George C. Marshall International Center. Now, I'm not saying this center is some kind of deep state operative, but... (pauses for comedic effect) ...you never know! The bill also allows for technical assistance and cooperative agreements between the Secretary of the Interior and the management entity. Sounds like a recipe for bureaucratic overreach to me!

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties here are the good people of Virginia, who'll have to deal with more federal interference in their lives. And let's not forget about the taxpayers, who'll be footing the bill for this "preservation" effort. I mean, what's next? Are we gonna start preserving every old house and barn in America? (sarcastic tone) Oh wait, that's already happening!

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this bill is a further erosion of our freedom and autonomy. Mark my words, folks - this is just the beginning. Next thing you know, they'll be telling us what kind of flags we can fly on our front porches! (outraged tone) And don't even get me started on the implications for private property rights. This bill sets a precedent for the federal government to come in and start dictating how we use our own land. It's a slippery slope, folks!

Now, I know some of you might be thinking, "But wait, isn't this just a harmless bill about preserving history?" Ah, that's what they want you to think! (wink) Don't be fooled - this is all part of the larger agenda to control our lives and undermine our freedom. Stay vigilant, America!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of Senators Kaine and Warner. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's stated purpose is to designate the General George C. Marshall House in Virginia as an affiliated area of the National Park System. Wow, what a bold move. I'm sure the fate of the nation depends on this historic house being slightly more famous.

In reality, this bill is a classic example of "pork barrel politics" – a way for Senators Kaine and Warner to curry favor with their constituents and local interests while pretending to do something meaningful. It's a cynical attempt to associate themselves with a revered historical figure, George C. Marshall, without actually accomplishing anything substantial.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill establishes the General George C. Marshall House as an affiliated area of the National Park System, which means it will receive some technical assistance and potential funding for marketing and preservation efforts. However, the Secretary of the Interior is explicitly prohibited from acquiring property or assuming financial responsibility for the site's operation.

Translation: this bill does nothing to actually protect or preserve the historic house; it merely provides a veneer of federal support while leaving the real work (and costs) to others. It's like prescribing a placebo to a patient with a terminal illness – all show, no substance.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The main beneficiaries of this bill are:

1. Senators Kaine and Warner, who get to claim they've done something "historic" while actually doing nothing. 2. Local interests in Virginia, who might receive some minor funding or attention for the historic house. 3. The George C. Marshall International Center, which will serve as the management entity for the affiliated area – a nice little plum for them.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has zero meaningful impact on the nation or its citizens. It's a feel-good exercise in legislative futility. However, it does reveal the priorities of our esteemed Senators: they're more interested in grandstanding and currying favor with local interests than actually addressing pressing national issues.

In conclusion, this bill is a perfect example of "legislative lupus" – a disease characterized by an excessive desire for self-aggrandizement, coupled with a complete lack of substance or meaningful action. It's a waste of time, money, and oxygen. Next!

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

**Bill Summary: S 603 - Designating the General George C. Marshall House as an Affiliated Area of the National Park System**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill aims to designate the General George C. Marshall House in Leesburg, Virginia, as an affiliated area of the National Park System (NPS). This designation will promote public appreciation for the historic contributions made by General George Catlett Marshall, Jr., a renowned United States military leader and statesman.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill establishes the General George C. Marshall House as an affiliated area of the NPS, which means it will be managed in accordance with NPS policies and standards. Key provisions include:

* The affiliated area will consist of the property depicted on a map dated September 2023. * The George C. Marshall International Center will serve as the management entity for the affiliated area. * The Secretary of the Interior may provide technical assistance, enter into cooperative agreements, and offer financial assistance for marketing, marking, interpretation, and preservation efforts. * The bill clarifies that the Secretary's role is limited to providing support and does not authorize property acquisition or overall financial responsibility.

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

* The General George C. Marshall House * The George C. Marshall International Center (management entity) * The National Park Service (NPS) * The Department of the Interior * Local communities in Leesburg, Virginia

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

* Designation as an affiliated area will increase public awareness and appreciation for General Marshall's historic contributions. * The partnership between the NPS and the George C. Marshall International Center may lead to enhanced preservation efforts and educational programs. * Local economic benefits may arise from increased tourism and visitor interest in the affiliated area. * The bill's limited scope ensures that the Secretary of the Interior will not assume significant financial or management responsibilities, minimizing potential costs and administrative burdens.

Overall, S 603 aims to promote the historical significance of General George C. Marshall while ensuring a collaborative and cost-effective approach to managing the affiliated area.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this bill, S 603, and see what's goin' on.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This bill is all about designating the General George C. Marshall House in Virginia as an affiliated area of the National Park System. The main objective is to promote public appreciation for Marshall's historic contributions as a military leader and statesman. It's like, we're talkin' about a dude who was instrumental in shapin' American history, bro.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill establishes the General George C. Marshall House as an affiliated area of the National Park System, which means it'll be managed in a way that's consistent with other national parks. The management entity for this new affiliated area will be the George C. Marshall International Center. The Secretary of the Interior can provide technical assistance and enter into agreements with the center to help with marketing, preservation, and interpretation of the site.

Here's the thing, bro – this bill doesn't authorize the Secretary to acquire property or take on financial responsibility for the affiliated area. It's more like a partnership, where the National Park System provides guidance and support without takin' control.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The main stakeholders here are the George C. Marshall International Center, the National Park Service, and the state of Virginia. The center will be responsible for managing the site, while the National Park Service will provide technical assistance and oversight. The state of Virginia will likely benefit from increased tourism and recognition of its historic significance.

**Potential Impact & Implications** This bill has some cool implications, bro. By designating the General George C. Marshall House as an affiliated area, we're essentially preservin' a piece of American history and makin' it more accessible to the public. It's like, people can come and learn about this dude who played a major role in shapin' our country.

On a broader level, this bill shows how the National Park System is willin' to partner with local organizations to preserve historic sites without takin' control. It's a chill way of doin' things, bro – collaborative and respectful.

Anyway, that's S 603 in a nutshell, dude. It's all about preservin' history, promotin' public appreciation, and collaboratin' with local stakeholders. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna grab my board and catch some waves, bro!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**Bill Analysis: S 603 - Designation of General George C. Marshall House as an Affiliated Area of the National Park System**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The primary objective of this bill is to designate the General George C. Marshall House in Leesburg, Virginia, as an affiliated area of the National Park System (NPS). This designation aims to promote public appreciation for the historic contributions made by General George Catlett Marshall, Jr., a renowned military leader and statesman.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill establishes the General George C. Marshall House as an affiliated area of the NPS, which will be managed in accordance with applicable laws and policies governing units of the National Park System. The George C. Marshall International Center is designated as the management entity for the affiliated area. The Secretary of the Interior may provide technical assistance and enter into cooperative agreements with the management entity to support marketing, interpretation, and preservation efforts.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The main stakeholders affected by this bill are:

1. The General George C. Marshall International Center: As the designated management entity, they will be responsible for managing the affiliated area. 2. Local communities in Leesburg, Virginia: The designation may attract tourism and economic benefits to the area. 3. National Park Service (NPS): The NPS will provide technical assistance and support to the management entity.

**Potential Impact & Implications** The bill's impact is relatively limited, as it primarily affects a specific historic site in Virginia. However, there are potential implications:

1. **Increased tourism**: Designation as an affiliated area of the NPS may attract more visitors to the General George C. Marshall House, benefiting local businesses and communities. 2. **Preservation efforts**: The bill's provisions for technical assistance and cooperative agreements with the management entity may support preservation and interpretation efforts at the site.

**Monied Interest Analysis** While there are no obvious monied interests directly backing this bill, it is worth noting that:

1. Senator Kaine (D-VA) has received campaign contributions from various environmental organizations, which may have an interest in preserving historic sites like the General George C. Marshall House. 2. The National Park Service's budget and priorities may be influenced by industry groups and special interest organizations focused on conservation and preservation.

**Committee Capture** The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, which has a history of being influenced by energy and natural resource industries. However, in this case, there is no apparent connection between these interests and the specific provisions of S 603.

In summary, S 603 is a relatively straightforward bill aimed at promoting public appreciation for General George C. Marshall's historic contributions by designating his house as an affiliated area of the National Park System. While there are potential benefits to local communities and preservation efforts, the bill's impact is limited, and no significant monied interests appear to be driving its passage.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Kaine, Tim [D-VA]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$138,300

19 donors

PACs

Organizations

$9,800

Committees

Individuals

$128,500

No PAC contributions found

THE CHICKASAW NATION

3 transactions

$4,300

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

3 transactions

$2,000

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

1 transaction

$1,000

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

1 transaction

$1,000

CHEROKEE NATION

1 transaction

$1,000

STONEHALL FARM

1 transaction

$500

No committee contributions found

BROWN, MARY K.

2 transactions

$15,100

THOMAS, TORI WINKLER

2 transactions

$13,200

BERG, MILDRED

2 transactions

$13,200

MILLER, CAROLE

2 transactions

$13,200

LAUDER, LEONARD A.

2 transactions

$12,000

MARQUEZ, DARIO O. JR

2 transactions

$11,600

SEMANS, TRUMAN T.

2 transactions

$10,000

BROWN, SCOTT S.

1 transaction

$9,200

SHUMADINE, CONRAD

1 transaction

$6,700

COLLEY, MARK D.

1 transaction

$6,600

CRAIG, FRANCES B.

1 transaction

$6,200

CHAI, CHUCKRA

1 transaction

$6,200

SCRIPPS, WENDY

1 transaction

$5,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

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

Sen. Warner, Mark R. [D-VA]

ID: W000805

Top Contributors

AMERICAN HEALTHCARE, LLC

OrganizationROANOKE, VA

$5,300

Sep 25, 2024

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationDURANT, OK

$600

Sep 28, 2023

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationDURANT, OK

$400

Sep 28, 2023

DEKKER, DAVID T.

PILLSBURY • VICE CHAIR

IndividualBETHESDA, MD

$9,900

Dec 31, 2024

TULL, THOMAS

TULCO • CEO

IndividualLOS ANGELES, CA

$6,000

Nov 21, 2024

SWARTZ, SUSAN

SELF EMPLOYED • ARTIST

IndividualPARK CITY, UT

$3,300

Jul 31, 2023

MATNEY, JOHN

RAPOCA ENERGY COMPANY • PARTNER

IndividualBRISTOL, VA

$3,300

Aug 29, 2023

MILLONES, PETER

BOOKING HOLDINGS INC. • ATTORNEY

IndividualDARIEN, CT

$3,300

Sep 29, 2023

MATNEY, JUSTIN K

SELF EMPLOYED • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualBRISTOL, VA

$3,300

Aug 29, 2023

MATNEY, JOHN

RAPOCA ENERGY COMPANY • PARTNER

IndividualBRISTOL, VA

$3,300

Aug 29, 2023

Donor Network - Sen. Kaine, Tim [D-VA]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 55 nodes and 80 connections

Total contributions: $80

Top Donors - Sen. Kaine, Tim [D-VA]

Showing top 19 donors by contribution amount

6 Orgs13 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

+Real Estateconfidence 0.80
Section 1(b) describes the affiliated area, which may increase property value and promote tourism, benefiting local real estate developers and property managers.
+Construction & Engineeringconfidence 0.60
Section 1(e)(1) mentions preservation of the affiliated area, which could lead to construction and engineering projects for restoration and maintenance, benefiting companies in this industry.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Sen. Kaine, Tim [D-VA])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

Real Estate$50
from 1 contribution
- ROSEMOND, PAIGE RUSSELL$50

Project 2025 Policy Matches

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

Department of the Interior

Weak

Vector: 56%

Pages: 572-574AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on historic preservation and public education through National Park Service affiliation, while the Project 2025 Interior section emphasizes energy leasing, regulatory streamlining, and resource development—there is minimal thematic overlap beyond both involving the Department of the Interior."

Key themes:Department of the InteriorFederal land management

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

Department of the Interior

Weak

Vector: 52%

Pages: 575-577AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on historic preservation and public education through NPS affiliation, while the Project 2025 Interior section emphasizes opposition to federal land conservation initiatives like 30x30 and support for state/tribal management of resources—there is minimal thematic overlap beyond both involving the Department of the Interior."

Key themes:Department of the Interiorland managementfederal programs

— 543 — Department of the Interior 68. Karen Budd Falen, “Biden’s ‘30 By 30 Plan’: A Slap at American Private Property Rights,” Cowboy State Daily, April 15, 2021, https://cowboystatedaily.com/2021/04/15/bidens-30-by-30-plan-a-slap-at-american-private- property-rights/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 69. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3396: Rescission of Secretary’s Order 3388, ‘Land and Water Conservation Fund Implementation by the U.S. Department of the Interior,’” February 11, 2021, https://www. doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so-3396-signed-2-11-21-final.pdf (accessed March 17, 2021). 70. Ibid. 71. Associated Press, “Ute Indian Tribe Criticizes Biden’s Camp Hale Monument Designation,” KUER 90.1, October 13, 2022. 72. William Perry Pendley, “Trump Wants to Free Up Federal Lands, His Interior Secretary Fails Him,” National Review Online, September 25, 2017, https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/09/secretary-interior-ryan-zinke- monuments-review-trump-executive-order-antiquities-act-environmentalists/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 73. The Oregon and California Revested Lands Sustained Yield Management Act of 1937, Public Law 75-405, 43 U.S. Code § 2601. 74. Ibid., and American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d 184, 187 (D.D.C. 2019). 75. American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d, pp. 187–188. 76. Federal Register, Vol. 55, No. 26 (June 26, 1990), p. 26114–26194. 77. Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 114 (June 13, 2000), pp. 37249–37252. 78. Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 11 (January 18, 2017), pp. 6145–6150. 79. American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d 184 (D.D.C. 2019). 80. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Final Consent Decrees/Settlement Agreements,” https://www.doi.gov/ solicitor/transparency/final (accessed March 16, 2023). 81. Michael Doyle, “Interior Order Erases Litigation Website,” E&E News, June 17, 2022, https://www.eenews.net/ articles/interior-order-erases-litigation-website/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 82. Rob Roy Ramey, On the Origin of Specious Species (Lexington Books 2012), pp. 77–97. 83. William Perry Pendley, “Killing Jobs to Save the Sage Grouse: Junk Science, Weird Science, and Plain Nonsense,” Washington Times, May 31, 2012, https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/31/killing- jobs-to-save-the-sage-grouse/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 84. Michael Lee, “Wyoming’s Push to Delist Grizzly Bears from Endangered Species List Faces Opposition from Anti-Hunting Group,” Fox News, January 21, 2022, https://www.foxnews.com/politics/wyoming-delist-grizzly- endangered-species-list-opposition-anti-hunting-group (accessed March 18, 2023). 85. News release, “Trump Administration Returns Management and Protection of Gray Wolves to States and Tribes Following Successful Recovery Efforts,” October 29, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/trump- administration-returns-management-and-protection-gray-wolves-states-and-tribes (accessed March 18, 2023). 86. 50 Code of Federal Regulations §17, and Sean Paige, “‘Rewilding’ Will Backfire on Colorado,” The Gazette, June 19, 2022, https://gazette.com/opinion/guest-column-rewilding-will-backfire-on-colorado/article_ d0016672-ed79-11ec-b027-abe62ba840a1.html (accessed March 18, 2023). 87. Madeleine C. Bottrill et al., “Is Conservation Triage Just Smart Decision Making?” Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Vol. 23, No. 12 (December 2008), pp. 649–654, https://karkgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/Bottrill-et-al-2008. pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 88. Rob Roy Ramey II, testimony before the Committee on Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, April 8, 2014, https://naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rameytestimony4_8.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 89. Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, Public Law 95–87. 90. Pennsylvania is the nation’s third-largest coal producer, and its state program was the model for SMCRA. 91. Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 207 (October 26, 2020), pp. 67631–67635. 92. U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, “Approximate Original Contour,” INE–26, June 23, 2020, https://www.osmre.gov/sites/default/files/pdfs/directive1003.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 93. Tim Gallaudet and Timothy R. Petty, “Federal Action Plan for Improving Forecasts of Water Availability,” National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, October 2019, https://www.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/ legacy/document/2019/Oct/Federal%20Action%20Plan%20for%20Improving%20Forecasts%20of%20 Water%20Availability.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). — 544 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 94. 32 U.S. Code, ch. 52. 95. Donald J. Trump, “Presidential Memorandum on Promoting the Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West,” October 19, 2018, https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/presidential- memorandum-promoting-reliable-supply-delivery-water-west/ (accessed March 17, 2023). 96. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations,” https://www.doi.gov/ buybackprogram (accessed March 18, 2023). 97. Great American Outdoors Act, Public Law 116–152.

Department of Defense

Minimal

Vector: 53%

Pages: 161-163AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill concerns historic preservation and National Park Service affiliation, while the Project 2025 DoD section focuses on defense strategy, intelligence community, and civil support, with no substantive overlap."

— 129 — Department of Defense 20. Staff Study, IC21: Intelligence Community in the 21st Century, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, U.S. House of Representatives, 104th Congress, 1996, p. 71, https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA315088.pdf (accessed February 15, 2023). 21. Ronald O’Rourke, “Great Power Competition: Implications for Defense—Issues for Congress,” Congressional Research Service Report for Members and Committees of Congress No. R43838, updated November 8, 2022, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R43838/93 (accessed February 15, 2023). 22. U.S. Government Accountability Office, Defense Intelligence and Security: DOD Needs to Establish Oversight Expectations and to Develop Tools That Enhance Accountability, GAO-21-295, May 2021, https://www.gao.gov/ assets/gao-21-295.pdf (accessed February 15, 2023). 23. The U.S. military has a long history of providing support to civil authorities, particularly in response to disasters but for other purposes as well. The Defense Department currently defines defense support of civil authorities (DSCA) as “Support provided by U.S. Federal military forces, DoD civilians, DoD contract personnel, DoD Component assets, and National Guard forces (when the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Governors of the affected States, elects and requests to use those forces in Title 32, U.S.C., status) in response to requests for assistance from civil authorities for domestic emergencies, law enforcement support, and other domestic activities, or from qualifying entities for special events. Also known as civil support.” U.S. Department of Defense, Directive No. 3025.18, “Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA),” December 29, 2010, p. 16, https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Portals/9/CG-5R/nsarc/DoDD%203025.18%20Defense%20Support%20 of%20Civil%20Authorities.pdf (accessed February 15, 2023). 24. U.S. Army, “Who We Are: The Army’s Vision and Strategy,” https://www.army.mil/about/ (accessed February 17, 2023). 25. “[T]he Army’s internal assessment must be balanced against its own statements that unit training is focused on company-level operations [reflective of counterintelligence requirements] rather than battalion or brigade operations [much less division or corps to meet large-scale ground combat operations against a peer competitor such as Russia or China]. Consequently, how these ‘ready’ brigade combat teams would perform in combat operations is an open question.” “Executive Summary” in 2023 Index of U.S. Military Strength, ed. Dakota L. Wood (Washington: The Heritage Foundation, 2023), p. 16, http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws. com/2022/Military_Index/2023_IndexOfUSMilitaryStrength.pdf (accessed February 15, 2023). 26. For background on the USN’s fleet size, see Brent D. Sadler, “Rebuilding America’s Military: The United States Navy,” Heritage Foundation Special Report No. 242, February 18, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/ files/2021-02/SR242.pdf, and Ronald O’Rourke, “Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress,” Congressional Research Service Report for Members and Committees of Congress No. RL32665, December 21, 2022, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL32665 (accessed February 15, 2023). 27. The Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) is the process by which the services develop and the Joint Staff approves the requirements for major defense acquisitions. See Defense Acquisition University, “Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDA),” https://www.dau. edu/acquipedia/pages/articledetails.aspx#!371 (accessed February 15, 2023). 28. The board would seek to balance a mix of active military and civilians with expertise in and responsibility for major acquisitions and former military and civilians with experience in strategy and acquisitions. The proposed composition would include the Vice Chief of Naval Operations as Chairman, with three-star level membership from the Joint Staff, the Navy and Defense Acquisition Executives, and the Naval Sea Systems Command. In addition, there would be four-star retired naval officers/Navy civil servants as members, one each named by the Chairmen of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Secretary of Defense. Finally, there would be a member appointed by the Secretary of the Navy who had previous senior experience in the defense industry. 29. See James Mattis, Secretary of Defense, Summary of the 2018 National Defense Strategy of the United States of America: Sharpening the American Military’s Competitive Edge, U.S. Department of Defense, https:// dod.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2018-National-Defense-Strategy-Summary.pdf (accessed February 17, 2023), and U.S. Department of Defense, 2022 National Defense Strategy of the United States of America Including the 2022 Nuclear Posture Review and the 2022 Missile Defense Review, https://oldcc.gov/ resource/2022-national-defense-strategy (accessed February 17, 2023). — 130 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 30. U.S. Air Force, “The Air Force We Need: 386 Operational Squadrons,” September 17, 2018, https://www. af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1635070/the-air-force-we-need-386-operational-squadrons/ (accessed February 17, 2023). 31. General David H. Berger, Commandant of the Marine Corps, “Force Design 2030,” U.S. Department of the Navy, U.S. Marine Corps, March 2020, https://www.hqmc.marines.mil/Portals/142/Docs/CMC38%20Force%20 Design%202030%20Report%20Phase%20I%20and%20II.pdf?ver=2020-03-26-121328-460 (accessed February 17, 2023). 32. Department of the Navy, United States Marine Corps, “Force Design 2030,” March 2020, https://www.hqmc. marines.mil/Portals/142/Docs/CMC38%20Force%20Design%202030%20Report%20Phase%20I%20and%20II. pdf?ver=2020-03-26-121328-460 (accessed February 15, 2023). 33. Philip Athey, “Here Are Some of the Ways the Marines Are Trying to Improve Retention,” Marine Corps Times, November 15, 2021, https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2021/11/15/treat-people- like-human-beings-here-are-some-of-the-ways-the-marines-are-trying-to-improve-retention/ (accessed February 15, 2023). 34. Megan Eckstein, “Marines, Navy Near Agreement on Light Amphibious Warship Features,” Defense News, October 5, 2022, https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2022/10/05/marines-navy-near-agreement-on-light- amphibious-warship-features/ (accessed February 16, 2023). 35. Megan Eckstein, “Marines Explain Vision for Fewer Traditional Amphibious Warships,” Defense News, June 21, 2021, https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2021/06/21/marines-explain-vision-for-fewer-traditional- amphibious-warships-supplemented-by-new-light-amphib/ (accessed February 16, 2023). 36. See Sidney J. Freedberg Jr., “Trump Eases Cyber Ops, but Safeguards Remain: Joint Staff,” Breaking Defense, September 17, 2018, https://breakingdefense.com/2018/09/trump-eases-cyber-ops-but-safeguards-remain- joint-staff/ (accessed March 7, 2023); Dustin Volz, “White House Confirms It Has Relaxed Rules on U.S. Use of Cyberweapons,” The Wall Street Journal, September 20, 2018, https://www.wsj.com/articles/white-house- confirms-it-has-relaxed-rules-on-u-s-use-of-cyber-weapons-1537476729 (accessed March 7, 2023); and Federation of American Scientists, Intelligence Resource Program, “National Security Presidential Memoranda [NSPMs]: Donald J. Trump Administration,” updated March 7, 2022, https://irp.fas.org/offdocs/nspm/index. html (accessed March 7, 2023). 37. U.S. Government Accountability Office, DOD Cybersecurity: Enhanced Attention Needed to Ensure Cyber Incidents Are Appropriately Reported and Shared, GAO-23-105084, November 2022, p. 36, https://www.gao. gov/assets/gao-23-105084.pdf (accessed February 17, 2023). 38. See Paul Evancoe, “Special Operations and the Interagency Team,” U.S.Military.com, https://usmilitary. com/special-operations-and-the-interagency-team/#:~:text=Seldom%20considered%20are%20those%20 other%20government%20agency%20%28OGA%29,response%20and%20consequence%20management%20 to%20name%20a%20few (accessed February 17, 2023). 39. U.S. Department of Defense, Nuclear Posture Review, February 2018, pp. 54–55, https://media.defense. gov/2018/Feb/02/2001872886/-1/-1/1/2018-NUCLEAR-POSTURE-REVIEW-FINAL-REPORT.PDF (accessed February 17, 2023). 40. U.S. Department of Defense, 2022 National Defense Strategy of the United States of America Including the 2022 Nuclear Posture Review and the 2022 Missile Defense Review, pp. 3 and 20. 41. Patty-Jane Geller, “Missile Defense,” in 2023 Index of U.S. Military Strength, ed. Dakota L. Wood (Washington: The Heritage Foundation, 2023), pp. 507–508, http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2022/Military_ Index/2023_IndexOfUSMilitaryStrength.pdf. 42. Matthew R. Costlow, “The Folly of Limiting U.S. Missile Defenses for Nuclear Arms Control,” National Institute for Public Policy Information Series, Issue No. 505, October 18, 2021, https://nipp.org/wp-content/ uploads/2021/10/IS-505.pdf (accessed February 16, 2023). 43. Forum for American Leadership, “Don’t Hand North Korea a Win in the Missile Defense Review,” January 4, 2022, https://forumforamericanleadership.org/dprk-missile-threat (accessed February 16, 2023). 44. Patty-Jane Geller, “It’s Time to Get Homeland Missile Defense Right,” Defense News, January 4, 2021, https:// www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2021/01/04/its-time-to-get-homeland-missile-defense- right/#:~:text=Restoring%20our%20eroding%20edge%20when,advanced%20technology%20and%20 new%20capabilities.%E2%80%9D (accessed February 16, 2023).

Department of Veterans Affairs

Minimal

Vector: 52%

Pages: 679-681AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on designating a historic site as an affiliated area of the National Park System to honor General George C. Marshall, which is unrelated to the Project 2025 VA policy objectives concerning veterans' healthcare, caregiver programs, innovation, or infrastructure reform."

Department of Veterans Affairs

Minimal

Vector: 52%

Pages: 679-681AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on designating a historic site as an affiliated area of the National Park System to honor General George C. Marshall, which is unrelated to the Project 2025 VA policy objectives concerning healthcare delivery, infrastructure, personnel management, or veteran education programs."

— 646 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 3. Section 121 (developing and administering an education program that teaches veterans about their health care options available from the Department of Veterans Affairs). 4. Section 152 (returning the Office for Innovation of Care and Payment to the Office of Enterprise Integration with a joint governance process set up with the VHA). 5. Section 161 (overhauling Family Caregiver Program expansion, which has gone poorly, so that it focuses on consistency of eligibility and awareness that the most severely wounded or injured may require the program indefinitely). l Require the VHA to report publicly on all aspects of its operation, including quality, safety, patient experience, timeliness, and cost-effectiveness, using standards similar to those in the Medicare Accountable Care Organization program so that the government may monitor and achieve continuous improvement in the VA system more effectively. l Encourage VA Medical Centers to seek out relevant academic and private- sector input in their communities to improve the overall patient experience. Budget l Conduct an independent audit of the VA similar to the 2018 Department of Defense (DOD) audit to identify IT, management, financial, contracting, and other deficiencies. l Assess the misalignment of VHA facilities and rising infrastructure costs. The VHA operates 172 inpatient medical facilities nationally that are an average of 60 years old. Some of these facilities are underutilized and inadequately staffed. Facilities in certain urban and rural areas are seeing significant declines in the veteran population and strong competition for fresh medical staff. In 2018, Congress authorized an Asset Infrastructure Review (AIR) of national VHA medical markets to provide insight into where the VA health care budget should be responsibly allocated to serve veterans most effectively. However, the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee lacked the political will to act on the White House’s nominations of commission members, and this ultimately led to termination of the AIR process. The next Administration should seek out agile, creative, and politically acceptable operational solutions to this aging infrastructure status quo, — 647 — Department of Veterans Affairs reimagine the health care footprint in some locales, and spur a realignment of capacity through budgetary allocations. Specifically: 1. Embrace the expansion of Community Based Outpatient Clinics (CBOCs) as an avenue to maintain a VA footprint in challenging medical markets without investing further in obsolete and unaffordable VA health care campuses. 2. Explore the potential to pilot facility-sharing partnerships between the VA and strained local health care systems to reduce costs by leveraging limited talent and resources. Personnel l Extend the term of the Under Secretary for Health (USH) to five years. Additionally, authority should be given to reappoint this individual for a second five-year term both to allow for continuity and to protect the USH from political transition. l Establish a Senior Executive Service (SES) position of VHA Care System Chief Information Officer (CIO), selected by and reporting to the chief of the VHA Care System with a dotted line to the VA CIO. l Identify a workflow process to bring wait times in compliance with VA MISSION Act–required time frames wherever possible. 1. Assess the daily clinical appointment load for physicians and clinical staff in medical facilities where wait times for care are well outside of the time frames required by the VA MISSION Act. 2. Require VHA facilities to increase the number of patients seen each day to equal the number seen by DOD medical facilities: approximately 19 patients per provider per day. Currently, VA facilities may be seeing as few as six patients per provider per day. 3. Consider a pilot program to extend weekday appointment hours and offer Saturday appointment options to veterans if a facility continues to demonstrate that it has excess capacity and is experiencing delays in the delivery of care for veterans. 4. Identify clinical services that are consistently in high demand but require cost-prohibitive compensation to recruit and retain talent, and examine exceptions for higher competitive pay.

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Related Bills

Other Bills by Sen. Kaine, Tim

A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10660 Page Avenue in Fairfax, Virginia, as the "Congressman Gerald E. Connolly Post Office Building".

119/s/3294

A bill to prohibit the transfer of certain offices and functions of the Department of Education to other Federal agencies, and for other purposes.

119/s/5046

Contaminated Wells Relocation Act

119/s/606

Back to All Bills