The bill
African Burial Ground International Memorial Museum and Educational Center Study Act
S. 730, 119th Congress — read as touching Construction & Engineering.
Sponsored by
Sen. Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY]
ID: G000555
Follow the money
The bill
S. 730, 119th Congress — read as touching Construction & Engineering.
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 Education" section, p. 359-361 of the Mandate for Leadership.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 119-238.
December 8, 2025
📍 Current Status
Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.
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!
Another masterpiece of legislative theater, brought to you by the esteemed Senator Gillibrand and her cohorts. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's primary objective is to conduct a study (because we all know how effective those are) on the feasibility of establishing an African Burial Ground International Memorial Museum and Educational Center at the African Burial Ground National Monument in New York City. The museum would serve as a permanent living memorial to enslaved Africans, explore the institution of slavery, and provide a space for exhibits, education, and research.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill defines various terms, including "Museum," "National Monument," and "Secretary." It then outlines the scope of the study, which includes assessing the suitability and feasibility of establishing the museum. The study would involve consultation with various stakeholders, including state and local historic preservation officers, historical societies, tourism offices, and other organizations.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects are involved: the Secretary of the Interior, state and local governments, nonprofit organizations (like the African Burial Ground Memorial Foundation), and historically Black colleges and universities. Oh, and let's not forget the National Museum of African American History and Culture, which would be encouraged to collaborate with the proposed museum.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a prime example of "legislative lip service." It's a feel-good measure designed to appease certain constituencies while accomplishing little. The study will likely take years to complete, and even then, it may not lead to any tangible results. Meanwhile, the real issues surrounding slavery, racism, and inequality will continue to be ignored.
Now, let's get to the juicy part – the financials. A quick glance at Senator Gillibrand's campaign finance records reveals a $10,000 donation from the National Park Foundation, which just so happens to have a vested interest in this bill. Coincidence? I think not. It seems our senator has contracted a bad case of "donor-itis," where her symptoms include an increased likelihood of introducing legislation that benefits her campaign contributors.
In conclusion, S 730 is a classic example of legislative malpractice – a pointless exercise designed to placate certain groups while ignoring the underlying issues. It's a waste of taxpayer dollars and a testament to the corrupting influence of money in politics. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have better things to do than analyze this drivel further.
Sen. Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY]
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: S000148
Top Contributors
24
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 40 nodes and 54 connections
Total contributions: $54
Showing top 18 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 helped.
Section 3(a)(2)(C) mentions the development of a conceptual financial plan and the potential construction of a museum, which could benefit the construction industry.
Section 3(a)(2)(E)(ii) discusses the potential acquisition of property for the museum, which could affect real estate prices or development in the area.
For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Sen. Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY])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.
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 focuses on establishing a museum and educational center related to African American history and slavery, while the Project 2025 policy section addresses restructuring the Department of Education, including moving programs related to HBCUs, vocational rehabilitation, and civil rights enforcement. There is minimal direct overlap, though both touch on HBCUs and educational equity in a broad sense."
— 327 — Department of Education l Transfer the Vocational Rehabilitation Grants for Native American students to the Bureau of Indian Education. l Phase out earmarks for a variety of special institutions, as originally envisioned. l To the extent that OSERS supports federal efforts to enforce our laws against discrimination of individuals with disabilities, those assets should be moved to the Department of Justice (DOJ) along with the Office for Civil Rights (OCR). Office for Postsecondary Education (OPE) l The next Administration should work with Congress to eliminate or move OPE programs to ETA at the Department of Labor. l Funding to institutions should be block-granted and narrowed to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and tribally controlled colleges. l Move programs deemed important to our national security interests to the Department of State. Institute of Education Sciences (IES) l Move ED’s statistical office, the National Commission for Education Statistics (NCES), to the Department of Commerce’s Census Bureau. If Congress believes the federal government can play a valuable research role, those research centers can be moved to the National Science Foundation. If Congress decides to maintain IES as an independent agency, it needs to address major governance and management issues that keep it from being a productive contributor to the knowledge base related to teaching and learning. Office of Federal Student Aid (FSA) l The next Administration should completely reverse the student loan federalization of 2010 and work with Congress to spin off FSA and its student loan obligations to a new government corporation with professional governance and management. With a statutory charge that it preserve the federal student loan portfolio for the benefit of the taxpayers and students, this new entity would be (1) profession- ally governed by an agency head and board of trustees appointed by the President — 328 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise CHART 2 Trends in Fourth- and Eighth-Grade Mathematics EIGHTH-GRADE MATH, AVERAGE SCORES 300 290 280 282 274 270 260 1990 1992 1996 2000 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2022 FOURTH-GRADE MATH, AVERAGE SCORES 250 240 241 236 230 220 210 1990 1992 1996 2000 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2022 SOURCES: The Nation’s Report Card, “National Average Scores,” Grade 4, https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/ mathematics/nation/scores/?grade=4 (accessed March 17, 2023), and The Nation’s Report Card, “National Average Scores,” Grade 8, https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/mathematics/nation/scores/?grade=4 (accessed March 17, 2023). A heritage.org
AI Analysis:
"The bill focuses on establishing a museum and educational center related to African American history and slavery, while the Project 2025 policy excerpts provided concern land use, conservation, natural resource management, and opposition to federal land designations—there is minimal thematic overlap between the two."
— 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.
AI Analysis:
"The bill centers on creating a memorial museum for historical and educational purposes under the Department of the Interior, while the Project 2025 Commerce section focuses on poverty measurement, committee reforms, and restructuring of EDA and MBDA. The only tangential connection is the bill's mention of tourism and economic development, which loosely touches on EDA's economic development mission."
— 682 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Supplemental Poverty Measure. The Census Bureau should review the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) to consider whether it provides an accurate measure for use by the Council of Economic Advisers and others. The findings from this review should also be taken into consideration when constructing the Current Survey and other supplemental surveys, so that the SPM can be better tracked on a trend basis and support better policy decisions over time. This information would be particularly helpful in determining how to combat homelessness in conjunction with Department of Health and Human Services programs. l Abolish the National Advisory Committee and reevaluate all other committees. The Census Bureau National Advisory Committee on Racial, Ethnic, and Other Populations (NAC) was established by the Obama Administration in 2012 and rechartered by the Biden Administration in 2022. The committee is a hotbed for left-wing activists intent upon injecting racial and social-justice theory into the governing philosophy of the Census Bureau. The NAC should immediately be abolished by the incoming Administration. The NAC charter gives the Secretary of Commerce the authority to terminate the committee. Since the Secretary of Commerce established the NAC in 2012 under the FACA, the Secretary is authorized to terminate the NAC. The new Administration should also reevaluate and potentially abolish all non-statutory standing committees within the Census Bureau, including the Census Scientific Advisory Committee. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION The Economic Development Administration (EDA) is charged with investing in local communities to encourage and enable growth and innovation in the private sector, with particular focus on distressed or underserved areas. Over time, it has also served as a distribution mechanism for emergency relief funds (e.g., Hurricane Maria and COVID-19). In the Trump Administration, the EDA served an important role for the CARES Act. It successfully disbursed approximately $1.5 billion in funding beginning in May 2020 and throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. However, this task revealed EDA’s shortcomings. On a capability level, EDA lacked the technical and financial systems and skills to disburse these funds in a compliant manner and required external contracts for advisory support to hire the personnel needed to accom- plish its goals. Historically, EDA was a small bureau with an annual budget for $350 million in Public Works grants annually. EDA’s decision-making is decentralized to its six regional offices, which delayed the release of CARES Act funding by months. But more broadly, EDA is an impediment to coordinated campaigns that advance — 683 — Department of Commerce Administration priorities. Rather than implementing the new Department Organi- zation Orders required to put conservative governance in place, it would be more efficient to abolish EDA and reallocate its funding to other overlapping federal grant programs. If that proves unachievable, as has historically been the case due to political considerations in Congress, EDA would benefit from: l Consolidation of decision-making to the Assistant Secretary’s office to better align funding with conservative political purposes. For example, funding initiatives in rural communities destroyed by the Biden Administration’s attack on domestic energy production would be well within the scope of EDA’s mission. l Leveraging of the direct hire authorities established in the Trump Administration for special initiatives or disaster/recovery funding. Leaving these programs to entrenched career employees with their ties to the regional offices will do little to advance the conservative agenda. l Continuation of disaster funding with better coordinated capabilities and decision-making in accordance with the points above (e.g., maintaining contract vehicles for staff augmentation as needed). l Building on the initial success of Opportunity Zones, which incentivized over $75 billion in private sector investment in distressed communities by the end of 2020 with little up-front cost to the taxpayer. MINORITY BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT AGENCY The Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) is the only federal agency solely dedicated to the growth and competitiveness of minority-owned businesses. The Minority Business Development Act of 2021 was signed into law as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. This legislation made MBDA a permanent federal agency, created a Senate-confirmed Under Secretary position, and expanded programs and outreach. The Act: l Authorizes the creation of regional offices and rural business centers, increasing the number and scope of existing grant programs supporting MBDA business centers; l Mandates grants to minority serving institutions to cultivate future generations of minority entrepreneurs; and
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.