A resolution calling on the Government of Panama to expel officials and interests of the People's Republic of China and terminate Chinese management of key Panamanian ports.

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/sres/31
Last Updated: April 4, 2025

Sponsored by

Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO]

ID: S001227

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Invalid Date

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

Another brilliant example of congressional theater, where our esteemed leaders pretend to care about national security while actually serving the interests of their corporate overlords.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This resolution is a masterclass in grandstanding, masquerading as a genuine concern for national security. The main purpose is to "express profound concern" (read: virtue signal) about China's influence in Panama and demand that Panama expel Chinese officials and terminate their management of key ports.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The resolution calls on the Government of Panama to:

1. Reaffirm its commitment to the Neutrality Treaty, which is a nice way of saying "do what we tell you." 2. Review and terminate agreements with Chinese state-owned enterprises or China-based private entities. 3. Expel all officials from the People's Republic of China operating within Panamanian ports and critical infrastructure projects.

The resolution also urges the US Government to:

1. Leverage provisions in the Neutrality Treaty to monitor and address threats to the neutrality of the Panama Canal (because we need more excuses for military intervention). 2. Provide technical, financial, and strategic support to Panama as it seeks to assert sovereignty over its critical infrastructure (read: bribe them with aid).

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects:

1. China: The boogeyman du jour. 2. Panama: A country that's been reduced to a pawn in the great game of geopolitics. 3. US corporations: Who will benefit from the increased "security" and "stability" provided by this resolution (read: more contracts for defense contractors). 4. Lobbyists: Who will reap the rewards of their efforts to shape this resolution.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This resolution is a thinly veiled attempt to:

1. Justify increased US military presence in the region. 2. Undermine China's growing influence in Latin America. 3. Provide a pretext for future interventions and regime changes. 4. Enrich defense contractors and other corporate interests.

In short, this resolution is a cynical exercise in fear-mongering, designed to distract from the real issues facing our nation while serving the interests of those who actually run the show.

Related Topics

Civil Rights & Liberties State & Local Government Affairs Transportation & Infrastructure Small Business & Entrepreneurship Government Operations & Accountability National Security & Intelligence Criminal Justice & Law Enforcement Federal Budget & Appropriations Congressional Rules & Procedures
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$158,400
23 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$13,000
Committees
$0
Individuals
$145,400

No PAC contributions found

1
ELEVATE MISSOURI
2 transactions
$6,700
2
TURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND OF CHIPPEWA TRIBE
1 transaction
$2,900
3
PETER J SPALITTO DDS PC
1 transaction
$2,900
4
KIRKWOOD PLUMBING INC
1 transaction
$500

No committee contributions found

1
POPOLO, JOE
2 transactions
$13,200
2
WALTON, TROY
1 transaction
$11,600
3
PFAUTCH, ROY
1 transaction
$11,600
4
ROSS, DONALD
1 transaction
$10,000
5
TAYLOR, ANDREW
1 transaction
$6,600
6
TAYLOR, BARBARA
1 transaction
$6,600
7
KELSEY, J DAVID
1 transaction
$6,600
8
FOGEL, DAVID
1 transaction
$6,600
9
PALOMO, OSWALDO
1 transaction
$6,600
10
TAMASI, DAVID
1 transaction
$6,600
11
MCKNIGHT, ANDREW
1 transaction
$6,600
12
POPOLO, CHRIS
1 transaction
$6,600
13
ASHWORTH, CAROL
1 transaction
$6,600
14
ASHWORTH, JIMMY
1 transaction
$6,600
15
GIBBS, HALLIE H.
1 transaction
$6,600
16
GIDWITZ, RONALD J.
1 transaction
$6,600
17
STEWARD, DAVE
1 transaction
$6,600
18
MANDELBLATT, DANIELLE
1 transaction
$6,600
19
MANDELBLATT, ERIC
1 transaction
$6,600

Donor Network - Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 24 nodes and 25 connections

Total contributions: $158,400

Top Donors - Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO]

Showing top 23 donors by contribution amount

4 Orgs19 Individuals

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. Higher similarity scores indicate stronger thematic connections.

Introduction

Low 54.5%
Pages: 122-124

— 89 — Section 2: The Common Defense The solution to this problem is strong political leadership. Skinner writes, “The next Administration must take swift and decisive steps to reforge the department into a lean and functional diplomatic machine that serves the President and, thereby, the American people.” Because the Senate has been extraordinarily lax in fulfilling its constitutional obligation to confirm presidential appointees, she recommends putting appointees into acting roles until such time as the Senate confirms them. Skinner writes that State should also stop skirting the Constitution’s trea- ty-making requirements and stop enforcing “agreements” as treaties. It should encourage more trade with allies, particularly with Great Britain, and less with adversaries. And it should implement a “sovereign Mexico” policy, as our neighbor “has functionally lost its sovereignty to muscular criminal cartels that effectively run the country.” In Africa, Skinner writes, the U.S. “should focus on core security, economic, and human rights” rather than impose radical abortion and pro-LGBT initiatives. Divisive symbols such as the rainbow flag or the Black Lives Matter flag have no place next to the Stars and Stripes at our embassies. When it comes to China, Skinner writes that “a policy of ‘compete where we must, but cooperate where we can’…has demonstrably failed.” The People’s Repub- lic of China’s (PRC) “aggressive behavior,” she writes, “can only be curbed through external pressure.” Efforts to protect or excuse China must stop. She observes, “[M]any were quick to dismiss even the possibility that COVID escaped from a Chinese research laboratory.” Meanwhile, Skinner writes, “[g]lobal leaders includ- ing President Joe Biden…have tried to normalize or even laud Chinese behavior.” She adds, “In some cases, these voices, like global corporate giants BlackRock and Disney”—or the National Basketball Association (NBA)—“directly benefit from doing business with Beijing.” Former vice president of the U.S. Agency for Global Media Mora Namdar writes in Chapter 8 that we need to have people working for USAGM who actually believe in America, rather than allowing the agencies to function as anti-American, tax- payer-funded entities that parrot our adversaries’ propaganda and talking points. Former acting deputy secretary of homeland security Ken Cuccinelli says in Chap- ter 5 that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), a creation of the George W. Bush era, should be closed, as it has added needless additional bureaucracy and expense without corresponding benefit. He recommends that it be replaced with a new “stand-alone border and immigration agency at the Cabinet level” and that the remaining parts of DHS be distributed among other departments. Former chief of staff for the director of National Intelligence Dustin Carmack writes in Chapter 7 that the U.S. Intelligence Community is too inclined to look in the rearview mirror, engage in “groupthink,” and employ an “overly cautious” approach aimed at personal approval rather than at offering the most accurate, unvarnished intelligence for the benefit of the country. And in Chapter 9, former acting deputy administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development Max

Introduction

Low 54.5%
Pages: 122-124

— 89 — Section 2: The Common Defense The solution to this problem is strong political leadership. Skinner writes, “The next Administration must take swift and decisive steps to reforge the department into a lean and functional diplomatic machine that serves the President and, thereby, the American people.” Because the Senate has been extraordinarily lax in fulfilling its constitutional obligation to confirm presidential appointees, she recommends putting appointees into acting roles until such time as the Senate confirms them. Skinner writes that State should also stop skirting the Constitution’s trea- ty-making requirements and stop enforcing “agreements” as treaties. It should encourage more trade with allies, particularly with Great Britain, and less with adversaries. And it should implement a “sovereign Mexico” policy, as our neighbor “has functionally lost its sovereignty to muscular criminal cartels that effectively run the country.” In Africa, Skinner writes, the U.S. “should focus on core security, economic, and human rights” rather than impose radical abortion and pro-LGBT initiatives. Divisive symbols such as the rainbow flag or the Black Lives Matter flag have no place next to the Stars and Stripes at our embassies. When it comes to China, Skinner writes that “a policy of ‘compete where we must, but cooperate where we can’…has demonstrably failed.” The People’s Repub- lic of China’s (PRC) “aggressive behavior,” she writes, “can only be curbed through external pressure.” Efforts to protect or excuse China must stop. She observes, “[M]any were quick to dismiss even the possibility that COVID escaped from a Chinese research laboratory.” Meanwhile, Skinner writes, “[g]lobal leaders includ- ing President Joe Biden…have tried to normalize or even laud Chinese behavior.” She adds, “In some cases, these voices, like global corporate giants BlackRock and Disney”—or the National Basketball Association (NBA)—“directly benefit from doing business with Beijing.” Former vice president of the U.S. Agency for Global Media Mora Namdar writes in Chapter 8 that we need to have people working for USAGM who actually believe in America, rather than allowing the agencies to function as anti-American, tax- payer-funded entities that parrot our adversaries’ propaganda and talking points. Former acting deputy secretary of homeland security Ken Cuccinelli says in Chap- ter 5 that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), a creation of the George W. Bush era, should be closed, as it has added needless additional bureaucracy and expense without corresponding benefit. He recommends that it be replaced with a new “stand-alone border and immigration agency at the Cabinet level” and that the remaining parts of DHS be distributed among other departments. Former chief of staff for the director of National Intelligence Dustin Carmack writes in Chapter 7 that the U.S. Intelligence Community is too inclined to look in the rearview mirror, engage in “groupthink,” and employ an “overly cautious” approach aimed at personal approval rather than at offering the most accurate, unvarnished intelligence for the benefit of the country. And in Chapter 9, former acting deputy administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development Max — 90 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Primorac asserts that the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) must be reformed, writing, “The Biden Administration has deformed the agency by treating it as a global platform to pursue overseas a divisive political and cultural agenda that promotes abortion, climate extremism, gender radicalism, and interventions against perceived systematic racism.” If the recommendations in the following chapters are adopted, what Skinner says about the State Department could be true for other parts of the federal gov- ernment’s national security and foreign policy apparatus: The next conservative President has the opportunity to restructure the making and execution of U.S. defense and foreign policy and reset the nation’s role in the world. The recom- mendations outlined in this section provide guidance on how the next President should use the federal government’s vast resources to do just that.

Introduction

Low 53.5%
Pages: 859-862

— 826 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise moderate content in good faith—“in a way that eliminates the expansive, non-tex- tual immunities that courts have read into the statute.” In addition to taking unilateral action, Carr says, the FCC should work with Congress on legislative changes to ensure that “Internet companies no longer have carte blanche to censor protected speech while maintaining their Section 230 protections.” Carr writes that during the Trump Administration, the FCC took an “appro- priately strong approach to the national security threats posed by the Chinese Communist Party.” The FCC put Huawei on its Covered List of entities—its list of those posing “an unacceptable risk” to U.S. national security. Carr writes that TikTok also poses a “serious and unacceptable” risk to U.S. national security, while providing “Beijing with an opportunity to run a foreign influence campaign by determining the news and information that the app feeds to millions of Americans,” and the next Administration should ban it. What’s more, Carr writes, “U.S. busi- nesses are aiding Beijing—often unwittingly”—in its effort to become, by 2030, “the global leader in artificial intelligence.” In part, they are doing so by providing “Bei- jing access to their high-powered cloud computing services.” Carr asserts that “it is time for an Administration to put in place a comprehensive plan that aims to stop U.S. entities from directly or indirectly contributing to China’s malign AI goals .” Former Federal Election Commissioner Hans von Spakovsky writes in Chap- ter 29 that while “the authority of the President over the actions of” the Federal Election Commission “is extremely limited,” the President “must ensure that the [Justice Department], just like the FEC, is directed to only prosecute clear viola- tions” of the Federal Election Campaign Act. “The department must not construe ambiguous provisions…in a way that infringes on protected First Amendment activity,” he writes. The FEC has six members, three from each party, and its determinations require a majority—so, they require the support of at least one member of each party. DOJ should not “prosecute an individual for supposedly violating the law when the FEC has previously determined that a similarly situated individual has not violated the law,” writes von Spakovsky. Moreover, he writes that the “President should vigorously oppose all efforts”—such as the language in the “For the People Act of 2021”—“to change the structure of the FEC” so that it would have an “odd number” of members. The current structure “ensures that there is bipartisan agreement before any action is taken and protects against the FEC being weaponized.” In Chapter 27, David R. Burton writes that the Securities and Exchange Com- mission (SEC) “should be reducing impediments to capital formation, not radically increasing them” by pushing a costly “climate change” agenda, as it is doing under the Biden Administration. Discussing the Federal Trade Commission, Adam Can- deub writes in Chapter 30, “Antitrust law can combat dominant firms’ baleful effects on democratic” notions—“such as free speech, the marketplace of ideas, shareholder control, and managerial accountability as well as collusive behavior — 827 — Section 5: Independent Regulatory Agencies with government.” Under the Biden FTC, he writes, firms try “to get out of anti- trust liability by offering climate, diversity, or other forms of ESG-type offerings.” Candeub says that state AGs “are far more responsive to their constituents” than the federal government generally is, and he recommends that the FTC establish a position in the chairman’s office that is “focused on state AG cooperation and inviting state AGs to Washington, DC, to discuss enforcement policy in key sectors under the FTC’s jurisdiction: Big Tech, hospital mergers, supermarket mergers, and so forth.”

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.