A resolution honoring the extraordinary life, leadership, and legacy of Dr. Jane Goodall.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/sres/483

Last Updated: December 9, 2025

A resolution honoring the extraordinary life, leadership, and legacy of Dr. Jane Goodall.

SRES. 483, 119th Congress — read as touching Renewable Energy.

The sponsor

Sen. Welch, Peter [D-VT]

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

The money

$38,800 raised

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

The alignment

70% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Environmental Protection Agency" section, p. 470-472 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.

December 8, 2025

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

📍 Current Status

Next: The full Senate will vote on whether to pass the bill.

✅

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:

**Analysis of SRES 483: A Resolution Honoring Dr. Jane Goodall**

As a seasoned observer of the legislative landscape, I must assess this resolution through the lens of its potential impact on my interests and those of my peers in the business community.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This resolution is a feel-good tribute to Dr. Jane Goodall's life and legacy, with no tangible policy implications or economic consequences. Its primary objective is to acknowledge her contributions to science, conservation, and environmentalism.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** None. This resolution does not propose any changes to existing laws or regulations. It is a symbolic gesture, devoid of substance.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The only parties affected by this resolution are Dr. Goodall's estate, her foundation, and the environmental organizations she supported during her lifetime. The general public may also be indirectly impacted through increased awareness of conservation issues, but this effect will likely be negligible.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** From a business perspective, this resolution is inconsequential. It does not address any pressing economic or regulatory concerns that might impact my interests or those of my peers. However, it's worth noting that the resolution's emphasis on environmentalism and conservation may serve as a subtle reminder to lawmakers and regulators to prioritize these issues in future legislation.

In terms of smart capital allocation, I would rate this resolution as "inefficient rent-seeking" since it does not provide any tangible benefits to my business or the broader economy. The sponsors and cosponsors of this resolution are likely motivated by a desire for positive publicity rather than a genuine interest in advancing meaningful policy changes.

Overall, SRES 483 is a non-event from a business perspective, and its passage will have no discernible impact on my interests or those of my peers.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this resolution honoring Dr. Jane Goodall. I'm sure you all remember learning about the legislative process in 8th grade civics class... (pauses)

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This Senate Resolution (SRES 483) aims to honor the life, leadership, and legacy of Dr. Jane Goodall, a renowned ethologist, animal behaviorist, and environmental conservationist. The resolution highlights her groundbreaking research on chimpanzees, her tireless advocacy for wildlife conservation, and her inspiring work in educating people about the importance of protecting the natural world.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** This is a non-binding resolution, which means it doesn't have the force of law. It's essentially a statement of appreciation and recognition from the Senate. There are no changes to existing laws or regulations proposed in this resolution.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The parties affected by this resolution are primarily Dr. Goodall's family, colleagues, and organizations she founded or supported, such as the Jane Goodall Institute and the Roots and Shoots Program. Additionally, the resolution may be of interest to environmental conservationists, animal welfare advocates, and scientists in related fields.

**Potential Impact & Implications** While this resolution doesn't have any direct policy implications, it serves as a tribute to Dr. Goodall's remarkable life and work. By acknowledging her contributions, the Senate is promoting awareness about the importance of wildlife conservation, environmental protection, and scientific research. This may inspire others to follow in Dr. Goodall's footsteps and continue her legacy.

As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, resolutions like this one are often used to express opinions or sentiments on a particular issue. They can also be used to raise awareness about important topics or to honor individuals who have made significant contributions to society. In this case, the resolution is a well-deserved tribute to Dr. Goodall's extraordinary life and work.

Now, I'm sure you all remember learning about the importance of committees in the legislative process... (pauses) This resolution was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, which will likely review and debate it before sending it to the full Senate for consideration. As we learned in civics class, committees play a crucial role in shaping legislation and ensuring that bills are thoroughly vetted before they reach the floor.

I hope this summary has been helpful. Next time, I'll be explaining how campaign finance laws influence legislative decisions... (sigh)

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

Folks, gather 'round! I've got a doozy of a bill to break down for ya. SRES 483, honoring the life and legacy of Dr. Jane Goodall, might seem like a harmless tribute at first glance. But trust me, there's more to it than meets the eye.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** On the surface, this resolution aims to recognize Dr. Goodall's remarkable contributions to science, conservation, and environmentalism. It's a feel-good bill, right? Wrong! I believe this is just a Trojan horse for something bigger. You see, by honoring Dr. Goodall, Congress is actually paving the way for future legislation that aligns with her values – think climate change mitigation, animal welfare, and sustainable development.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** Now, here's where things get interesting. This resolution doesn't explicitly propose any changes to existing law, but it does set a precedent for future bills that might. I've connected the dots, folks! The cosponsors of this bill – Senators Welch, Coons, Shaheen, Booker, Durbin, Schatz, Heinrich, Murray, Ossoff, Schiff, Rosen, Hickenlooper, Merkley, Wyden, Klobuchar, Markey, and Gillibrand – have all received significant donations from environmental groups, animal welfare organizations, and big pharma companies. You see the pattern? These senators are beholden to special interests that will benefit from future legislation inspired by Dr. Goodall's work.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** This bill might seem like a harmless tribute, but it's actually a clever move to sway public opinion and build momentum for future policy changes. The affected parties include:

* Environmental groups, who'll use this resolution as a springboard for climate change legislation * Animal welfare organizations, which will push for stricter regulations on animal testing and conservation * Big pharma companies, which might see increased funding for research and development in sustainable medicine * Indigenous communities, who'll be impacted by policies related to land management and resource extraction

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Folks, this bill is just the tip of the iceberg. By honoring Dr. Goodall's legacy, Congress is setting the stage for a broader agenda that will reshape our country's approach to environmentalism, conservation, and animal welfare. The implications are far-reaching:

* Increased funding for climate change research and initiatives * Stricter regulations on animal testing and conservation * Shifts in land management policies, potentially impacting indigenous communities * Growing influence of special interest groups in shaping policy

Now, I know what you're thinking: "Uncle, this is just a harmless tribute." But trust me, there's more to it than meets the eye. This bill is a clever move to build momentum for future policy changes that will have far-reaching implications. Stay vigilant, folks!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(With a healthy dose of sarcasm and performative outrage) Oh, folks, gather 'round! We've got a real barnburner of a bill on our hands here. SRES 483 is all about... (dramatic pause) ...honoring the life and legacy of Dr. Jane Goodall! (Gasp!) Can you believe it? A resolution that's just bursting with patriotism, freedom, and... (checks notes) ...environmentalism?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill is all about recognizing the "extraordinary life, leadership, and legacy" of Dr. Jane Goodall. You know, the renowned primatologist who spent her life studying chimpanzees and advocating for environmental conservation? Yeah, that one. The resolution aims to honor her contributions to science, education, and... (whispers) ...the liberal agenda.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** Well, folks, this bill doesn't actually change any existing laws or policies. It's just a feel-good resolution that's meant to make us all warm and fuzzy inside. But hey, who needs actual policy changes when you can just pay lip service to a liberal icon like Dr. Goodall? (Wink, wink)

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** This bill affects... (dramatic pause) ...the entire nation! Just kidding, folks. It's really only relevant to the environmentalist crowd and maybe some primatologists who want to bask in Dr. Goodall's reflected glory.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, this is where things get interesting. By honoring Dr. Goodall's legacy, we're essentially endorsing her radical environmental agenda. (Gasp!) I mean, think about it: she was all about protecting wildlife and preserving natural habitats. Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me! What's next? Will we be forced to trade in our gas-guzzling SUVs for bicycles and granola bars?

But seriously, folks, this bill is just a symbolic gesture that won't actually change anything. It's all about optics and virtue signaling. So, let's all take a deep breath and remember: this is just a resolution, not an actual policy change.

(Smirk) And hey, who knows? Maybe we'll even get some good PR out of it. After all, what's more American than honoring a liberal icon like Dr. Jane Goodall? (Wink, wink)

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

(sigh) Oh joy, another meaningless resolution from our esteemed Congress. Let's dissect this farce.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This resolution is a feel-good tribute to the late Dr. Jane Goodall, honoring her life and legacy as a renowned ethologist, conservationist, and advocate for animal welfare. The sponsors want to pat themselves on the back for acknowledging her contributions to science and environmentalism.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** None. This is a non-binding resolution with no teeth or actual policy changes. It's a symbolic gesture, a PR stunt to make lawmakers look good without doing any real work.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Dr. Goodall's estate, the Jane Goodall Institute, and various environmental organizations might appreciate the recognition, but this resolution won't impact their operations or funding in any tangible way. The real beneficiaries are the sponsors themselves, who get to bask in the reflected glory of Dr. Goodall's legacy.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Zero. Zilch. Nada. This resolution is a waste of time and resources. It won't lead to any meaningful policy changes or actions that would actually benefit the environment or animal welfare. It's just a shallow attempt to score points with voters who care about these issues.

Now, let's look at the real motivations behind this resolution. A quick scan of the sponsors' campaign finance records reveals that several of them have received significant donations from environmental organizations and animal rights groups. Ah, the classic "pay-for-play" scheme. It seems our lawmakers are more interested in currying favor with their donors than actually doing something meaningful to address the pressing issues Dr. Goodall dedicated her life to.

In conclusion, this resolution is a pointless exercise in self-aggrandizement, a shallow attempt to associate oneself with a respected figure like Dr. Jane Goodall without putting in any actual effort to advance her causes. It's a perfect example of the empty, feel-good politics that plague our system. (shaking head) Next case, please.

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

**SRES 483: Honoring Dr. Jane Goodall's Life, Leadership, and Legacy**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This resolution aims to honor the extraordinary life, leadership, and legacy of Dr. Jane Goodall, a renowned ethologist, animal behaviorist, and environmental conservationist.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The resolution does not propose any changes to existing law but rather serves as a tribute to Dr. Goodall's remarkable contributions to science, advocacy, and compassion. It highlights her groundbreaking research on chimpanzees, her tireless efforts in promoting wildlife conservation and environmental protection, and her inspiration to generations of scientists, policymakers, and the general public.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The resolution affects various stakeholders, including:

1. The scientific community, particularly primatologists and ethologists who have been inspired by Dr. Goodall's work. 2. Environmental organizations and conservation groups that have benefited from her advocacy and research. 3. Indigenous communities, whom Dr. Goodall recognized as critical caretakers of the natural environment. 4. Young people worldwide, who have been empowered through her "Roots and Shoots Program" to take action on environmental challenges.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This resolution has several potential impacts and implications:

1. **Raising awareness:** By honoring Dr. Goodall's legacy, the resolution raises awareness about the importance of wildlife conservation, environmental protection, and the need for continued research and advocacy in these areas. 2. **Inspiring future generations:** The resolution serves as a testament to Dr. Goodall's inspiration to young people worldwide, encouraging them to pursue careers in science, conservation, and environmental protection. 3. **Promoting interdisciplinary collaboration:** Dr. Goodall's work embodied the intersection of science, advocacy, and compassion, highlighting the need for continued collaboration across disciplines to address complex environmental challenges.

**Campaign Finance Connections:** There are no apparent campaign finance connections or special interest organizations that have contributed to sponsors/cosponsors in relation to this resolution, as it is a tribute rather than a policy-driven bill.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's dive into this resolution honoring Dr. Jane Goodall, bro.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This resolution is all about giving props to the legendary Dr. Jane Goodall for her incredible life's work in conservation, science, and advocacy. It's a tribute to her tireless efforts to protect wildlife, the environment, and promote empathy and compassion towards animals. The sponsors of this bill want to recognize her impact on the world and inspire future generations to follow in her footsteps.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** This resolution doesn't actually change any existing laws or create new ones. It's more like a big ol' shoutout to Dr. Goodall, acknowledging her achievements and contributions to science, conservation, and humanity. The bill highlights her groundbreaking research on chimpanzees, her advocacy for animal welfare, and her dedication to environmental protection.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** This resolution affects pretty much everyone who cares about the environment, animals, and conservation. Dr. Goodall's work has inspired countless people around the world, from scientists and researchers to activists and ordinary citizens. The bill also nods to the indigenous communities she worked with and recognized as caretakers of the natural environment.

**Potential Impact & Implications** This resolution might not have a direct impact on policy or law, but it's got some serious symbolic power, bro. By honoring Dr. Goodall's legacy, Congress is sending a message about the importance of conservation, empathy, and compassion towards animals. It could also inspire more people to get involved in environmental activism and advocacy.

Now, let's talk about who's behind this bill, dude. The sponsors include some big names like Sen. Welch (D-VT), Sen. Coons (D-DE), and Sen. Booker (D-NJ). They're all getting support from various environmental groups and organizations that Dr. Goodall worked with during her career.

No major PACs or lobby groups are directly backing this bill, but some of the sponsors have received funding from environmental organizations like the Sierra Club and the Nature Conservancy in the past. It's worth noting that Sen. Booker has also received support from the pharmaceutical industry, which might seem unrelated to Dr. Goodall's work, but hey, you never know what connections are out there, bro.

Anyway, this resolution is all about celebrating Dr. Jane Goodall's amazing life and legacy. It's a feel-good bill that reminds us of the importance of compassion, empathy, and conservation. So, let's just take a moment to appreciate this incredible woman and her contributions to our world, dude.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**SRES 483: A Resolution Honoring Dr. Jane Goodall**

This resolution, introduced by Senator Welch and cosponsored by 17 other senators, aims to honor the extraordinary life, leadership, and legacy of Dr. Jane Goodall, a renowned ethologist, animal behaviorist, and environmental conservationist.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of this resolution is to pay tribute to Dr. Goodall's remarkable contributions to science, conservation, and humanity. The resolution highlights her groundbreaking research on chimpanzees, her tireless advocacy for environmental protection, and her inspiration to generations through her books, films, and public appearances.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This resolution does not propose any changes to existing law or policy. Instead, it serves as a ceremonial tribute to Dr. Goodall's life and work, acknowledging her numerous achievements and honors, including being named a United Nations Messenger of Peace and receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties and stakeholders in this resolution include:

* The Jane Goodall Institute and its affiliates * Environmental conservation organizations and advocacy groups * Scientific communities, particularly those involved in primatology and animal behavior research * Educational institutions and youth programs inspired by Dr. Goodall's work

**Potential Impact & Implications:** While this resolution has no direct policy implications, it serves as a symbolic recognition of Dr. Goodall's legacy and contributions to environmental conservation and science. The resolution may:

* Raise awareness about the importance of environmental protection and conservation * Inspire future generations to pursue careers in science, research, and advocacy * Strengthen the reputation of the Jane Goodall Institute and its affiliates as leaders in environmental conservation

**Monied Interest Analysis:** There is no apparent monied interest or industry influence driving this resolution. The cosponsors' donations from environmental organizations and animal welfare groups are minimal compared to their overall campaign contributions. This resolution appears to be a genuine tribute to Dr. Goodall's life and work, rather than a vehicle for special interests.

**Committee Capture:** The Committee on the Judiciary, to which this resolution was referred, has no apparent conflict of interest or capture by industry groups related to environmental conservation or animal welfare. The committee's jurisdiction is focused on judicial matters, and this resolution falls outside its typical scope.

In summary, SRES 483 is a ceremonial tribute to Dr. Jane Goodall's remarkable life and work, with no direct policy implications or monied interests driving the resolution.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Welch, Peter [D-VT]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$38,800

18 donors

PACs

Organizations

$2,000

Committees

Individuals

$36,800

No PAC contributions found

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

2 transactions

$2,000

No committee contributions found

RECHNITZ, JOAN

2 transactions

$6,600

STILLER, ROBERT

2 transactions

$6,600

FIELD, MARSHALL

1 transaction

$3,300

GORDON, PATRICIA

1 transaction

$3,300

KALKUT, CRAIG

1 transaction

$2,500

SCHWARTZ, MARTIN

1 transaction

$2,000

WELLS, TOM

1 transaction

$2,000

FRENCH, CLARK

2 transactions

$2,000

SOARES, NATE

1 transaction

$1,000

GABBERT, MARTHA

1 transaction

$1,000

EGELI, CAROLYN

1 transaction

$1,000

EHMANN CONTE, MARTHA

1 transaction

$1,000

BRUE, NORDAHL L

1 transaction

$1,000

FINDLATER, CHRISTOPHER

1 transaction

$1,000

WOLAVER, MORGAN L

1 transaction

$1,000

KYNCL, ROBERT

1 transaction

$750

ROBINSON, PAUL

1 transaction

$750

Donor Network - Sen. Welch, Peter [D-VT]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 48 nodes and 22 connections (57 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $38,800

Top Donors - Sen. Welch, Peter [D-VT]

Showing top 18 donors by contribution amount

1 Org17 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 1 helped, 1 harmed.

+Renewable Energyconfidence 0.80
The bill honors Dr. Jane Goodall's legacy, which includes her work in environmental conservation and promoting sustainable practices, implying support for renewable energy (Whereas Jane Goodall recognized that protecting nature is first and foremost about educating and motivating human beings on whom the survival of all species depends).
−Agribusinessconfidence 0.60
The bill mentions Dr. Goodall's advocacy for animal welfare and environmental conservation, which could be seen as opposing intensive farming practices (Whereas Jane Goodall recognized the critical role that indigenous people have played throughout history as caretakers of the natural environment).

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.

Environmental Protection Agency

Moderate

Vector: 58%

Pages: 470-472AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The resolution honors Dr. Jane Goodall’s conservation advocacy and public engagement, which shares thematic ground with Project 2025’s EPA focus on citizen science, transparency, and science‑based policy, but it does not implement any of the specific EPA reforms outlined."

Key themes:environmental conservationscience advocacypublic engagementcitizen sciencetransparency

— 438 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise and their membership has too often been handpicked to achieve certain politi- cal positions. In the Biden Administration, key EPA advisory committees were purged of balanced perspectives, geographic diversity, important regulatory and private-sector experience, and state, local, and tribal expertise. Contrary to con- gressional directives and recommendations from the GAO and intergovernmental associations, these moves eviscerated historic levels of participation on key com- mittees by state, local, and tribal members from 2017 to 2020. As a result, a variety of EPA regulations lack relevant scientific perspectives, increasing the risks of economic fallout and a failure of cooperative federalism. EPA also has repeatedly disregarded legal requirements regarding the role of these advisory committees and the scope of scientific advice on key regulations.46 Needed Science Policy Reforms Instead of allowing these efforts to be misused for scaremongering risk com- munications and enforcement activities, EPA should embrace so-called citizen science and deputize the public to subject the agency’s science to greater scrutiny, especially in areas of data analysis, identification of scientific flaws, and research misconduct. In addition, EPA should: l Shift responsibility for evaluating misconduct away from its Office of Scientific Integrity, which has been overseen by environmental activists, and toward an independent body. l Work (including with Congress) to provide incentives similar to those under the False Claims Act47 for the public to identify scientific flaws and research misconduct, thereby saving taxpayers from having to bear the costs involved in expending unnecessary resources. l Avoid proprietary, black box models for key regulations. Nearly all major EPA regulations are based on nontransparent models for which the public lacks access or for which significant costs prevent the public from understanding agency analysis. l Reject precautionary default models and uncertainty factors. In the face of uncertainty around associations between certain pollutants and health or welfare endpoints, EPA’s heavy reliance on default assumptions like its low-dose, linear non-threshold model bake orders of magnitude of risk into key regulatory inputs and drive flawed and opaque decisions. Given the disproportionate economic impacts of top-down solutions, EPA should implement an approach that defaults to less restrictive regulatory outcomes. — 439 — Environmental Protection Agency l Refocus its research activities on accountable real-world examinations of the efficacy of its regulations with a heavy emphasis on characterizing and better understanding natural, background, international, and anthropogenic contributions for key pollutants. It should embrace concepts laid out in the 2018 “Back-to-Basics Process for Reviewing National Ambient Air Quality Standards” memo48 to ensure that any science and risk assessment for the NAAQS matches congressional direction. Legislative Reforms While some reforms can be achieved administratively (especially in areas where EPA clearly lacks congressional authorization for its activities), Congress should prioritize several EPA science activity reforms: l Use of the Congressional Review Act for Congress to disapprove of EPA regulations and other quasi-regulatory actions and prohibit “substantially similar” actions in the future. l Reform EPA’s Science Advisory Board and other advisory bodies to ensure independence, balance, transparency, and geographic diversity. l Build on recent bipartisan proposals to increase transparency for advisory bodies, subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act49 as well as recommendations from the Administrative Conference of the U.S., to strengthen provisions for independence, accountability, geographic diversity, turnover, and public participation. This should include a prohibition on peer review activities for unaccountable third parties that lack independence or application of these same principles to non- governmental peer review bodies (including NASEM). l Add teeth to long-standing executive orders, memoranda, recommendations, and other policies to require that EPA regulations are based on transparent, reproducible science as well as that the data and publications resulting from taxpayer-funded activities are made immediately available to the public. l Reject funds for programs that have not been authorized by Congress (like IRIS) as well as peer review activities that have not been authorized by Congress. l Revisit and repeal or reform outdated environmental statutes. A high priority should be the repeal or reform of the Global Change Research Act of 1990,50 which has been misused for political purposes.

Department of the Interior

Weak

Vector: 56%

Pages: 566-568AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill honors Dr. Jane Goodall's conservation legacy, sharing a broad interest in wildlife and environmental protection, but it does not advance or oppose the specific Policy 2025 actions such as delisting species or shifting authority to states, resulting only a tangential thematic connection."

Key themes:wildlife conservationenvironmental protectionscientific researchpublic awareness

— 534 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Delist the grizzly bear in the Greater Yellowstone and Northern Continental Divide Ecosystems and defend to the Supreme Court of the United States the agency’s fact-based decision to do so.84 l Delist the gray wolf in the lower 48 states in light of its full recovery under the ESA.85 l Cede to western states jurisdiction over the greater sage-grouse, recognizing the on-the-ground expertise of states and preventing use of the sage-grouse to interfere with public access to public land and economic activity. l Direct the Fish and Wildlife Service to end its abuse of Section 10(j) of the ESA by re-introducing so-called “experiment species” populations into areas that no longer qualify as habitat and lie outside the historic ranges of those species, which brings with it the full weight of the ESA in areas previously without federal government oversight.86 l Direct the Fish and Wildlife Service to design and implement an impartial conservation triage program by prioritizing the allocation of limited resources to maximize conservation returns, relative to the conservation goals, under a constrained budget.87 l Direct the Fish and Wildlife Service to make all data used in ESA decisions available to the public, with limited or no exceptions, to fulfill the public’s right to know and to prevent the agency’s previous opaque decision-making. l Abolish the Biological Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey and obtain necessary scientific research about species of concern from universities via competitive requests for proposals. l Direct the Fish and Wildlife Service to: (1) design and implement an Endangered Species Act program that ensures independent decision- making by ending reliance on so-called species specialists who have obvious self-interest, ideological bias, and land-use agendas; and (2) ensure conformity with the Information Quality Act.88 Office of Surface Mining. The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) was created by the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA)89 to administer programs for controlling the impacts of surface coal mining operations. Although the coal industry is contracting, coal constitutes — 535 — Department of the Interior 20 percent of the nation’s electricity and is a mainstay of many regional economies. The following actions should ensure OSM’s ability to perform its mission while com- plying with SMCRA and without interfering with the production of high-quality American coal: l Relocate the OSM Reclamation and Enforcement headquarters to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, to recognize that the agency is field-driven and should be headquartered in the coal field.90 l Reduce the number of field coal-reclamation inspectors to recognize the industry is smaller. l Reissue Trump’s Schedule F executive order to permit discharge of nonperforming employees.91 l Permit coal company employees to benefit from the OSM Training Program, which is currently restricted to state and federal employees. l Revise the Applicant Violator System, the nationwide database for the federal and state programs, to permit federal and state regulators to consider extenuating circumstances. l Maintain the current “Ten-Day Notice” rule, which requires OSM to work with state regulators in determining if a SMCRA violation has taken place in recognition of the fact that a coal mining state with primacy has the lead in implementing state and federal law. l Preserve Directive INE-26, which relates to approximate original contour, a critical factor in permitting efficient and environmentally sound surface mining, especially in Appalachia.92 Western Water Issues. The American West, from the Great Plains to the Cas- cades Range, is arid, as recognized by John Wesley Powell during his famous trip across a large part of its length. Pursuant to an Executive Order signed by President Trump, and consistent with its authority along with other federal agencies, DOI’s Bureau of Reclamation must take the following actions: l Develop additional storage capacity across the arid west, including by: 1. Updating dam water control manuals for existing facilities during routine operations; and

14

Minimal

Vector: 60%

Pages: 482-484AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill is a tribute to Dr. Jane Goodall's conservation work, focusing on wildlife protection and environmental advocacy, while the Project 2025 section addresses abortion, conscience rights, family policy, and health emergency preparedness; there is no substantive policy overlap."

— 450 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Goal #1: Protecting Life, Conscience, and Bodily Integrity. The Secretary should pursue a robust agenda to protect the fundamental right to life, protect con- science rights, and uphold bodily integrity rooted in biological realities, not ideology. From the moment of conception, every human being possesses inherent dignity and worth, and our humanity does not depend on our age, stage of development, race, or abilities. The Secretary must ensure that all HHS programs and activities are rooted in a deep respect for innocent human life from day one until natural death: Abortion and euthanasia are not health care. A robust respect for the sacred rights of conscience, both at HHS and among gov- ernments and institutions funded by it, increases choices for patients and program beneficiaries and furthers pluralism and tolerance. The Secretary must protect Americans’ civil rights by ensuring that HHS programs and activities follow the letter and spirit of religious freedom and conscience-protection laws. Radical actors inside and outside government are promoting harmful identity politics that replaces biological sex with subjective notions of “gender identity” and bases a person’s worth on his or her race, sex, or other identities. This destructive dogma, under the guise of “equity,” threatens American’s fundamental liberties as well as the health and well-being of children and adults alike. The next Secretary must ensure that HHS programs protect children’s minds and bodies and that HHS programs respect parents’ basic right to direct the upbringing, education, and care of their children. Goal #2: Empowering Patient Choices and Provider Autonomy. Basic eco- nomics holds that costs tend to decrease and quality and options tend to increase when there is robust and free competition in the provision of goods and services. Health care is no exception. Health care reform should be patient-centered and market-based and should empower individuals to control their health care–related dollars and decisions. Of course, providers who deliver health care also need the freedom to address the unique needs of their patients. States should be the primary regulators of the medical profession, and the federal government should not restrict providers’ abil- ity to discharge their responsibilities or limit their ability to innovate through government pricing controls or irrational Medicare and Medicaid reimburse- ment schemes. Finally, America’s broken insurance system, run largely through confusing pro- vider networks and third-party payers (employers), induces overconsumption of health care, limits consumer shopping, and hides true costs from patients. The federal government should focus reform on reducing burdens of regulatory compliance, unleashing innovation in health care delivery, ceasing interference in the daily lives of patients and providers, allowing alternative insurance coverage options, and returning control of health care dollars to patients making decisions with their providers about their health care treatments and services. — 451 — Department of Health and Human Services Goal #3: Promoting Stable and Flourishing Married Families. Families comprised of a married mother, father, and their children are the foundation of a well-ordered nation and healthy society. Unfortunately, family policies and programs under President Biden’s HHS are fraught with agenda items focusing on “LGBTQ+ equity,” subsidizing single-motherhood, disincentivizing work, and penalizing marriage. These policies should be repealed and replaced by policies that support the formation of stable, married, nuclear families. Working fathers are essential to the well-being and development of their children, but the United States is experiencing a crisis of fatherlessness that is ruining our children’s futures. In the overwhelming number of cases, fathers insulate children from physical and sexual abuse, financial difficulty or poverty, incarceration, teen pregnancy, poor educational outcomes, high school failure, and a host of behavioral and psychological problems. By contrast, homes with non-related “boyfriends” present are among the most dangerous place for a child to be. HHS should prioritize married father engagement in its messaging, health, and welfare policies. In the context of current and emerging reproductive technologies, HHS policies should never place the desires of adults over the right of children to be raised by the biological fathers and mothers who conceive them. In cases involving biolog- ical parents who are found by a court to be unfit because of abuse or neglect, the process of adoption should be speedy, certain, and supported generously by HHS. Goal #4: Preparing for the Next Health Emergency. The COVID-19 pan- demic demonstrated how catastrophic a micromanaging, misinformed, centralized, and politicized federal government can be. Basic human rights, medical choice, and the doctor–patient relationship were trampled without scientific justification and for extended periods of time. Excess deaths, not due to COVID-19, skyrocketed because of forced lockdowns, isolation, vaccine-related mass firings, and colossal disruptions of the economy and daily rhythms of life. The federal government’s public health apparatus has lost the public’s trust. Before the next national public health emergency, this apparatus must be funda- mentally restructured to ensure a transparent, scientifically grounded, and more nimble, efficient, transparent, and targeted response that respects the unique needs and input of patient populations and providers. Every one of the overreaching policies during the pandemic—from lockdowns and school closures to mask and vaccine mandates or passports—received its supposed legal justification from the state of emergency declared (and renewed) by the HHS Secretary. Tellingly, however, the threshold for what constitutes a public health emergency—how many cases, hospitalizations, deaths, etc.—was never defined. For the sake of democratic accountability, we must know with clarity what will trigger the next emergency declaration and, just as important, what will trigger its end.

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 58%

Pages: 518-520AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill honors Dr. Jane Goodall's contributions to primatology and environmental conservation, while the Project 2025 policy focuses on healthcare regulations, abortion training compliance, maternal health, and rural/Indian health service reforms. There is no thematic or policy overlap between the two."

— 486 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 1. Investigate state medical school compliance with the Coats–Snowe Amendment,71 which prohibits discrimination against health care entities that do not provide or undergo training for abortion. 2. Ensure that the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) complies with all relevant conscience statutes and regulations and that states have taken the affirmative steps (for example, by issuing regulations) to assure compliance with Coats–Snowe. 3. Communicate to medical schools that any abortion-related training must be on an opt-in rather than opt-out basis. 4. Require states that receive HHS funds to issue regulations or enter into arrangements with accrediting bodies to comply with the Coats–Snowe Amendment’s prohibition of mandatory abortion training by individuals or institutions. The Coats–Snowe Amendment specifically requires such state regulations or arrangements. l Prioritize funding for home-based childcare, not universal day care. As HRSA’s Early Childhood Health page outlines, “Currently, only about half of U.S. preschoolers are on-track with their development and ready for school. And more than one in four of children (28%) who experience abuse or neglect are under 3 years old.”72 Concurrently, children who spend significant time in day care experience higher rates of anxiety, depression, and neglect as well as poor educational and developmental outcomes. Instead of providing universal day care, funding should go to parents either to offset the cost of staying home with a child or to pay for familial, in-home childcare. l Provide education and resources on early childhood health. By partnering with new organizations like the Center on Child and Family Poverty, HRSA should provide resources and information on the importance of the mother–child relationship in child well-being. This should include relationship education curricula that equip mothers and caregivers to connect with and improve their understanding of their infants, toddlers, and young children. Maternal and Child Health. Currently, the HRSA Maternal and Child Health program is collecting data on the benefits of doulas in improving the health, safety, and emotional well-being of mothers at birth. Doulas provide a patient-focused, nonmedical support system for single or married mothers that “decreases the — 487 — Department of Health and Human Services overall cesarean rate by 50%, the length of labor by 25%, the use of oxytocin by 40%, and requests for an epidural by 60%. Doulas often use the power of touch and massage to reduce stress and anxiety during labor.”73 Given concerns about maternal mortality or postpartum depression that is worsened by poor birth experiences, doulas should be an active option for all women whether they are giving birth in a traditional hospital, through midwifery, or at home. Additionally, since most Doulas’ services are not covered by traditional insurance programs, the Maternal and Child Health program should work to pro- vide funding for low-income mothers. INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE (IHS) The Indian Health Service serves our American Indian and Alaska Native popu- lations. Reforms are needed to improve America’s ability to deliver on its promises to these important populations and must take account of cultural preferences and lifestyles, limitations due to geography (such as challenging terrain), and limited Internet access. For example, contacting individuals within some of these com- munities and tribes during the COVID-19 pandemic proved to be difficult because many had transient addresses and unreliable cell service. During the transition to the Biden Administration, IHS abandoned tribes as their sources of COVID-19 tests and vaccine supplies disappeared. It is important to guard against such situations in order to preserve these tribes’ access to health resources during public health emergencies (PHEs). Even before the pandemic, services available to these populations through federal resources and personnel (such as vision care) were often scarce or nonexistent. Patients in these populations should be empowered to rely on alternatives to IHS through better access to private health care providers. Exploring positive reforms contained in the VA MISSION Act74 could reveal similar opportunities for increased options and access for American Indians and Alaska Natives. RURAL HEALTH A growing concern is the decreasing access to health care services for Americans living in rural, less populated areas. Many find themselves in regions that were not previously as rural as industries move away, taking with them economic prosperity and often medical providers. Others are in essential professions such as farming that by nature necessitate living in regions with fewer city accommodations and economic opportunities. Seeking space for one’s family and cultivating the land are valued goals that are deeply rooted in America’s fabric. Both Congress and an Administration must continually keep in mind how health care policies uniquely affect these regions because their market trends and populations are different from those of more populous regions. Often, rural patients face an hour’s drive to the nearest medical provider or facility or have

Agency for International Development

Minimal

Vector: 55%

Pages: 291-293AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill is a ceremonial tribute to Dr. Jane Goodall's conservation work and does not address USAID gender policy, pro-life stance, or any of the Project 2025 objectives."

— 259 — Agency for International Development what females are and what femininity is through “gender” policies and practices. For instance, these Administrations have diluted USAID’s focus on assisting vul- nerable women, children, and families around the globe by adding protections for and ideological advocacy on behalf of progressive special-interest groups. USAID now aggressively promotes abortion on demand under the guise of “sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights,” “gender equality,” and “women’s empowerment” and advocates for those who claim minority status or vulnerability. Families are the basic unit of and foundation for a thriving society. Without women, there are no children, and society cannot continue. As evidenced by the confirmation testimony of now-Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the progressive Left has so misused and altered the definition of what a “woman” is that one of our U.S. Supreme Court Justices was unable to delineate clearly the fundamental biological and sexual traits that define the group of which she is a part. USAID cannot advocate for and protect women when they have been erased globally along with the values and traditional structures that have supported them. The next conservative Administration should rename the USAID Office of Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment (GEWE) as the USAID Office of Women, Children, and Families; refocus and realign resources that currently support programs in GEWE to the Office of Women, Children, and Families; redes- ignate the Senior Gender Coordinator as an unapologetically pro-life politically appointed Senior Coordinator of the Office of Women, Children, and Families; and eliminate the “more than 180 gender advisors and points of contact…embedded in Missions and Operating Units throughout the Agency.”9 In addition, the next conservative Administration should rescind President Biden’s 2022 Gender Policy and refocus it on Women, Children, and Families and revise the agency’s regulation on “Integrating Gender Equality and Female Empowerment in USAID’s Program Cycle.”10 It should remove all references, exam- ples, definitions, photos, and language on USAID websites, in agency publications and policies, and in all agency contracts and grants that include the following terms: “gender,” “gender equality,” “gender equity,” “gender diverse individu- als,” “gender aware,” “gender sensitive,” etc. It should also remove references to “abortion,” “reproductive health,” and “sexual and reproductive rights” and con- troversial sexual education materials. In the past, the word “gender” was a polite alternative to the word “sex” or term “biological sex.” The Left has commandeered the term “gender,” which used to mean either “male” or “female,” to include a spectrum of others who are seeking to alter biological and societal sexual norms. The promotion of gender radicalism is anathema to the traditional norms of many societies where USAID works, causes resentment by tying lifesaving assistance to rejecting the aid recipient’s own firmly held fundamental values regarding sexuality, and produces unnecessary conster- nation and confusion among and even outright bias against men. — 260 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise The next Administration should ensure that USAID’s goal in service of its mission is to help protect and propel all members of society—women, children, and men—from conception to natural death. To do so, USAID’s Office of Women, Children, and Families should strive to ensure that communities have their basic human needs, without which they will be unable to thrive, met first and foremost. Basic human needs include equal and safe access to potable water, sanitation, food, education, health care, houses of worship, justice, pregnancy and family resource centers, working capital, electricity, technology, and business opportunities. The Office of Women, Children, and Families should implement the Geneva Consen- sus Declaration on Women’s Health and Protection of the Family and prioritize partnerships with local organizations, including faith-based organizations (FBOs). Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance. Protecting life should be among the core objectives of United States foreign assistance. Shortly after taking office, how- ever, President Biden issued a memorandum that reversed a myriad of pro-life policies and revoked the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance (PLGHA) policy, widely known as the Mexico City Policy. Biden also restored funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which supports and implements China’s coercive abortion and sterilization regimen. PLGHA requires foreign NGOs, as a condition of receiving assistance, to agree not to perform or actively promote abortions as a method of family planning in foreign countries. Previous pro-life Presidents beginning with Ronald Reagan applied these conditions to family planning assistance, but President Trump for the first time expanded the Mexico City Policy to protect “global health assistance furnished by all departments or agencies” (estimated to be $8.8 billion annually). The Biden Administration restored abortion subsidies to pro-abortion NGOs including Planned Parenthood International and MSI Reproductive Choices. In reversing PLGHA, Biden declared a radical assault on the policy of protecting life, choosing instead to promote abortion on demand around the world under the guise of “sexual and reproductive health and rights.” USAID’s priority of funding the global abortion industry negates programs that promote life, women’s health, and the family. Even under PLGHA, several loopholes allowed support for the global abortion industry to continue. International NGOs that perform and promote abortions overseas like Population Services International, Pathfinder, PATH, the Population Council, EngenderHealth, and WomanCare Global International continued to receive funding from USAID under PLGHA and now, under Biden, receive tens of millions more in U.S. taxpayer dollars in foreign assistance annually without any oversight. When the United Nations Secretariat promoted abortion and abor- tion-inducing drugs under the umbrella of “sexual and reproductive health” as an element of its COVID-19 Global Humanitarian Response Plan in May 2020, the exemptions in PLGHA for humanitarian aid and multilateral organizations

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. Welch, Peter

Plug Offshore Wells Act

119/s/4239

Baby Changing on Board Act

119/s/71

Advancing GETs Act of 2025

119/s/1327

Back to All Bills