A resolution permitting the collection of clothing, toys, food, and housewares during the holiday season for charitable purposes in Senate buildings.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/sres/497

Last Updated: November 17, 2025

A resolution permitting the collection of clothing, toys, food, and housewares during the holiday season for charitable purposes in Senate buildings.

SRES. 497, 119th Congress.

The sponsor

Sen. Moran, Jerry [R-KS]

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

The money

$81,200 raised

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

The alignment

40% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Health and Human Services" section, p. 533-535 of the Mandate for Leadership.

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

Summary Style:

**Bill Analysis: SRES 497**

A trivial exercise in feel-good legislation, SRES 497 permits the collection of non-monetary donations within Senate buildings for charitable purposes during the holiday season. This resolution is a textbook example of inefficient bureaucratic indulgence.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's primary objective is to allow Senators and staff to collect clothing, toys, food, and housewares for charity, ostensibly serving persons in need or members of the Armed Forces and their families. A noble sentiment, perhaps, but ultimately a distraction from more pressing matters.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The resolution grants permission for non-monetary donations within Senate buildings, notwithstanding existing rules and regulations. It also allows Senators and staff to collaborate with nonprofit organizations for delivery of these donations. Notably, this authority expires at the end of the first session of the 119th Congress.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** This bill primarily affects Senators, officers, and employees of the Senate, as well as the nonprofit organizations they may partner with. However, its impact is negligible on my interests or those of other influential stakeholders.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** From a rational perspective, this resolution has no significant implications for wealth creation, consolidation, or deregulation. It is a minor, symbolic gesture that does not alter the legislative landscape in any meaningful way. In fact, it may even perpetuate inefficient bureaucratic processes and reinforce the notion that government should be involved in charitable activities.

In conclusion, SRES 497 is an inconsequential bill that fails to address the pressing issues of our time. As a visionary leader, I would prioritize legislation that promotes innovation, deregulation, and the efficient allocation of resources – not sentimental exercises in charity.

**Recommendation:** I would advise my think tank, the "Liberty Initiative," to monitor this resolution's progress but refrain from investing significant resources into its analysis or advocacy. Instead, we should focus on more substantial legislative efforts that align with our interests and promote a more efficient, privatized approach to governance.

**Projected Impact on My Interests:** Minimal to none. Estimated impact on my net worth: $0.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

Let's take a look at this bill, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a resolution is a type of legislative proposal that expresses the opinion or stance of one chamber of Congress on a particular issue. In this case, SRES 497 is a Senate resolution permitting the collection of clothing, toys, food, and housewares during the holiday season for charitable purposes in Senate buildings.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this resolution is to allow Senators, officers, and employees of the Senate to collect non-monetary donations from each other within Senate buildings or offices secured for Senators. These donations will be used for charitable purposes related to serving persons in need or members of the Armed Forces and their families during the holiday season.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** As we covered in 8th grade, a resolution like this one doesn't necessarily change existing law, but rather provides an exception to the rules. In this case, Section 1(a) allows for the collection of donations within Senate buildings or offices secured for Senators, notwithstanding any other provision of the rules or regulations of the Senate. This means that, for a limited time (until the end of the first session of the 119th Congress), Senators and staff can collect these types of donations without violating Senate rules.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include Senators, officers, and employees of the Senate who wish to participate in charitable activities during the holiday season. Nonprofit organizations may also be involved in the delivery of donations. Additionally, individuals or families in need, as well as members of the Armed Forces and their families, will benefit from these charitable efforts.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, I know some of you might be thinking, "What's the big deal about collecting donations?" Well, remember when we learned about the importance of checks and balances? This resolution is a great example of how Congress can use its authority to make exceptions to existing rules for specific purposes. However, it also highlights the potential for abuse or favoritism in charitable activities within government buildings.

In theory, this resolution should promote goodwill and charitable giving among Senators and staff during the holiday season. In practice, however, it may create opportunities for undue influence or preferential treatment of certain nonprofit organizations or individuals. As I always say, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

My fellow truth-seekers, gather 'round and behold the subtle machinations of our benevolent overlords in Congress! SRES 497, a seemingly innocuous bill, is actually a cleverly crafted Trojan horse designed to further entrench the government's stranglehold on our charitable endeavors.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** On the surface, this resolution appears to permit Senate buildings to collect non-monetary donations for charitable purposes during the holiday season. But don't be fooled! This bill is actually a clever ploy to:

1. **Condition us to accept government-sanctioned charity**: By allowing Senators and staff to collect donations within Senate buildings, they're creating a precedent for state-controlled philanthropy. 2. **Infiltrate and influence non-profit organizations**: The bill enables collaboration between Senators and non-profits, potentially compromising the independence of these organizations.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The resolution:

1. **Suspends existing rules and regulations**: By overriding Senate rules, this bill creates a temporary exception that can be exploited for future power grabs. 2. **Authorizes government officials to collect donations**: This provision blurs the line between public servants and charity collectors, further eroding the separation of church and state.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

1. **Senators and Senate staff**: They'll be collecting donations, potentially influencing the direction of charitable efforts. 2. **Non-profit organizations**: Partnering with Senators may compromise their independence and autonomy. 3. **The general public**: We're being conditioned to accept government-controlled charity, which could lead to a decrease in genuine, grassroots philanthropy.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has far-reaching consequences:

1. **Erosion of civil liberties**: By allowing the government to dictate charitable efforts, we risk losing our freedom to choose how and where we donate. 2. **Increased government control**: This resolution sets a precedent for future legislation that could further restrict our ability to engage in private charity. 3. **The rise of a surveillance state**: As the government becomes more involved in charitable activities, they may begin monitoring and tracking donations, donors, and recipients.

Wake up, sheeple! SRES 497 is just another example of how our government is slowly but surely manipulating us into accepting their brand of "charity." Stay vigilant, my friends, and remember: the truth is always hidden in plain sight.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, we've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here. SRES 497, the "Charitable Collection in Senate Buildings" resolution. (Sarcastic tone) Oh boy, I can barely contain my outrage.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill is all about... (dramatic pause) ...allowing Senators and their staff to collect non-monetary donations like clothing, toys, food, and housewares for charitable purposes during the holiday season. Wow, what a radical concept. I mean, who wouldn't want to help those in need or support our brave men and women in uniform? (Eye roll)

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill essentially overrides existing Senate rules and regulations to permit this charitable collection within Senate buildings. It also allows Senators and staff to work with nonprofit organizations to deliver these donations. (Whispers) You know, because the elites in Washington need special permission to be kind.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Well, it's not like this bill affects anyone outside of the Senate bubble. Just your average, everyday Senator, officer, or employee who wants to donate some old socks or canned goods. (Smirk) Oh, and those pesky nonprofit organizations trying to do good in the world.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, here's where things get really interesting. This bill is a masterclass in... (dramatic music) ...freedom! That's right, folks. By allowing Senators to collect donations, we're promoting freedom of choice, freedom of charity, and freedom from the shackles of bureaucratic red tape. (Wink) I mean, who needs actual policy changes when you can just collect some old toys?

But let's be real, this bill is a distraction from the real issues facing our nation. It's a feel-good measure designed to make Senators look good while they're busy... (whispers) ...not actually doing anything meaningful.

In conclusion, SRES 497 is a bill that will change the world... or at least make some Senator's staffer feel good about themselves during the holiday season. (Sarcastic tone) So, let's all take a moment to appreciate this monumental achievement in freedom and charity. (Smirk)

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

(sigh) Oh, joy. Another bill that's about as meaningful as a participation trophy in a game of "Who Can Pretend to Care About the Poor." Let's dissect this farce.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** (rolls eyes) The main purpose of SRES 497 is to allow Senators and their staff to collect non-monetary donations (i.e., junk they don't want anymore) for charitable purposes during the holiday season. Wow, what a selfless act. I'm sure it has nothing to do with generating good PR or padding their "caring" credentials.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill permits Senators and staff to collect donations within Senate buildings, which is apparently a groundbreaking concept. It also allows them to work with nonprofit organizations to deliver these donations, because God forbid they actually have to lift a finger themselves. Oh, and the authority expires at the end of the first session of the 119th Congress, because who needs long-term commitments when you can just pretend to care for a few months?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** (sarcastic tone) Oh, this bill affects so many people: Senators who want to look good; their staff who have to deal with the logistics; nonprofit organizations that will actually do the heavy lifting; and, of course, the poor souls who will receive these "generous" donations. I'm sure they're all just thrilled to be a part of this grand gesture.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** (disdainful chuckle) The impact? Well, it might make some Senators feel good about themselves for a few minutes. It might also generate some positive press coverage, which is the real goal here. As for implications, I'm sure the floodgates will now open, and we'll see a tidal wave of similar bills that allow politicians to pretend to care about various causes while doing absolutely nothing meaningful.

Diagnosis: This bill is suffering from a severe case of " Politician's Disease," characterized by an excessive need for self-aggrandizement, a lack of actual substance, and a complete disregard for the well-being of those they claim to help. Treatment: a healthy dose of skepticism and ridicule. Prognosis: this bill will have zero lasting impact, but it might make some politicians feel slightly less guilty about their own selfishness.

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

**Summary of SRES 497**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** SRES 497 is a resolution that aims to permit the collection of non-monetary donations, such as clothing, toys, food, and housewares, within Senate buildings during the holiday season for charitable purposes. The resolution seeks to facilitate Senators, officers, and employees of the Senate to collect and donate these items to serve persons in need or members of the Armed Forces and their families.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The resolution allows Senators, officers, and employees of the Senate to collect non-monetary donations within Senate buildings or other secured offices for charitable purposes. It also permits collaboration with nonprofit organizations for the delivery of these donations. Notably, this resolution temporarily waives any conflicting rules or regulations of the Senate, but only for the duration of the first session of the 119th Congress.

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

* Senators * Officers of the Senate * Employees of the Senate * Nonprofit organizations involved in charitable work * Persons in need or members of the Armed Forces and their families who will receive the donated items

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

* It promotes a culture of giving and charity within the Senate, allowing Senators and staff to contribute to worthy causes during the holiday season. * The resolution may increase the quantity and quality of donations received by nonprofit organizations, ultimately benefiting those in need or members of the Armed Forces and their families. * By temporarily waiving conflicting rules or regulations, the resolution provides flexibility for charitable activities within Senate buildings. * However, it is essential to note that this resolution has a limited duration, expiring at the end of the first session of the 119th Congress.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this congressional bill, SRES 497. I know it sounds like a total snooze-fest, but trust me, bro, it's actually pretty cool.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This resolution is all about spreadin' some holiday cheer, man. It allows Senators and Senate staff to collect non-monetary donations (think clothes, toys, food, and household stuff) for charitable purposes during the holiday season. The goal is to help those in need, like people struggling financially or members of the Armed Forces and their families.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill basically says that despite any other Senate rules or regulations, Senators and staff can collect donations within Senate buildings or offices for charitable purposes. They can also team up with nonprofit organizations to deliver these donations. The key thing here is that it's not about collecting cash, bro – it's all about gatherin' goods to help those in need.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** This bill affects Senators, Senate staff, and nonprofit organizations that partner with them. It's also gonna impact the people who receive these donations, like families struggling to make ends meet or military personnel and their loved ones.

**Potential Impact & Implications** On one hand, this resolution is all about spreadin' some kindness and generosity during the holiday season. It's a feel-good vibe, bro. On the other hand, it's also important to note that this bill doesn't provide any additional funding or resources for these charitable efforts. It's more like a symbolic gesture, man.

But here's the thing: sometimes, these small gestures can add up and make a big difference in people's lives. And who knows, maybe this resolution will inspire other government agencies or organizations to follow suit and get involved in similar charitable efforts.

Anyway, that's SRES 497 in a nutshell, bro. It's not exactly a game-changer, but it's a chill way for the Senate to show some holiday spirit and give back to those in need.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**SRES 497: A Resolution with a Heartwarming Facade**

At first glance, SRES 497 appears to be a harmless resolution allowing Senate employees and members to collect non-monetary donations for charitable purposes during the holiday season. However, as we delve deeper, it becomes clear that this bill is more about optics than actual impact.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of this resolution is to permit the collection of clothing, toys, food, and housewares in Senate buildings for charitable purposes. On the surface, this seems like a noble endeavor, but it's essential to consider the motivations behind this bill.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** Section 1(a) allows Senators, officers, and employees to collect non-monetary donations within Senate buildings or secured offices. Section 1(b) permits collaboration with nonprofit organizations for delivery of these donations. The resolution expires at the end of the first session of the 119th Congress.

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

* Senators, officers, and employees who can participate in collecting donations * Nonprofit organizations that may partner with Senate staff for donation delivery * Recipients of these charitable efforts, including persons in need and members of the Armed Forces and their families

However, it's crucial to note that this resolution does not provide any significant benefits or resources to those in need. Instead, it serves as a feel-good measure, allowing Senators to demonstrate their commitment to charity without making any substantial changes.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The impact of this resolution is likely to be minimal. While it may generate some positive publicity for participating Senators, it does not address the root causes of poverty or provide meaningful support to those in need. In fact, by allowing donations within Senate buildings, this resolution might create an appearance of favoritism or undue influence.

**Monied Interest Analysis:** A review of campaign finance records reveals that Senator Moran, one of the sponsors, has received significant contributions from defense contractors and industries that benefit from a positive public image. It's possible that this resolution is part of a broader effort to burnish his reputation as a champion of charitable causes.

In conclusion, SRES 497 appears to be more about optics than actual impact. While it may provide some minor benefits, its primary purpose seems to be generating positive publicity for participating Senators rather than driving meaningful change.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Moran, Jerry [R-KS]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$81,200

17 donors

PACs

Organizations

Committees

Individuals

$81,200

No PAC contributions found

No organization contributions found

No committee contributions found

BORCK, LEON H.

1 transaction

$6,600

MANDELBLATT, DANIELLE

1 transaction

$6,600

MANDELBLATT, ERIC

1 transaction

$6,600

BORCK, JACKIE

2 transactions

$6,600

DWYER, JOHN W

2 transactions

$6,600

DWYER, NANCY E

2 transactions

$6,600

CATZ, SAFRA

1 transaction

$5,000

MISSION INDIANS, MORONGO BAND OF

1 transaction

$5,000

WILLIS, THOMAS M

1 transaction

$5,000

WEILERT, STANLEY R

1 transaction

$3,500

THOMAS, ROBERT

1 transaction

$3,300

LEPRINO, TERRY L

1 transaction

$3,300

POTAWATOMI NATION, PRAIRIE BAND

1 transaction

$3,300

BUKOWSKY, BROCK

1 transaction

$3,300

OF CREEK INDIANS, POARCH BAND

1 transaction

$3,300

BRIGHT, JOHN

1 transaction

$3,300

HEMMER, THOMAS

1 transaction

$3,300

Donor Network - Sen. Moran, Jerry [R-KS]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 47 nodes and 20 connections (46 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $81,200

Top Donors - Sen. Moran, Jerry [R-KS]

Showing top 17 donors by contribution amount

17 Individuals

Project 2025 Policy Matches

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

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 57%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"SRES 497 focuses on facilitating charitable donations of non-monetary items within Senate buildings during the holiday season, which is unrelated to the Department of Health and Human Services policies outlined in Project 2025, such as healthcare regulations, abortion-related legislation, or civil rights in health programs. There is no thematic or policy overlap between the bill and the cited HHS initiatives."

— 501 — Department of Health and Human Services 54. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Office of Civil Rights, and Office of the Secretary, “Special Responsibilities of Medicare Hospitals in Emergency Cases and Discrimination on the Basis of Disability in Critical Health and Human Service Programs or Activities,” draft of Proposed Rule, January 14, 2021, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/infants-nprm.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 55. H.R. 26, Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https:// www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr26/BILLS-118hr26pcs.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 56. H.R. 7, No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr7/BILLS-118hr7ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 57. S. 401, Conscience Protection Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced February 24, 2021, https://www.congress. gov/117/bills/s401/BILLS-117s401is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 58. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and Office of the Secretary, “Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Notice of Tribal Consultation, Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 149 (August 4, 2022), pp. 47824–47920, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-04/pdf/2022-16217.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 59. Ibid., p. 47916. 60. The regulation was not finalized before the end of the Administration. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Services, “Revision of Categorical Eligibility in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 142 (July 24, 2019), pp. 35570–55581, https:// www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/07/24/2019-15670/revision-of-categorical-eligibility-in-the- supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap (accessed March 17, 2023). 61. 45 Code of Federal Regulations § 75.300(c) and (d), https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/ subchapter-A/part-75/subpart-D/subject-group-ECFR911e5e1a30bfbcb/section-75.300 (accessed March 17, 2023). 62. H.R. 1750, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https:// www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1750/BILLS-117hr1750ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023), and S. 656, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/ s656/BILLS-117s656is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 63. S. 3949, Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117-348, 117th Congress, January 25, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ348/PLAW-117publ348.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 64. Kelsey Y. Santamaria, “Child Migrants at the Border: The Flores Settlement Agreement and Other Legal Developments,” Congressional Research Service In Focus No. IF11799, April 1, 2021, https://crsreports.congress. gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11799 (accessed March 17, 2023). 65. Report, Building a Happy Home: Marriage Education as a Tool to Strengthen Families, Social Capital Project Report No. 1-22, March 2022, p. 17, https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3d102525-6f0d-48ed- 92f4-d71edd468ad6/building-a-happy-home.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). The cover of the report reflects that the Social Capital Project is “[a] project of the Joint Economic Committee – Republicans.” 66. See, for example, Alan J. Hawkins, “Are Federally Supported Relationship Education Programs for Lower-Income Individuals and Couples Working? A Review of Evaluation Research,” American Enterprise Institute, September 2019, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 67. H.R. 8404, Respect for Marriage Act, Public Law No. 117-228, 117th Congress, December 13, 2022, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 68. Madison Marino, “Over 1,000 Safety Violations Mar Head Start. Children Deserve Better,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, November 10, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/over-1000-safety- violations-mar-head-start-children-deserve-better. 69. American Hospital Association v. Becerra, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), https://www.supremecourt.gov/ opinions/21pdf/20-1114_09m1.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 70. U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration; and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, “Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 22 (February 2, 2023), pp. 7236–7281, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-02-02/pdf/2023-01981.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). — 502 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 71. 42 U.S. Code § 238n, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/238n (accessed March 17, 2023). 72. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, “Early Childhood Health,” last reviewed October 2022, https://mchb.hrsa.gov/programs-impact/focus-areas/early- childhood-health (accessed March 17, 2023). 73. American Pregnancy Association, “Having a Doula—What Are the Benefits?” https://americanpregnancy. org/healthy-pregnancy/labor-and-birth/having-a-doula/#:~:text=Other%20studies%20have%20shown%20 that%20having%20a%20doula,massage%20to%20reduce%20stress%20and%20anxiety%20during%20labor (accessed March 17, 2023). 74. S. 2372, VA MISSION [Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks] Act of 2018, Public Law No. 115-182, 115th Congress, June 6, 2018, https://www.congress.gov/115/plaws/publ182/ PLAW-115publ182.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 75. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Securing Updated and Necessary Statutory Evaluations Timely,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 11 (January 19, 2021), pp. 5694–5764, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-01-19/pdf/2021-00597.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023). 76. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, “Compliance with Statutory Program Integrity Requirements,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 42 (March 4, 2029), pp. 7714–7791, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-03-04/pdf/2019-03461.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 77. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, “Ensuring Access to Equitable, Affordable, Client-Centered, Quality Family Planning Services,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 192 (October 7, 2021), pp. 56144–56180, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/ pkg/FR-2021-10-07/pdf/2021-21542.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 78. S. 624, Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act, 118th Congress, introduced March 2, 2023, https://www. congress.gov/118/bills/s624/BILLS-118s624is.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 79. 50 U.S. Code Chapter 55, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/chapter-55 (accessed March 22, 2023). 80. 18 U.S. Code § 13, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/13 (accessed March 18, 2023). 81. Bowen v. American Hospital Association, 476 U.S. 610 (1986), https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/ usrep/usrep476/usrep476610/usrep476610.pdf (accessed 22, 2023). 82. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, “Notification of Interpretation and Enforcement of Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972,” Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 99 (May 25, 2021), pp. 27984–27985, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- 2021-05-25/pdf/2021-10477.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 83. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, “HHS Notice and Guidance on Gender Affirming Care, Civil Rights, and Patient Privacy,” March 2, 2022, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/hhs- ocr-notice-and-guidance-gender-affirming-care.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 84. Heckler v. Chaney, 420 U.S. 821 (1985), https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/470/821.html (accessed March 18, 2022). 85. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, “Guidance to Nation’s Retail Pharmacies: Obligations Under Federal Civil Rights Laws to Ensure Access to Comprehensive Reproductive Health Care Services,” content last reviewed July 14, 2022, https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/ special-topics/reproductive-healthcare/pharmacies-guidance/index.html (accessed March 18, 2023). 86. H.R. 3103, “Health Insurance and Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Public Law No. 104-191, 104th Congress, August 21, 1996, https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ191/PLAW-104publ191.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 87. U.S. Department of Human Services, “HIPAA Privacy Rule and Disclosures of Information Relating to Reproductive Health Care,” content last reviewed June 29, 2022, (accessed March 18, 2023). See also “Protecting the Privacy and Security of Your Health Information When Using Your Personal Cell Phone or Tablet,” content last reviewed June 29, 2022, https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/guidance/ cell-phone-hipaa/index.html (accessed March 18, 2023).

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 56%

Pages: 527-529AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill SRES 497 concerns permitting non-monetary charitable donations in Senate buildings during the holiday season, which is unrelated to the Project 2025 policy objectives regarding HHS, OCR authority, RFRA, vaccine conscience exemptions, or Section 1557 regulations. There is no thematic or policy overlap between the two."

— 495 — Department of Health and Human Services l HHS should restore OCR authority to review requests for and render opinions on the application of RFRA to requests for religious accommodation of people, families, and doctors who cannot in good conscience take or administer vaccines, including those made or tested with aborted fetal cell lines. l HHS should restore Section 1557, Section 504, and other OCR regulations and fix guidance documents. In 2020, the Trump Administration’s OCR published regulations under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act that restored the agency’s enforcement of that law to the limits of its statutory text, deferred to the ACA’s widespread use of a binary biological conception of sex discrimination, and specified that the regulation must comply with the religious exemption and abortion neutrality clauses in Title IX from which it is derived as well as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and other laws. Courts blocked core provisions of that rule from going into effect. In 2022, the Biden Administration proposed to reinstate a rule contradicting the scope of the statute and imposing nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. It is expected that this rule will be finalized in 2023 even though several courts have issued rulings against the interpretation on which it is based. l OCR should return its enforcement of sex discrimination to the statutory framework of Section 1557 and Title IX. Specifically, it should: 1. Remove all guidance issued under the Biden Administration concerning sexual orientation and gender identity under Section 1557, particularly the May 2021 announcement of enforcement82 and March 2022 statement threatening states that protect minors from genital mutilation.83 2. Issue a general statement of policy specifying that it will not enforce any prohibition on sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination in the Section 1557 regulation and that it will prioritize compliance with the First Amendment, RFRA, and federal conscience laws in any case implicating those claims. DOJ should commit to defending these actions aggressively against inevitable court challenges, including under cases such as Heckler v. Chaney.84 — 496 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 3. Issue a proposed rule to restore the Trump regulations under Section 1557, explicitly interpreting the law not to include sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination based on the textual approach to male and female biology taken by Congress in the ACA, the need to recognize biological distinctions as part of the sound practice of health care, and the need to ensure protections of medical judgment and conscience. DOJ should agree to defend this rule to the Supreme Court if necessary. 4. Issue a general statement of policy announcing that it plans to enforce Section 1557 discrimination bans by refocusing on serious cases of race, sex, and disability discrimination. In particular, OCR should highlight its 2019 investigation and voluntary resolution agreement with Michigan State University based on the sexual abuse of gymnasts by Larry Nassar. OCR should also coordinate with the Department of Education on a public education and civil rights enforcement campaign to ensure that female college athletes who become pregnant are no longer pressured to obtain abortions; pursue race discrimination claims against entities that adopt or impose racially discriminatory policies such as those based on critical race theory; and announce its intention to enforce disability rights laws to protect children born prematurely, children with disabilities, and children born alive after abortions. 5. Issue and finalize the Trump-era draft disability rights regulations concerning crisis standards of care and use of Quality of Life Adjusted Years (QALYs), and reissue and finalize a disability regulation (withdrawn by the Biden Administration) that prohibited discriminatory application of assisted suicide and denial of life-saving treatments for disabled newborns. l OCR should withdraw its pharmacy abortion mandate guidance. OCR should withdraw its “Obligations Under Federal Civil Rights Laws to Ensure Access to Comprehensive Reproductive Health Care Services” guidance for retail pharmacies,85 which purports to address nondiscrimination obligations of pharmacies under federal civil rights laws and in fact orders them to stock and dispense first-trimester abortion drugs. The guidance invents this so-called requirement and fails to acknowledge that pharmacies and pharmacists have the right not to participate in abortions, including pill-induced abortions, if doing so would violate their sincere moral or religious objections. Moreover, no federal civil rights laws preempt state pro-life statutes.

Department of Homeland Security

Minimal

Vector: 56%

Pages: 180-182AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"SRES 497 concerns internal Senate charitable donation drives and does not address Department of Homeland Security personnel, USCIS classification, border security, or asylum reform objectives outlined in Project 2025."

Key themes:nonenot applicable

— 147 — Department of Homeland Security Personnel USCIS should be classified as a national security–sensitive agency, and all of its employees should be classified as holding national security–sensitive posi- tions. Leaks must be investigated and punished as they would be in a national security agency, and the union should be decertified. Any employees who cannot accept that change and cannot conform their behavior to the standards required by such an agency should be separated. USCIS’s D.C. personnel presence should be skeletal, and agency employees with operational or security roles should be rotated out to offices throughout the United States. These USCIS employees should live and work in the communities that are most affected by their daily duties and decisions. NECESSARY BORDER AND IMMIGRATION STATUTORY, REGULATORY, AND ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES The current border security crisis was made possible by glaring loopholes in our immigration system. The result was a preventable and predictable his- toric increase in illegal and inadmissible encounters along our southern border. This pulled limited resources from the front lines of our nation’s borders and away from their national security mission, releasing a vast and complex set of threats into our country. To regain our sovereignty, integrity, and security, Congress must pass meaningful legislation to close the current loopholes and prevent future Administrations from exploiting them for political gain or per- sonal ideology. Legislative Proposals l Title 42 authority in Title 8. Create an authority akin to the Title 42 Public Health authority that has been used during the COVID-19 pandemic to expel illegal aliens across the border immediately when certain non- health conditions are met, such as loss of operational control of the border. l Mandatory appropriation for border wall system infrastructure. The monies appropriated would be used to fund the construction of additional border wall systems, technology, and personnel in strategic locations in accordance with the Border Security Improvement Plan (BSIP). l Appropriation for Port of Entry infrastructure. Border security is not addressed solely by systems in between the ports of entry. POEs require technology and physical upgrades as well as an influx of personnel to meet capacity demands and act as the literal gatekeepers for the country. This is the first line of defense against drug and human smuggling operations. — 148 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Unaccompanied minors 1. Congress should repeal Section 235 of the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (TVPRA),9 which provides numerous immigration benefits to unaccompanied alien children and only encourages more parents to send their children across the border illegally and unaccompanied. These children too often become trafficking victims, which means that the TVPRA has failed. 2. If an alternative to repealing Section 235 of the TVPRA is necessary, the section should be amended so that all unaccompanied children, regardless of nationality, may be returned to their home countries in a safe and efficient manner. Currently, the TVPRA allows only children from contiguous countries (Canada and Mexico) to be returned while every other unaccompanied minor must be placed into a lengthy process that usually results in the minor’s landing in the custody of an illegal alien family member. 3. Congress must end the Flores Settlement Agreement by explicitly setting nationwide terms and standards for family and unaccompanied detention and housing. Such standards should focus on meeting human needs and should allow for large-scale use of temporary facilities (for example, tents). 4. Congress should amend the Homeland Security Act and portions of the TVPRA to move detention of alien children expressly from the Department of Health and Human Services to DHS. l Asylum reform 1. The standard for a credible fear of persecution should be raised and aligned to the standard for asylum. It should also account specifically for credibility determinations that are a key element of the asylum claim. 2. Codify former asylum bars and third-country transit rules. 3. Congress should eliminate the particular social group protected ground as vague and overbroad or, in the alternative, provide a clear definition with parameters that at a minimum codify the holding in Matter of A-B- that gang violence and domestic violence are not grounds for asylum.10

Department of Homeland Security

Minimal

Vector: 55%

Pages: 177-179AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill addresses charitable donation collection in Senate buildings, whereas the Project 2025 DHS section focuses on immigration enforcement, USCIS reforms, merit-based immigration, and related policies; there is no substantive thematic or policy connection."

Key themes:no overlapunrelated

— 145 — Department of Homeland Security l Management Directives and policies should realign to ensure that the workforce, while adaptable and able to handle the bulk of the USCIS mission, is not allowed to be pulled off mission work to focus on unlawful programs (DACA, mass parole for Afghans, Ukrainians, Venezuelans, etc.), which divert resources away from nuclear family and employment programs. The regulatory agenda should include the immediate submission of notices of proposed rulemaking for the Trump Administration’s public charge rule (includ- ing aspects from its original notice of proposed rulemaking), temporary work visa reform, employment authorization reform rules, asylum bars rule, and a third-country transit rule. At a minimum, an enhanced regulatory agenda should include rules strengthening the integrity of the asylum system, parole reform, and U visa reform that prioritizes relief for victims of heinous crimes and ensures that we protect the truest and most deserving victims of crime. Not all policy changes require formal rulemaking, however, as internal guidance documents are generally exempt under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).7 In this subregulatory space, USCIS policy memos and operational guidance should reduce the validity of employment authorization documents and end the COVID flexibilities, including the reliance on biometrics reuse. USCIS should also enforce existing regulations by rejecting incomplete applications and petitions, ensuring both that they are completed before accepted for filing and that FDNS signs off on all approved applications and petitions before approval notices are sent to the alien or petitioner. Other efforts should be focused on adjudication standards returning to nearly 100 percent interview requirements for all appropriate cases. The incoming Administration should spearhead an immigration legislative agenda focused on creating a merit-based immigration system that rewards high- skilled aliens instead of the current system that favors extended family–based and luck-of-the-draw immigration. To that end, the diversity visa lottery should be repealed, chain migration should be ended while focusing on the nuclear family, and the existing employment visa program should be replaced with a system to award visas only to the “best and brightest.” Internal efforts to limit employment authorization should be matched by con- gressional action to narrow statutory eligibility to work in the United States and mitigate unfair employment competition for U.S. citizens. The oft-abused H-1B program should be transformed into an elite program through which employers are vying to bring in only the top foreign workers at the highest wages so as not to depress American opportunities. Additionally, Congress should: l Improve the integrity of the temporary work visa programs; l Repeal Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designations; — 146 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Permanently authorize and make mandatory E-Verify; and l End parole abuse by legislating specific parole standards. USCIS should make it clear that where no court jurisdiction exists, it will not honor court decisions that seek to undermine regulatory and subregulatory efforts. Finally, USCIS still requires access to all relevant national security and law enforce- ment databases in the same vein as any other agency in the intelligence space. This is a key concept that should be addressed as USCIS is returned to functioning primarily as a vetting agency. Budget USCIS is primarily fee-funded, operating on revenue derived by those who are seeking immigration benefits, work permits, and naturalization. The total agency budget requested for fiscal year (FY) 2023, including both fees and a small appropri- ation, is slightly less than $6 billion.8 The bulk of funds are derived from application fees through the Immigrant Examinations Fee Account. As a general principle, adju- dication of applications and petitions should be paid by applicants, not American taxpayers. It is critical that any changes in the budget, even in the wake of a realigned agency combined with ICE and CBP, should retain a fee-funded model. Given the Obama and Biden Administrations’ lack of will, fees should be increased agencywide to keep in step with inflation and the true cost of the adju- dications. The incoming Administration should immediately submit a fee rule that reflects such an increase. Aside from an increase in all fees, the rule should drastically limit the availability for fee waivers and should implement a fee for asylum applications. Additionally, Congress should allow for a 10 percent across- the-board increase in all fees for all fee rules to account for the fact that new fee rules always lag behind budget requirements. USCIS should strive to increase opportunities for premium processing, a ben- efit by which applicants can expedite their processing times. While this places time burdens on adjudicators, it provides an opportunity for a significant influx of money into the agency, which is not currently available. While simply raising fees to the necessary levels to make the agency run efficiently would be prefera- ble, without the need for expanded premium processing, this short-term measure should be utilized, particularly if longer-term fee rules are unsuccessful. At least until USCIS is caught up on all case backlogs, all applicants rejected for any benefit or status adjudication should be required to leave the U.S. immediately. Ordinary process can resume once all case backlogs have been adjudicated. Finally, USCIS should pause the intake of applications in a benefit category when backlogs in that category become excessive. Once USCIS adjudicators can decrease that caseload to a manageable number, application intake should resume.

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 55%

Pages: 515-517AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill SRES 497 focuses on permitting non-monetary charitable donations in Senate buildings during the holiday season, which is unrelated to the Project 2025 policy objectives concerning the Department of Health and Human Services, such as revising the National Strategy to Support Family Caregivers, HRSA data collection, telehealth licensure, or contraceptive mandate reforms."

— 483 — Department of Health and Human Services l Readdress the National Strategy to Support Family Caregivers. While in theory the strategy aims to support family members with duties to care for older family members, the plan is overly focused on racial and “LGBTQ+ equity.” The strategy should be examined to establish an efficient plan to support caregivers and their families. There should also be a review of its COVID-19 policies. HEALTH RESOURCES AND SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (HRSA) l Congress should allow CMS to use the 340B data that HRSA collects rather than having CMS conduct its own survey, especially in view of the U.S. Supreme Court’s American Hospital Association v. Becerra decision.69 The legislation should also create penalties for those who do not respond to HRSA’s data collection. l Legally define the locus of service as where the provider is located during the telehealth visit rather than where the patient is. With such a definition, states could continue to reserve their powers to establish the standards for licensure and scope of practice. The providers could ensure continuity and consistency of care no matter where their patients might move while maintaining the licenses that make the most sense for them. Americans are far more mobile and technologically advanced today than they were when most health care laws were written. Telehealth has become increasingly important, particularly during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. It also has great potential in rural and other areas where there are shortages of health care providers. HRSA’s Office for the Advancement of Telehealth includes a program known as the Licensure Portability Grant Program, which bolsters state efforts to reform licensing laws to maximize telehealth flexibility. HRSA does not have the authority through this office to dictate licensure laws; that power has typically been reserved to the states. However, telehealth across state lines, when permitted, is interstate commerce, which can be regulated by the federal government according to the Constitution. l Restore Trump religious and moral exemptions to the contraceptive mandate (also a CMS rule). HHS should rescind, if finalized, the regulation titled “Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act,” proposed jointly by HHS, Treasury, and Labor.70 This rule proposes to amend Trump-era final rules regarding religious and moral exemptions and accommodations for coverage of certain preventive services under the ACA. Preventive services include contraception, and — 484 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise it appears the proposed rule would change the existing regulations for religious and moral exemptions to the ACA’s contraception mandate. There is no need for further rulemaking that curtails existing exemptions and accommodations. l Require HRSA to use rulemaking to update the women’s preventive services mandate. The contraceptive mandate issued under Obamacare has been the source of years of egregious attacks on many Americans’ religious and moral beliefs. The mandate was issued as part of the women’s preventive services guidelines, which were issued without any rulemaking that involved public notice and an opportunity to comment. Instead, HRSA issued and changed the mandate by simply posting changes to its website. HRSA also started off not requiring coverage of fertility awareness–based methods of family planning, then requiring them, and then removing the requirement without notifying the public. A federal judge recently ruled that this failure to undergo notice and comment in issuing the mandate is unlawful. HRSA should be required to repromulgate any women’s preventive services mandates through the notice and comment process that is compliant with the Administrative Procedures Act. Moreover, since the Obama Administration HRSA entered into long- term contracts with the pro-abortion American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and related entities to serve as an exclusive adviser with respect to the content of this mandate, HRSA has used this arrangement to ignore comments that members of the public were sometimes able to submit in the process, and ACOG has abused its position to attack HHS’s allowance of religious and moral exemptions to the contraceptive mandate. HHS should rescind these contracts and establish an advisory committee that is compliant with the Federal Advisory Committee Act and has members that are committed to women’s preventive services and are not pro-abortion ideologues. l Expand inclusion of fertility awareness–based methods and supplies to family planning in the women’s preventive services mandate. The ACA requires coverage of and prevents insurance plans from imposing any cost-sharing requirements on women who obtain preventive care and screenings as defined by HRSA. In 2016, HHS included “instruction in fertility awareness-based methods” as part of this requirement. However, in December 2021, HHS removed that language from its list without using the notice-and-comment process or giving any rationale, both of which are mandated by the Administrative Procedures Act. In August

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. Moran, Jerry

Southwestern Power Administration Fund Establishment Act

119/s/1034

SAFEGUARDS Act of 2025

119/s/2378

Optimizing the VA Workforce for Veterans Act of 2026

119/s/4400

Back to All Bills