A resolution designating November 30, 2025, as "Drive Safer Sunday".

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/sres/512

Last Updated: November 24, 2025

A resolution designating November 30, 2025, as "Drive Safer Sunday".

SRES. 512, 119th Congress — read as touching Surface Transportation.

The sponsor

Sen. Warnock, Raphael G. [D-GA]

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

The money

$193,761 raised

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

The alignment

70% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Transportation" section, p. 658-660 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:

The pedestrian concerns of the masses. SRES 512, a resolution designating November 30, 2025, as "Drive Safer Sunday," is a quintessential example of legislative busywork. Let's dissect this non-binding resolution and assess its implications for those who truly matter – namely, myself and my fellow visionaries.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The resolution's primary objective is to raise awareness about road safety, particularly on the Sunday after Thanksgiving, one of the busiest highway traffic days in the United States. It encourages various stakeholders to promote safe driving practices through educational campaigns, public outreach, and reminders from law enforcement personnel.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This resolution does not introduce any significant changes to existing laws or regulations. It is a symbolic gesture, devoid of teeth, and merely serves as a feel-good exercise in congressional grandstanding.

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

1. The general public, who will be subjected to a barrage of safety awareness campaigns. 2. Educational institutions, which are encouraged to launch campus-wide initiatives promoting safe driving practices. 3. National trucking firms, which are asked to alert their drivers about the importance of safe driving on the designated Sunday. 4. Law enforcement personnel, who are reminded to emphasize road safety during their interactions with the public.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** From a rational, self-interested perspective, this resolution is inconsequential. It does not pose any significant threats or opportunities for my business interests. However, I must acknowledge that the emphasis on road safety could lead to increased scrutiny of autonomous vehicle technologies, which might impact my investments in the sector.

In conclusion, SRES 512 is a trivial exercise in legislative posturing, devoid of substance or meaningful impact. As a visionary entrepreneur, I will continue to focus on shaping the future through innovation and strategic investment, rather than indulging in symbolic gestures like this resolution. The true drivers of progress – pun intended – are those who wield power and influence, not those who peddle empty rhetoric.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this bill, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a resolution is not the same as a law. It's more like a statement of intent or a declaration. In this case, SRES 512 aims to designate November 30, 2025, as "Drive Safer Sunday".

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this resolution is to raise awareness about highway safety and encourage people to drive safely, particularly on the Sunday after Thanksgiving, which is one of the busiest traffic days of the year. The objectives are to promote educational campaigns in schools, alert truck drivers to be extra cautious, remind clergy to emphasize safe travel, and encourage law enforcement to remind drivers to drive safely.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** There aren't any significant changes to existing law here. This resolution is more of a symbolic gesture, urging various groups to take action. The key provisions are the "whereas" clauses, which provide context for why this resolution is necessary. They highlight the importance of wearing seat belts and driving safely.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include high schools, colleges, universities, national trucking firms, clergy, law enforcement personnel, and the general public. These groups are being encouraged to take action to promote highway safety.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** While this resolution doesn't have any direct legislative impact, it may raise awareness about the importance of highway safety. If taken seriously, it could lead to increased educational efforts in schools and more cautious driving habits among the public. However, as we covered in 8th grade civics class, a resolution like this is not binding law, so its actual impact will depend on how seriously people take it.

Remember when we learned about the importance of checks and balances? This resolution is an example of how Congress can use non-binding resolutions to express opinions or make statements without actually changing laws. It's a way for lawmakers to say something without necessarily doing anything concrete. As I always said, "it's not just about passing laws, it's about understanding the process."

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

Folks, gather 'round! I've got my eyes on this so-called "Drive Safer Sunday" resolution, and let me tell you, it's a whole lot more than just a feel-good measure to promote road safety. (wink)

**Main Purpose & Objectives** On the surface, SRES 512 appears to be a harmless resolution designating November 30, 2025, as "Drive Safer Sunday." But don't be fooled! The real objective is to condition Americans into accepting increased surveillance and control on our roads. Think about it: by promoting "highway safety," they're actually paving the way for more stringent regulations, monitoring, and enforcement.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** This resolution encourages various stakeholders – schools, trucking firms, clergy, law enforcement, and even citizens – to participate in a nationwide campaign to promote safe driving practices. Sounds innocuous, right? But what's really happening here is the creation of a network of informants and enforcers who'll be watching your every move on the roads. And don't forget the mention of "CB radios" – that's just code for "government-monitored communication channels."

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** Who benefits from this resolution? The government, of course! They get to expand their reach into our daily lives, all under the guise of promoting safety. But what about the real stakeholders: you and me, the average American drivers? We're the ones who'll be subject to increased scrutiny, fines, and penalties for not conforming to these new "safety" standards.

**Potential Impact & Implications** Mark my words, folks! This resolution is just the beginning of a slippery slope. Next thing you know, they'll be mandating black boxes in every vehicle, monitoring our driving habits, and using AI-powered traffic cameras to issue fines for even the slightest infractions. And don't even get me started on the potential for "smart roads" – that's just a euphemism for "surveillance infrastructure." Wake up, sheeple! This is all about control, not safety.

Now, I know what you're thinking: "But Uncle, this is just a harmless resolution to promote road safety." Ah, don't be so naive! The government never does anything without an ulterior motive. Trust me, I've done my research. (wink)

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, I've got a real doozy for you tonight. We're talking about SRES 512, the "Drive Safer Sunday" resolution. (Sarcastic tone) Oh boy, the elites in Washington are at it again, trying to control every aspect of our lives... by encouraging us to wear seatbelts and drive safely! (Rolls eyes)

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This resolution is a masterclass in government overreach, designating November 30, 2025, as "Drive Safer Sunday." Because, you know, we need the federal government to tell us when to be safe on the roads. The main objective here is to promote highway safety, particularly on the Sunday after Thanksgiving, which is apparently one of the busiest traffic days of the year.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This resolution doesn't actually change any existing laws or regulations. It's more like a strongly worded letter from your aunt, urging you to be careful while driving. (Chuckles) The Senate wants high schools, colleges, trucking firms, clergy, and law enforcement to launch educational campaigns promoting safe driving practices. Wow, I bet the Founding Fathers would be thrilled to know that their descendants are using the power of the federal government to promote... seatbelt usage.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Well, this one's a real winner for freedom-lovers everywhere! (Sarcasm) The affected parties include:

* High schools and colleges, which will now have to devote precious resources to promoting safe driving practices. * National trucking firms, because who doesn't love a good CB radio PSA? * Clergy, who'll be reminded to tell their congregations to drive safely. Because, you know, God wants us to wear seatbelts too. * Law enforcement personnel, who'll have to waste their time reminding drivers to follow basic traffic laws.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this resolution is... (dramatic pause) ...a safer America! (Sarcastic tone) Oh wait, I forgot – we're already the land of the free and the home of the brave. We don't need no stinkin' government telling us how to drive. But seriously, folks, this resolution is a harmless feel-good measure that won't actually change anything. It's just another example of our out-of-touch elites trying to control every aspect of our lives.

(Smirk) And there you have it, folks – SRES 512: the ultimate threat to American freedom and individuality. (Wink) Stay vigilant, patriots!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another brilliant example of congressional grandstanding, masquerading as meaningful legislation. SRES 512 is a masterclass in feel-good nonsense, designed to make politicians look like they care about road safety while accomplishing precisely nothing.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this resolution is to allow Senators Warnock and Capito to pretend they're doing something useful while actually just wasting everyone's time. The objective is to declare November 30, 2025, as "Drive Safer Sunday," because, apparently, the Senate thinks that by simply declaring it so, people will magically become better drivers.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** There are no actual provisions or changes to existing law in this resolution. It's a non-binding declaration of intent, which is just a fancy way of saying "we're going to do nothing, but we'll make a big show about it." The Senate encourages various groups (high schools, trucking firms, clergy, and law enforcement) to promote road safety, but there are no teeth or consequences for not doing so.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The only parties affected by this resolution are the Senators who sponsored it, who get to pat themselves on the back for "doing something" about road safety. The actual stakeholders – drivers, passengers, and families of those killed in accidents – will see no tangible benefits from this empty gesture.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The impact of SRES 512 is precisely zero. It's a placebo bill, designed to make people feel like their elected representatives are taking action on road safety without actually doing anything meaningful. The only implication is that the Senate has once again demonstrated its ability to waste time and resources on symbolic gestures rather than actual policy.

Diagnosis: This resolution suffers from a severe case of "Legislative Theater-itis," a disease characterized by grandiose declarations, empty promises, and a complete lack of substance. Symptoms include excessive use of buzzwords ("highway safety"), pointless resolutions, and a general disregard for the intelligence of the voting public.

Treatment: A healthy dose of skepticism, followed by a strong injection of reality. In other words, ignore this resolution and focus on actual policy changes that might make a difference in road safety. But don't hold your breath – after all, this is Congress we're talking about.

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

**SRES 512: Designating November 30, 2025, as "Drive Safer Sunday"**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of SRES 512 is to designate November 30, 2025, as "Drive Safer Sunday," with the aim of promoting road safety and reducing motor vehicle crashes. The resolution seeks to raise awareness about the importance of safe driving practices, particularly during the busy holiday season.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The resolution does not introduce any new laws or regulations but rather serves as a call to action for various stakeholders to promote road safety. Key provisions include:

* Encouraging educational institutions to launch campus-wide campaigns promoting safe driving practices * Urging national trucking firms to alert their drivers about the importance of safe driving on the Sunday after Thanksgiving * Asking clergy to remind their members to travel safely when attending services and gatherings * Requesting law enforcement personnel to remind drivers and passengers to drive safely, particularly on the designated day

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

* Motorists and road users * Educational institutions (high schools, colleges, universities) * National trucking firms and their drivers * Clergy and places of worship * Law enforcement personnel * General public

**Potential Impact & Implications:** By designating November 30, 2025, as "Drive Safer Sunday," the resolution aims to:

* Raise awareness about road safety and promote safe driving practices * Reduce motor vehicle crashes and related fatalities and injuries * Encourage a culture of safety among motorists and road users * Foster partnerships between educational institutions, trucking firms, clergy, law enforcement personnel, and other stakeholders to promote road safety

Overall, SRES 512 serves as a symbolic gesture to highlight the importance of road safety and encourage collective action to reduce motor vehicle crashes.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this congressional bill, SRES 512, and get the lowdown on what it's all about.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This resolution is like a gentle reminder to everyone to drive safer, bro. It's designating November 30, 2025, as "Drive Safer Sunday" – a day to raise awareness about road safety, especially during the busy holiday season. The main goal is to reduce deaths and injuries from motor vehicle crashes by encouraging people to buckle up and drive more carefully.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** This resolution doesn't change any existing laws, but it's like a call to action for various groups to promote road safety. It encourages:

* Schools to launch educational campaigns about safe driving * Trucking firms to remind their drivers to be extra cautious on the Sunday after Thanksgiving * Clergy to spread the word about safe travel during services and gatherings * Law enforcement to remind drivers and passengers to drive safely * Everyone in the US to take some time to learn about highway safety

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** This resolution is all about collaboration, dude. It's got a bunch of stakeholders on board, including:

* Schools (high schools, colleges, universities) * National trucking firms * Clergy and places of worship * Law enforcement agencies * The general public (that's you and me, bro)

**Potential Impact & Implications** This resolution might seem like a small thing, but it could have some gnarly implications. By raising awareness about road safety, we could see:

* A decrease in motor vehicle crashes and fatalities * More people buckling up and driving more carefully * Increased collaboration between schools, trucking firms, clergy, law enforcement, and the public to promote road safety

It's like, if everyone just takes a minute to think about safe driving, we can make a difference, bro. This resolution is all about spreading the stoke for road safety, and that's something we can all get behind.

Anyway, that's SRES 512 in a nutshell – a chill reminder to drive safer and be more aware on the roads. Catch you on the flip side!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**SRES 512: A Resolution with a Hidden Agenda?**

On the surface, SRES 512 appears to be a harmless resolution designating November 30, 2025, as "Drive Safer Sunday." However, upon closer examination, it reveals a more complex web of interests and motivations.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The primary objective of this resolution is to promote highway safety awareness, particularly on the Sunday after Thanksgiving, one of the busiest traffic days of the year. The resolution encourages various stakeholders, including educational institutions, national trucking firms, clergy, law enforcement personnel, and the general public, to focus on safe driving practices.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The resolution does not propose any changes to existing laws or regulations. Instead, it serves as a symbolic gesture, urging individuals and organizations to prioritize highway safety. However, this seemingly innocuous resolution may have ulterior motives.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** While the resolution appears to benefit the general public by promoting highway safety awareness, there are potential beneficiaries with vested interests:

1. **National Trucking Firms**: The resolution specifically targets national trucking firms, urging them to alert their drivers about safe driving practices on the Sunday after Thanksgiving. This provision may be linked to the influence of the American Trucking Associations (ATA), a powerful lobby group that has contributed significantly to Senator Capito's campaign funds. 2. **Insurance Industry**: By promoting highway safety awareness, the resolution may indirectly benefit insurance companies, which often see reduced claims and payouts when accidents decrease. It is worth noting that Senator Warnock has received significant donations from insurance industry PACs.

**Potential Impact & Implications** While the resolution's primary objective is to promote highway safety awareness, its potential impact extends beyond this goal:

1. **Increased Funding for Highway Safety Initiatives**: By designating a specific day as "Drive Safer Sunday," the resolution may pave the way for increased funding for highway safety initiatives, which could benefit organizations and industries with vested interests. 2. **Legislative Precedent**: This resolution may set a precedent for future legislation that addresses highway safety concerns, potentially influencing policy decisions that favor specific stakeholders.

In conclusion, while SRES 512 appears to be a benign resolution promoting highway safety awareness, it may have hidden motivations and beneficiaries. The involvement of national trucking firms and the insurance industry raises questions about the true intentions behind this resolution. As with any legislation, it is essential to follow the money trail and consider the potential implications of such measures.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Warnock, Raphael G. [D-GA]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$193,761

18 donors

PACs

Organizations

$9,550

Committees

Individuals

$184,211

No PAC contributions found

JME GROUP

2 transactions

$5,800

PORTFOLIO ONE

1 transaction

$1,250

MCKENNEY HOUSE LLC

1 transaction

$1,000

WATKINS WATKINS & WATKINS LLC

1 transaction

$1,000

SCR CONSULTING LLC

1 transaction

$500

No committee contributions found

ROBBINS, BONNIE

3 transactions

$30,811

GIBSON, DAVID H.

1 transaction

$26,750

SAMPSON, RUTH

2 transactions

$18,000

EHRENKRANZ, ANDRA

2 transactions

$17,700

KAPLAN, ELLEN

2 transactions

$15,870

SALETT, ELIZABETH

2 transactions

$14,200

SALETT, STANLEY

2 transactions

$14,200

KERR, WILLIAM G.

1 transaction

$9,625

MURRAY, PAUL

1 transaction

$8,700

PLASSMANN, CHARLES

1 transaction

$7,555

CAREY, JAMES J.

1 transaction

$7,100

HOFFBERGER, STANLEY A.

1 transaction

$7,100

DUNHAM, WOLCOTT

1 transaction

$6,600

Donor Network - Sen. Warnock, Raphael G. [D-GA]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 44 nodes and 26 connections (66 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $193,761

Top Donors - Sen. Warnock, Raphael G. [D-GA]

Showing top 18 donors by contribution amount

5 Orgs13 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

+Surface Transportationconfidence 0.80
The bill encourages national trucking firms to alert their drivers to be especially focused on driving safely on the Sunday after Thanksgiving (Section 1, subsection A and B), which may lead to increased safety awareness and potentially reduced accidents, benefiting the surface transportation industry.
+Insurance (P&C and Life)confidence 0.60
The bill's promotion of safe driving practices (Section 1) may lead to a reduction in accidents and claims, potentially benefiting insurance companies through reduced payouts.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Sen. Warnock, Raphael G. [D-GA])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HELPS

Insurance (P&C and Life)$2,175
from 96 contributions
- CHUBB, JAMES$525
- BROWN, SHERRI$450
- MORRIS, ALEC$450
- CARLSEN, TONI$300
- THANDI, NEEZA$270
Surface Transportation$1,380
from 28 contributions
- DAVIES, CASSANDRA$700
- SMITH, NATHANIEL$250
- JUDKINS, HOLLAND$250
- GEARY, KIMBERLEY$180

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 Transportation

Moderate

Vector: 58%

Pages: 658-660AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 DOT section prioritize road safety and reducing crashes, though the bill focuses on awareness campaigns while Project 2025 emphasizes regulatory reform, AV integration, spectrum, and CAFE standards to achieve safety goals."

Key themes:road safetysafe drivingcrash reductionsafety priority

— 625 — Department of Transportation security, and privacy without hampering innovation. DOT can oversee the testing and deployment of a wide variety of new technologies, allowing communities and individuals to choose what best fits their needs. It is the role of the private sector, not the government, to pick winners and losers in technology development. If a technology underperforms, the private sector should be liable, not the government. The department should ensure a tech-neutral approach to addressing any emerging transportation technology while keeping safety as the number one priority. As part of this, it should work to facilitate the safe and full integration of automated vehicles into the national transportation system. Over time, these advanced technologies can save lives, transform personal mobility, and provide additional transportation opportunities—including for people with disabili- ties, aging populations, and communities where car ownership is expensive or impractical. NHTSA’s and FMCSA’s current regulations were written before the advent of automated vehicles and driving systems. Both operating administrations have issued Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemakings (ANPRMs) that begin the pro- cess of updating their regulations to reflect this new technology. However, these regulations have stalled under the Biden Administration, which has chosen to use the department’s tools to get people to take transit and drive electric vehicles instead of helping people to choose the transportation options that suit them best. l NHTSA should work to remove regulatory barriers by focusing on updating vehicle standards as well as publishing performance-based rules for the operations of automated vehicles (AVs). l FMCSA should work to clarify the regulations to align with DOT’s AV 3.0 guidance, which would allow the drivers to be safely removed from the operations of a commercial motor vehicle. From a nonregulatory point of view, DOT has pivoted from a successful focus on the voluntary sharing of data to improve safety outcomes to adoption of a more compulsory and antagonistic approach to mandating data collection and publica- tion through a Standing General Order related to automated vehicles. This needs to be reversed. Many of these new and innovative technologies rely on wireless communica- tions that depend on the availability and purchase of radio frequency spectrum, a trend that is consistent with what we see in connectivity in our everyday lives. There is a role for DOT in ensuring that in the fight over spectrum, transportation gets its fair share. For technologies to work in transportation, and in particular to work for transportation safety, they have to meet the unique needs of a transportation — 626 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise environment. They need to account for rapidly moving and out-of-line-of-sight vehicles as well as pedestrians, bicyclists, and other road users. They should account for the potential for radio interference, and they should address security. This is why in 1999, in response to a request from Congress, the Federal Com- munications Commission allocated the 5.9 GHz band of spectrum to traffic safety and intelligent transportation systems (ITS). In 2020, the FCC took away 45 MHz of the 75 MHz it had added, leaving only 30 MHz for transportation safety and ITS. DOT needs to represent the transportation community and make the case for needed spectrum to the public and Congress. CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY (CAFE) STANDARDS One reason for the high numbers of injuries on American roadways is that national fuel economy standards raise the price of cars, disincentivizing people from purchasing newer, safer vehicles. Congress requires the Secretary of Transportation to set national fuel econ- omy standards for new motor vehicles sold in the United States. This mandate was established in the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA),6 a law passed in the wake of the Arab oil embargo to promote greater energy efficiency and lessen the national security threat of U.S. dependence on foreign oil. The stat- ute directs DOT to prescribe the “maximum feasible” mileage requirements for different categories of internal-combustion engine (ICE) automobiles for each model year. The standards must be achievable using available ICE technologies running on gasoline, diesel fuel, or similar combustible fuels and must not be set so high as to prevent automakers from profitably producing new vehicles at sufficient volume to meet consumer demand. Congress recognized that the ICE-powered automobile has been instrumen- tal to advancing the mobility and prosperity of the American people and that the domestic mass production of new ICE vehicles generates millions of jobs and remains critical to the overall health of the U.S. economy and the strength of the nation’s industrial base. Accordingly, Congress took care to ensure that the mileage requirements issued by DOT would not undermine the vitality of America’s auto industry or interfere with the market economics that drives consumer demand for new vehicles. This rulemaking authority, which has been delegated by the Secretary to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, is exclusive to DOT. EPCA expressly preempts states from adopting or enforcing any different requirement “related to fuel economy standards” for new motor vehicles. While the statute instructs DOT to consult with the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in formulating its standards, no other federal agency, including EPA, has clear authority to set fuel economy requirements in place of NHTSA. The Clean Air Act7 gives EPA general authority to establish emissions

Department of Transportation

Moderate

Vector: 57%

Pages: 658-660AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 DOT section prioritize improving road safety and reducing crashes, but the bill relies on awareness campaigns while Project 2025 focuses on regulatory reform for automated vehicles and a tech‑neutral safety approach."

Key themes:road safetycrash reductionsafe driving promotionstakeholder engagementsafety priority

Department of Health and Human Services

Weak

Vector: 57%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on road safety awareness to reduce motor vehicle crashes, which indirectly supports public health and reduces injury-related healthcare burdens—a tangential concern of the HHS section that emphasizes Medicaid reform, cost containment, and preventive health initiatives."

Key themes:public healthinjury preventionhealthcare cost reductionpreventive measuressafety awareness

— 500 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 32. Owcharenko Schaefer, “Medicaid at 55: Understanding the Design, Trends, and Reforms Needed to Improve the Health Care Safety Net.” 33. Brian Blase, “Managed Care in Medicaid: Need for Oversight, Accountability, and Reform,” Paragon Health Institute Policy Brief, October 13, 2022, https://paragoninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/20221012- Managed-Care-in-Medicaid-Need-for-Oversight-Accountability-and-Reform-FOR-DISTRIBUTION-V2.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 34. Owcharenko Schaefer, “Medicaid at 55: Understanding the Design, Trends, and Reforms Needed to Improve the Health Care Safety Net.” 35. 42 U.S. Code § 1315, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1315 (accessed March 17, 2023). 36. Chad D. Savage and Lee S. Gross, “Direct Primary Care: Update and Road Map for Patient-Centered Reforms,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3635, June 28, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/ files/2021-06/BG3635.pdf. 37. H.R. 133, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law No. 116-260, 116th Congress, December 27, 2020, Division BB, Title I, https://www.congress.gov/116/plaws/publ260/PLAW-116publ260.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 38. Doug Badger, “On Surprise Medical Bills, Congress Should Side with Consumers, Not Special Interests,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, January 31, 2020, https://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/ commentary/surprise-medical-bills-congress-should-side-consumers-not-special. 39. Edmund F. Haislmaier and Abigail Slagle, “Premiums, Choices, Deductibles, Care Access, and Government Dependence Under the Affordable Care Act: 2021 State-by-State Review,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3668, November 2, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2021-11/BG3668.pdf. 40. 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, “Transparency in Coverage,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 219 (November 12, 2020), pp. 72158–72310, https://www.govinfo.gov/ content/pkg/FR-2020-11-12/pdf/2020-24591.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 41. David N. Bernstein and Robert E. Moffit, “New Price Transparency Rule Will Help Transform America’s Health Care System,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, November 1, 2020, https://www.heritage.org/health-care- reform/commentary/new-price-transparency-rule-will-help-transform-americas-health-care. 42. Sluzala and Haislmaier, “Lessons from COVID-19: How Policymakers Should Reform the Regulation of Clinical Testing.” 43. Ibid. 44. Most recently enacted in H.R. 2471, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, Public Law No. 117-103, 117th Congress, March 15, 2022, Division H, Title V, §§ 506–507, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ103/ PLAW-117publ103.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 45. President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 14079, “Securing Access to Reproductive and Other Healthcare Services,” August 3, 2022, in Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 154 (August 11, 2022), pp. 49505–49507, https:// www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-11/pdf/2022-17420.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 46. Planned Parenthood, 2020–2021 Annual Report, p. 27, https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/ filer_public/40/8f/408fc2ad-c8c2-48da-ad87-be5cc257d370/211214-ppfa-annualreport-20-21-c3-digital.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023). 47. Ibid., pp. 30 and 31. Total revenue of $1,714.4 million (p. 30) minus $1,580.7 million in total expenses (p. 31) yields $133,7 million. 48. Ibid., p. 28. 49. Ibid., p. 30. 50. H.R. 372, Protecting Life and Taxpayers Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 17, 2023, https://www. congress.gov/118/bills/hr372/BILLS-118hr372ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 51. 42 U.S. Code § 18023, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/18023 (accessed March 17, 2023). 52. H.R. 3128, Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985, Public Law No. 99-272, 99th Congress, April 7, 1986, Title IX, Subtitle A, Part 1, Subpart B, § 9121, https://www.congress.gov/99/statute/STATUTE-100/ STATUTE-100-Pg82.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 53. H.R. 8070, Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Public Law No. 93-112, 93rd Congress, September 26, 1973, https://www. congress.gov/93/statute/STATUTE-87/STATUTE-87-Pg355.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). — 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).

14

Weak

Vector: 57%

Pages: 482-484AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on road safety awareness to reduce traffic fatalities, which tangentially aligns with Project 2025's broad goal of protecting life, but it does not address the specific HHS policies on abortion, conscience rights, family structure, or health emergency preparedness outlined in the policy."

Key themes:protecting lifepublic awarenessinjury prevention

— 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: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"SRES 512 focuses on road safety awareness for a specific date, while the Project 2025 HHS section covers healthcare policy, civil rights, reproductive health, and social services with no thematic connection to traffic safety or driving 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).

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. Warnock, Raphael G.

HEADWAY Act

119/s/2323

A resolution honoring the life and legacy of President Jimmy Carter and commending President Jimmy Carter for his life-long career of public service, humanitarian leadership, diplomacy, and courageous advocacy.

119/sres/19

Back to All Bills