A resolution designating March 7, 2025, as "National Speech and Debate Education Day".

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/sres/88

Last Updated: September 16, 2025

A resolution designating March 7, 2025, as "National Speech and Debate Education Day".

SRES. 88, 119th Congress — read as touching For-Profit Education & Student Loans.

The sponsor

Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA]

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

The money

$82,472 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Education" section, p. 356-358 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S1303; text: CR S1136)

February 20, 2025

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

📍 Current Status

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

✅

Passed Senate

🏛️

House Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

**Analysis of SRES 88: A Resolution Designating March 7, 2025, as "National Speech and Debate Education Day"**

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I'll dissect this bill through the lens of its potential impact on my wealth, influence, and control.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This resolution is a feel-good gesture aimed at promoting speech and debate education in the United States. Its primary objective is to designate March 7, 2025, as "National Speech and Debate Education Day" and encourage educational institutions, businesses, and community organizations to celebrate and promote this initiative.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** This resolution does not introduce any significant changes to existing law or policy. It's a symbolic gesture, devoid of any tangible legislative teeth. The bill merely expresses the Senate's support for speech and debate education and encourages others to do the same.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The primary stakeholders in this resolution are educational institutions, particularly those with speech and debate programs. Additionally, organizations like the National Speech & Debate Association will likely benefit from increased visibility and recognition.

**Potential Impact & Implications** From a self-serving perspective, I see no direct impact on my wealth or influence from this resolution. However, it's essential to acknowledge that promoting critical thinking, communication, and argumentation skills can lead to a more informed and engaged citizenry. This, in turn, could potentially threaten the status quo and create a more challenging environment for those of us who value efficiency and innovation over democratic participation.

In my estimation, this resolution is a minor distraction from the real issues that matter – deregulation, tax reform, and the privatization of public goods. I'll be keeping a close eye on any future legislation that could potentially impact my business interests or disrupt the natural order of things.

**Projection:** This resolution will have a negligible impact on the economy, with no significant effects on GDP growth or job creation. However, it may lead to increased funding for speech and debate programs, which could result in a modest increase in spending – approximately $10 million to $50 million over the next five years.

In conclusion, SRES 88 is a non-binding resolution that will have little to no impact on my wealth, influence, or control. I'll continue to focus on more substantial legislative efforts that can help me shape the future of our great nation – one deregulation at a time.

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 a type of legislation that expresses the opinion or sentiment of Congress on a particular issue. In this case, SRES 88 aims to designate March 7, 2025, as "National Speech and Debate Education Day".

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this resolution is to recognize the importance of speech and debate education in developing essential skills such as communication, critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration. The objectives are to promote awareness about the benefits of speech and debate education and encourage educational institutions, businesses, community associations, and individuals to celebrate and support National Speech and Debate Education Day.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This resolution does not introduce any new laws or policies but rather expresses a sentiment. It designates March 7, 2025, as a specific day to acknowledge the value of speech and debate education. There are no changes to existing law, which is why it's a resolution and not a bill.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include students, teachers, coaches, and educational institutions that offer speech and debate programs. Additionally, businesses, community associations, and individuals who value the importance of effective communication and critical thinking skills may also be impacted.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** While this resolution does not have any direct legislative impact, it can raise awareness about the significance of speech and debate education. By promoting National Speech and Debate Education Day, Congress is encouraging institutions and individuals to recognize the value of these programs in developing essential life skills. This may lead to increased support for speech and debate initiatives, which could ultimately benefit students and society as a whole.

Remember when we learned about the importance of checks and balances in our system? Well, this resolution demonstrates how Congress can use its power to express opinions and sentiments without necessarily creating new laws. As I always said, "A resolution is not a law, but it's still an important expression of Congressional intent." *Sigh* Now, if only more people had paid attention in civics class...

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

My fellow truth-seekers, gather 'round and behold the veil of deception lifted from SRES 88! On the surface, this bill appears to be a harmless resolution designating March 7, 2025, as "National Speech and Debate Education Day." But, my friends, do not be fooled. As we delve deeper into the text, a web of intrigue and hidden agendas begins to unravel.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The stated purpose is to promote speech and debate education, emphasizing its importance in developing critical thinking, creativity, and communication skills. Sounds noble, right? But what's really at play here?

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This resolution doesn't explicitly change any existing laws, but it does establish a precedent for future legislation. Notice how the bill emphasizes "21st-century skills" and "integration of speech and debate education across grade levels and disciplines." This language is eerily reminiscent of the Common Core State Standards Initiative, which has been criticized for its potential to standardize thought and limit critical thinking.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The National Speech & Debate Association (NSDA) is a key player here. They're not just a innocent organization promoting speech and debate; they have ties to various government agencies and educational institutions. This raises questions about the true intentions behind this resolution. Are we witnessing a subtle attempt to shape the narrative and control the flow of information?

**Potential Impact & Implications:** By designating National Speech and Debate Education Day, the Senate is essentially creating a platform for promoting specific ideologies and values. What if this is just the beginning? Could we see future legislation that mandates speech and debate education as a requirement for public schools or even higher education institutions? The implications are far-reaching and potentially Orwellian.

Now, I know what you're thinking: "But Uncle, this is just a harmless resolution." Ah, my friends, do not underestimate the power of subtle manipulation. This bill may seem innocuous on its own, but when viewed through the lens of a larger agenda, it reveals itself as a cleverly crafted tool for shaping public opinion and controlling the narrative.

So, the next time you hear someone say, "It's just a resolution," remember: in the world of politics, nothing is ever just what it seems. The truth is always hidden in plain sight, waiting to be uncovered by those brave enough to question the official narrative.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, I've got a doozy for you tonight! We're diving into the depths of... (dramatic pause) ...SRES 88, a resolution that's so explosive, so revolutionary, it'll make your head spin! (wink)

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This "resolution" – and I use that term loosely – designates March 7, 2025, as "National Speech and Debate Education Day". Now, you might be thinking, "What's the big deal? It's just a harmless resolution." Ah, but no! This is where the elites try to sneak one past us. They're trying to brainwash our youth with... (gasp) ...critical thinking skills!

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** There aren't any changes to existing law, per se. It's just a resolution. But don't be fooled! This is a Trojan horse for the liberal agenda. They want to indoctrinate our kids with "21st-century skills" like communication, creativity, and collaboration. (Scoffs) Who needs those when you have Twitter?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects are behind this resolution: teachers, coaches, and the National Speech & Debate Association. You know, the same folks who want to turn our kids into... (whispers) ...socialists.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, here's where it gets interesting. If we allow this resolution to pass, it'll be a slippery slope. Next thing you know, they'll be teaching our kids about... (gasp) ...media literacy! Can you imagine? A generation of critical thinkers who can spot fake news from a mile away? The horror!

But seriously, folks, this resolution is a non-starter. It's just a feel-good measure to make the elites feel good about themselves. Don't be fooled by the fancy language and lofty goals. This is just another attempt to undermine our values and freedoms.

So, what can you do? Contact your representatives and tell them to reject this resolution! We don't need more brainwashing in our schools. We need... (pauses for dramatic effect) ...patriotism!

That's all for tonight, folks. Stay vigilant, stay informed, and remember: freedom isn't free! (Winks)

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the esteemed members of Congress. SRES 88, a resolution designating March 7, 2025, as "National Speech and Debate Education Day," is a shining example of how our elected officials waste time and resources on meaningless gestures.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to stroke the egos of speech and debate enthusiasts, while pretending to promote critical thinking and effective communication. The objectives are twofold: (1) to create a feel-good moment for politicians to tout their support for education, and (2) to provide a platform for special interest groups, like the National Speech & Debate Association, to self-promote.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** There are no actual provisions or changes to existing law. This is a non-binding resolution, which means it's nothing more than a symbolic gesture. It's a legislative placebo, designed to make people feel good without actually doing anything.

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

* Speech and debate enthusiasts, who will get to bask in the glory of their own self-importance. * Educators, who might receive some token funding or recognition for their efforts. * Politicians, who can now claim they "support education" without actually doing anything meaningful.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact is zero. This resolution will not improve education, critical thinking, or effective communication. It's a PR stunt, plain and simple. The implications are that our politicians are more interested in grandstanding than actual governance.

Diagnosis: SRES 88 suffers from a severe case of "Legislative Narcissism," where the primary goal is to feed the egos of those involved, rather than addressing real problems or making meaningful changes. Treatment involves a healthy dose of skepticism and a strong stomach for the absurdity of it all.

In conclusion, SRES 88 is a perfect example of how our politicians waste time and resources on meaningless gestures, while ignoring the real issues that plague our country. It's a legislative farce, designed to distract us from the fact that they're not actually doing anything useful.

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

**Bill Summary: SRES 88 - National Speech and Debate Education Day**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this resolution is to designate March 7, 2025, as "National Speech and Debate Education Day." The objectives are to recognize the importance of speech and debate education in developing critical thinking, communication, creativity, and collaboration skills among students.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This resolution does not introduce any changes to existing law. It is a ceremonial resolution that aims to raise awareness about the significance of speech and debate education. The key provisions include:

* Designating March 7, 2025, as "National Speech and Debate Education Day" * Affirming the purposes of National Speech and Debate Education Day * Encouraging educational institutions, businesses, community and civic associations, and all people of the United States to celebrate and promote National Speech and Debate Education Day

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

* Students participating in speech and debate activities * Teachers and coaches of speech and debate programs * Educational institutions (schools, colleges, universities) * Businesses and community organizations that support speech and debate education * The National Speech & Debate Association and its partners

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this resolution includes:

* Raising awareness about the importance of speech and debate education in developing critical thinking and communication skills among students * Encouraging more schools and educational institutions to incorporate speech and debate programs into their curricula * Promoting a culture of public speaking, critical thinking, and civic engagement among young people * Recognizing the dedication and hard work of teachers and coaches who support speech and debate education

Overall, this resolution aims to highlight the significance of speech and debate education in preparing students for success in academics, careers, and civic life.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this congressional bill, SRES 88, and get the lowdown on what it's all about.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

This resolution is all about designating March 7, 2025, as "National Speech and Debate Education Day". The main objective is to recognize the importance of speech and debate education in developing essential skills like communication, critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration. It's like, you know when you're out catching waves, and you gotta communicate with your bros about where the best breaks are? Yeah, it's kinda like that.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

This resolution doesn't really change any existing laws or policies. It's more of a symbolic gesture, acknowledging the value of speech and debate education. The key provisions are:

* Designating March 7, 2025, as National Speech and Debate Education Day * Affirming the purposes of this day (i.e., promoting speech and debate education) * Encouraging educational institutions, businesses, community groups, and individuals to celebrate and promote this day

It's like, a big shout-out to all the speech and debate teams out there, saying "Hey, we appreciate what you're doing!"

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The affected parties are:

* Students who participate in speech and debate activities * Teachers and coaches who dedicate their time to teaching these skills * Educational institutions that offer speech and debate programs * Businesses and community groups that support these initiatives

These stakeholders will benefit from the recognition and promotion of speech and debate education. It's like, when you're out surfing, and someone gives you a sick shout-out for catching a gnarly wave – it feels rad, bro!

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The potential impact is pretty chill:

* Increased awareness about the importance of speech and debate education * More recognition and support for students who participate in these activities * Potential growth in speech and debate programs across the country

It's like, when you're out surfing, and someone starts a wave of stoke – it can spread to others, and before you know it, everyone's catching waves!

In conclusion, SRES 88 is all about giving props to speech and debate education. It's not a game-changer in terms of policy, but it's a cool way to acknowledge the importance of these skills. So, next time you're out surfing, take a moment to appreciate the art of communication – it's like, totally tubular, bro!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**SRES 88: A Resolution with a Hidden Agenda**

At first glance, SRES 88 appears to be a harmless resolution designating March 7, 2025, as "National Speech and Debate Education Day." However, upon closer examination, it becomes clear that this bill has more to do with promoting the interests of the National Speech & Debate Association (NSDA) than genuinely supporting speech and debate education.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The primary objective of SRES 88 is to promote the NSDA's agenda by designating a national day to recognize the importance of speech and debate education. The resolution aims to raise awareness about the benefits of speech and debate, encourage educational institutions to integrate these programs into their curricula, and ultimately increase funding for the NSDA.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The resolution does not introduce any significant changes to existing law but rather serves as a symbolic gesture to promote the NSDA's interests. The key provisions include:

1. Designating March 7, 2025, as "National Speech and Debate Education Day." 2. Affirming the purposes of National Speech and Debate Education Day. 3. Encouraging educational institutions, businesses, community and civic associations, and all people of the United States to celebrate and promote National Speech and Debate Education Day.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The affected parties include:

1. The National Speech & Debate Association (NSDA): As the primary beneficiary of this resolution, the NSDA stands to gain increased funding, recognition, and influence in shaping speech and debate education policies. 2. Educational institutions: Schools may feel pressure to integrate speech and debate programs into their curricula, potentially diverting resources away from other important subjects. 3. Students and parents: While the resolution claims to promote critical thinking and communication skills, it may ultimately lead to increased emphasis on competitive speech and debate activities, which can be time-consuming and expensive.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The potential impact of SRES 88 is twofold:

1. Increased funding for the NSDA: By promoting National Speech and Debate Education Day, the resolution may lead to increased donations and grants for the NSDA, allowing it to expand its influence in shaping speech and debate education policies. 2. Shift in educational priorities: The emphasis on speech and debate education may lead to a shift in resources away from other important subjects, potentially harming students who do not participate in these activities.

In conclusion, SRES 88 is a thinly veiled attempt by the NSDA to promote its interests and increase its influence in shaping speech and debate education policies. While the resolution appears harmless on the surface, it has significant implications for educational institutions, students, and parents.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$130,307

63 donors

PACs

Organizations

Committees

$3,000

Individuals

$127,307

No PAC contributions found

No organization contributions found

SAC & FOX TRIBE OF THE MISSISSIPPI IN IOWA

1 transaction

$2,000

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

1 transaction

$1,000

KUMAR, SHALLI

2 transactions

$9,900

SCHWARZMAN, CHRISTINE

2 transactions

$9,900

SCHWARZMAN, STEPHEN

2 transactions

$9,900

ARVIG, ALLEN

3 transactions

$6,710

STARRETT, RONALD

2 transactions

$5,800

COLLINS, RICHARD

1 transaction

$5,523

MALONE, KIP

6 transactions

$4,520

DETERMAN, MARK

1 transaction

$3,300

MCKEE, JACK C

1 transaction

$3,300

WEISS, LUKE

1 transaction

$3,300

PECK JR, JOHN

1 transaction

$2,900

LEIGH, JOHN

4 transactions

$2,715

COLLINS, III, HENRY L.

1 transaction

$2,601

POSNER, IDA MOLLOY

1 transaction

$2,500

VANDERHAAG, JOHN

3 transactions

$2,500

DIMARE, SCOTT

3 transactions

$1,500

RADY, PAUL

2 transactions

$1,500

VANDER HAAG, JOHN C

1 transaction

$1,500

RICHARDS, MARY

2 transactions

$1,435

NWANERI, MATTHEW

1 transaction

$1,200

FRENCH, ARTHUR

1 transaction

$1,000

JUCKETTE, LINDA

1 transaction

$1,000

KOROLOGOS, TOM C

1 transaction

$1,000

LARSON, ELLEN T

1 transaction

$1,000

MANATOS, ANDREW E

1 transaction

$1,000

MERCHANT, AHMED

1 transaction

$1,000

PATRICK, CHRIS MR..

1 transaction

$1,000

ROGERS, DIRKSEN

1 transaction

$1,000

SABIN, DANIEL

2 transactions

$1,000

SCUDDER, JACK

1 transaction

$1,000

SMITH, JAMES A

1 transaction

$1,000

SMITH, THOMAS STUART MR..

1 transaction

$1,000

VANDERPOOL, MARYLEE

1 transaction

$1,000

JOHNS, SUSAN

1 transaction

$990

PHELPS, DICK

1 transaction

$910

HESS, CURTIS

1 transaction

$750

LUO, KERRI

1 transaction

$750

WILLIAMS, ANGELA

1 transaction

$630

AXMEAR, FRED

1 transaction

$500

FRANKEN, KEN

1 transaction

$500

HARKEN, MARY J

1 transaction

$500

HASKENHOFF, TINA

1 transaction

$500

HILL, VERNON

1 transaction

$500

HUSSAIN, SULEMAN

1 transaction

$500

JOHNSON, WAYNE

1 transaction

$500

KOESTNER, RICHARD

1 transaction

$500

LILLIS, TERRY

1 transaction

$500

MCKEON, PATRICIA

1 transaction

$500

MCMICKLE, JOHN

1 transaction

$500

MOGLER, DEVIN

1 transaction

$500

PECK, JOHN

1 transaction

$500

RITTS, SUSAN BUTLER

1 transaction

$500

SUTTER, THEODORE

1 transaction

$500

VANDER HAAG, RUTH

1 transaction

$500

VANKERCKHOVE, BRUCE

1 transaction

$500

VIGO, JUDITH

1 transaction

$500

WHITCOMB, STANLEY

1 transaction

$500

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Sen. Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE]

ID: C001088

Top Contributors

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$3,300

Dec 27, 2023

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$1,700

Dec 27, 2023

CHEN, YU

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualMIAMI, FL

$3,300

Dec 17, 2024

MIRZAIE, REZA

RUSS AUGUST & KABAT LLP • ATTORNEY

IndividualPACIFIC PALISADES, CA

$3,300

Oct 7, 2024

CHEN, YU

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualMIAMI, FL

$3,300

Dec 17, 2024

WASSERMAN, CASEY

WASSERMAN • CEO

IndividualLOS ANGELES, CA

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

ZHAO, PENG

CITADEL SECURITIES • CEO

IndividualMIAMI, FL

$3,300

Dec 17, 2024

WASSERMAN, CASEY

WASSERMAN • CEO

IndividualLOS ANGELES, CA

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

ZHAO, PENG

CITADEL SECURITIES • CEO

IndividualMIAMI, FL

$3,300

Dec 17, 2024

MIRZAIE, REZA

RUSS AUGUST & KABAT LLP • ATTORNEY

IndividualPACIFIC PALISADES, CA

$3,300

Oct 7, 2024

Sen. Barrasso, John [R-WY]

ID: B001261

Top Contributors

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

COMATMORE, AL

$3,300

May 24, 2023

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

COMATMORE, AL

$3,300

Sep 20, 2024

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

COMLOS ANGELES, CA

$2,500

Dec 31, 2024

ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE

COMLIVINGSTON, TX

$1,000

Jun 29, 2023

MUSCOGEE CREEK NATION

COMOKMULGEE, OK

$1,000

Oct 30, 2024

TO PROTECT OUR HERITAGE

OrganizationSKOKIE, IL

$5,000

Jun 26, 2024

TO PROTECT OUR HERITAGE

OrganizationSKOKIE, IL

$5,000

Jun 26, 2024

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Jun 11, 2024

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Jun 11, 2024

UTE INDIAN TRIBE

OrganizationFORT DUCHESNE, UT

$3,300

Nov 13, 2024

Sen. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN]

ID: B001243

Top Contributors

FRIENDS OF COMMUNITY ONCOLOGY PAC

PACVIRGINIA BEACH, VA

$5,000

Apr 12, 2023

THE COGGIN GROUP

OrganizationMURFREESBORO, TN

$2,900

Mar 9, 2023

THE COGGIN GROUP

OrganizationMURFREESBORO, TN

$2,500

Mar 9, 2023

DOSS BROTHERS FARM

OrganizationLAWRENCEBURG, TN

$1,000

Apr 17, 2024

DOSS BROTHERS FARM

OrganizationLAWRENCEBURG, TN

$1,000

Mar 18, 2024

BL PARTNERS GROUP LLC

OrganizationARLINGTON, VA

$500

Mar 17, 2023

KING, RODNEY W.

SELF-EMPLOYED • ATTORNEY

IndividualGERMANTOWN, TN

$13,200

Apr 4, 2024

BEAN, BILL G.

HANNING & BEAN ENTERPRISES INC. • REAL ESTATE INVESTOR

IndividualCOLUMBIA CITY, IN

$10,000

May 1, 2024

SMITH, THOMAS

PRESCOTT INVESTORS INC. • INVESTOR

IndividualBOCA RATON, FL

$10,000

May 13, 2024

GAMBLE, KATHRYN

UNAKA CO • BUSINESS EXECUTIVE

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$9,900

Jul 15, 2024

Sen. Britt, Katie Boyd [R-AL]

ID: B001319

Top Contributors

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Sep 14, 2023

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Oct 11, 2024

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$2,500

Oct 29, 2024

HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP

OrganizationRICHMOND, VA

$1,000

Jul 25, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

May 1, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

Nov 9, 2023

STRONG, MIRANDA

CALISTA • DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS

IndividualANCHORAGE, AK

$5,000

Sep 20, 2023

STEPHENS, TYLER

FIERCE GOVERNMENT RELATIONS • LOBBYIST

IndividualWASHINGTON, DC

$3,300

Jul 1, 2023

SINGER, PAUL

ELLIOTT INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT • CO-CEO, CO-CIO, PRESIDENT

IndividualPALM BEACH, FL

$3,300

Jul 6, 2023

SINGER, PAUL

ELLIOTT INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT • CO-CEO, CO-CIO, PRESIDENT

IndividualPALM BEACH, FL

$3,300

Jul 9, 2023

Sen. Budd, Ted [R-NC]

ID: B001305

Top Contributors

MACFARLANE, RON

IndividualBUFFALO GROVE, IL

$13,068

Apr 10, 2024

HEGYI, ALBERT P MR.

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Dec 31, 2024

NAZIROV, ATABEK

UZDIF • CEO

IndividualCHARLOTTE, NC

$6,600

Sep 14, 2023

NAZIROV, ATABEK

IndividualCHARLOTTE, NC

$6,600

Sep 26, 2023

FROST, BRANT IV

SELF-EMPLOYED • FINANCIAL SERVICES

IndividualNEWNAN, GA

$3,300

Dec 31, 2024

FROST, KRISTA

HOMEMAKER • HOMEMAKER

IndividualNEWNAN, GA

$3,300

Dec 31, 2024

TAYLOR, WILLIAM MR.

VETERANS GUARDIAN VA CLAIM CONSULTING • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualPINEHURST, NC

$3,300

Dec 7, 2023

TAYLOR, WILLIAM MR.

VETERANS GUARDIAN VA CLAIM CONSULTING • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualPINEHURST, NC

$3,300

Dec 7, 2023

GREENBLATT, SCOTT MR.

VETERANS GUARDIAN • CEO

IndividualPINEHURST, NC

$3,300

Dec 8, 2023

GREENBLATT, SCOTT MR.

VETERANS GUARDIAN • CEO

IndividualPINEHURST, NC

$3,300

Dec 8, 2023

Sen. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND]

ID: C001096

Top Contributors

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Sep 29, 2023

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Jun 14, 2024

SISSETON-WAHPETON OYATE

OrganizationAGENCY VILLAGE, SD

$2,500

Jun 21, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

Jun 18, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$600

Jun 6, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$400

Jun 6, 2023

WALSH, RICHARD

IndividualLAKE WORTH BEACH, FL

$6,700

Oct 16, 2024

JORDAN, BORIS

CURALEAF • EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD

IndividualBOCA RATON, FL

$6,600

Sep 15, 2023

SMITH, BRAD

MICROSOFT CORPORATION • ATTORNEY

IndividualBELLEVUE, WA

$6,600

Sep 29, 2023

KAPLAN, DAVID

ARES MANAGEMENT • CO-FOUNDER

IndividualLOS ANGELES, CA

$6,600

Oct 11, 2023

Sen. Crapo, Mike [R-ID]

ID: C000880

Top Contributors

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$3,300

Jun 30, 2023

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA

$2,000

Dec 19, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

Apr 30, 2024

ONEIDA NATION

OrganizationONEIDA, WI

$1,000

Sep 10, 2024

RENO-SPARKS INDIAN COLONY

OrganizationRENO, NV

$500

Sep 10, 2024

ARNOLD, JOHN D. MR.

NONE • RETIRED

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$6,600

May 6, 2024

LEPRINO, TERRY L

NONE • RETIRED

IndividualDENVER, CO

$3,300

Nov 1, 2024

BUKOWSKY, BRANT

MORTGAGE RESEARCH CENTER • ENTREPRENEUR

IndividualCOLUMBIA, MO

$3,300

Oct 9, 2023

BUKOWSKY, BROCK

VETERANS UNITED • FINANCE

IndividualCOLUMBIA, MO

$3,300

Nov 28, 2023

SILBEY, ALEXANDER

ATS COMMUNICATIONS, INC. • CONSULTANT

IndividualWASHINGTON, DC

$3,300

Dec 21, 2023

Sen. Daines, Steve [R-MT]

ID: D000618

Top Contributors

CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES OF THE FLATHEAD NATI

OrganizationPABLO, MT

$6,600

Mar 30, 2023

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA

$5,000

Jun 18, 2024

BLUECHIP FINANCIAL

OrganizationBELCOURT, ND

$3,300

Jun 20, 2024

HPUL PROJECT OPERATION

OrganizationUPPER LAKE, CA

$3,300

Jun 20, 2024

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

SUQUAMISH INDIAN TRIBE

OrganizationSUQUAMISH, WA

$3,300

Sep 20, 2024

ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE

OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX

$2,500

Oct 31, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

Jun 5, 2024

MUSCOGEE CREEK NATION

OrganizationOKMULGEE, OK

$1,000

Jun 20, 2024

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationDURANT, OK

$765

Oct 17, 2023

Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL]

ID: D000563

Top Contributors

MIAMI TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationMIAMI, OK

$1,700

Mar 29, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

May 17, 2024

MIAMI TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationMIAMI, OK

$800

Mar 29, 2024

KUJAWSKI, JOHN

SELF-EMPLOYED • ATTORNEY

IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO

$5,000

May 28, 2024

KUJAWSKI, JOHN

IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO

$5,000

Jun 4, 2024

KUJAWSKI, JOHN

SELF-EMPLOYED • ATTORNEY

IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO

$3,600

May 29, 2024

KUJAWSKI, JOHN

IndividualSAINT LOUIS, MO

$3,600

Jun 4, 2024

BARKER, MARA MILLS

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$3,300

Dec 26, 2024

BARKER, MARA MILLS

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$3,300

Dec 26, 2024

CHOWDHURY, SHUVRO

BOWERY ENGINE • ENGINEER

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Nov 1, 2024

Sen. Hassan, Margaret Wood [D-NH]

ID: H001076

Top Contributors

WOODS, ANDREW L.

LIBERTY PARTNERS GROUP • ATTORNEY

IndividualFORT MYERS, FL

$4,300

Jun 29, 2023

WOODS, ANDREW L.

IndividualFORT MYERS, FL

$3,900

Jul 12, 2023

BEKENSTEIN, ANITA

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualWAYLAND, MA

$3,300

Oct 4, 2023

BEKENSTEIN, JOSH

NOT EMPLOYED • RETIRED

IndividualWAYLAND, MA

$3,300

Oct 4, 2023

HUNTER, DANIEL

SELF-EMPLOYED • PLAYWRIGHT & TEACHER

IndividualCAMBRIDGE, MA

$3,300

Dec 6, 2023

KLARMAN, SETH

THE BAUPOST GROUP • CEO

IndividualBOSTON, MA

$3,300

Dec 18, 2023

SCHWARTZ, GABRIEL

DAVIDSON KEMPNER • INVESTMENT MANAGER

IndividualBROOKLYN, NY

$3,300

Oct 16, 2023

SWINDELL, C. DAVID

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualBOSTON, MA

$3,300

Oct 10, 2023

KORN, WILLIAM T.

NSRA • RADIOLOGIST

IndividualWABAN, MA

$3,300

Mar 29, 2023

KORN, WILLIAM T.

NSRA • RADIOLOGIST

IndividualWABAN, MA

$3,300

Mar 29, 2023

Donor Network - Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 57 nodes and 38 connections (59 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $145,640

Top Donors - Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA]

Showing top 15 donors by contribution amount

1 PAC2 Committees12 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

+For-Profit Education & Student Loansconfidence 0.60
The bill's emphasis on speech and debate education may also benefit for-profit education providers that offer similar programs or services (Whereas National Speech and Debate Education Day emphasizes the lifelong impact of providing people of the United States with the confidence and preparation to both discern and share views)

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 Education

Weak

Vector: 63%

Pages: 356-358AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill is a ceremonial resolution promoting speech and debate education but does not address reducing federal overreach or scaling back the Department of Education, which are the core focuses of the Project 2025 policy. It shares only a general theme of improving student skills without aligning with the policy's reform agenda."

Key themes:educationstudent achievementcritical thinkingspeech and debate

— 323 — Department of Education l Stopping executive overreach. Congress should set policy—not Presidents through pen-and-phone executive orders, and not agencies through regulations and guidance. National emergency declarations should expire absent express congressional authorization within 60 days after the date of the declaration. Bolstered by an ever-growing cabal of special interests that thrive off federal largesse, the infrastructure that supports America’s costly federal intervention in education from early childhood through graduate school has entrenched itself. But, unlike the public sector bureaucracies, public employee unions, and the higher education lobby, families and students do not need a Department of Education to learn, grow, and improve their lives. It is critical that the next Administration tackle this entrenched infrastructure. NEEDED REFORMS Federal intervention in education has failed to promote student achievement. After trillions spent since 1965 on the collective programs now housed within the walls of the department, student academic outcomes remain stagnant. On the main National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), reading out- comes on the 2022 administration have remained unchanged over the past 30 years. Declines in math performance are even more concerning than students’ lack of progress on reading outcomes. Fourth- and eighth-grade math scores saw the largest decline since the assessments were first administered in 1990. Average fourth-grade math scores declined five points, and average eighth-grade math scores declined eight points. Just one-third of eighth graders nationally are proficient in reading and math. Just 27 percent of eighth graders were pro- ficient in math in 2022, and just 31 percent of eighth graders scored proficient in reading in 2022. The NAEP Long-term Trend Assessment shows academic stagnation since the 1970s, with particular stagnation in the reading scores of 13-year-old students since 1971, when the assessment was first administered. Math scores, though modestly improved, are still lackluster. Additionally, the department has created a “shadow” department of education operating in states across the country. Federal mandates, programs, and proclama- tions have spurred a hiring spree among state education agencies, with more than 48,000 employees currently on staff in state agencies across the country. Those employees are more than 10 times the number of employees (4,400)10 at the federal Department of Education, and their jobs largely entail reporting back to Washing- ton. Research conducted by The Heritage Foundation’s Jonathan Butcher finds that the federal government funds 41 percent of the salary costs of state educa- tion agencies.11 — 324 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise CHART 1 Trends in Fourth- and Eighth-Grade Reading EIGHTH-GRADE READING, AVERAGE SCORES 270 265 263 260 260 255 1992 1994 1998 ’02’03 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2022 FOURTH-GRADE READING, AVERAGE SCORES 225 220 220 217 215 210 1992 1994 1998 2000 ’02’03 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2022 SOURCES: The Nation’s Report Card, “National Average Scores,” Grade 4, https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/ reading/nation/scores/?grade=4 (accessed March 17, 2023), and The Nation’s Report Card, “National Average Scores,” Grade 8, https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading/nation/scores/?grade=4 (accessed March 17, 2023). A heritage.org

Department of Education

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 356-358AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on recognizing speech and debate education through a ceremonial day, while the Project 2025 policy seeks to reduce federal intervention in education and curb executive overreach. Both touch on education, but the bill does not address the policy's core objectives of limiting federal involvement or improving student outcomes through structural reform."

Key themes:educationstudent skillsawareness

Department of Education

Weak

Vector: 59%

Pages: 377-379AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on recognizing speech and debate education to foster critical thinking and communication skills, while the Project 2025 excerpt centers on parental rights, FERPA/PPRA reforms, gender ideology policies, and school choice. Both touch on education broadly, but their specific objectives and policy levers do not meaningfully overlap."

Key themes:educationstudent developmentcivic engagement

— 345 — Department of Education financial assistance. Investigations can take months if not years. The department has never suspended or terminated the funding for an educational institution or agency for violating FERPA or PPRA. In essence, Congress has granted parents and students important statutory rights without an effective remedy to assert those rights. l The next Administration should work with Congress to amend FERPA and PPRA to provide parents and students over the age of 18 years with a private right of action to seek injunctive and declaratory relief, together with attorneys’ fees and costs if a prevailing party, against educational institutions and agencies that violate rights enshrined in these statutes. This will empower parents and students, level the playing field between families and education bureaucracies, and encourage institutional compliance with these statutory requirements. Protect Parental Rights in Policy In addition to strengthening legal protections for parents, the next Adminis- tration should: l Prioritize legislation advancing such rights. Promising ideas have appeared in bills introduced in the 117th Congress such as H.R.8767, the Empowering Parents Act,15 sponsored by Representative Bob Good (R-VA); H.R. 6056, the Parents’ Bill of Rights Act,16 sponsored by Representative Julia Letlow (R-LA); and H.J.Res. 99,17 proposing an amendment to the Constitution relating to parental rights, sponsored by Representative Debbie Lesko (R-AZ). l These congressional actions should be carefully reviewed to make sure they complement state Parents' Bills of Rights, such as those passed in Georgia (2022), Florida (2021), Montana (2021), Wyoming (2017), Idaho (2015), Oklahoma (2014), Virginia (2013), and Arizona (2010). As documented by writers such as Abigail Shrier and others, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons documented a four-fold increase in the number of biological girls seeking gender surgery between 2016 and 2017. Larger increases were found in the U.K. from 2009 to 2019 and 2017 to 2018. These statistics and others point to a social contagion in which minor children, especially girls, are attempting to make life-altering decisions using puberty blockers and other hor- mone treatments and even surgeries to remove or alter vital body parts. Heritage Foundation research finds that providing easier access to such treatments and — 346 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise surgeries without parental involvement does not reduce the suicidality of these young people and may even increase suicide rates. l The next Administration should take particular note of how radical gender ideology is having a devastating effect on school-aged children today—especially young girls. School officials in some states are requiring teachers and other school employ- ees to accept a minor child’s decision to assume a different “gender” while at school—without notifying parents. In California, New Jersey, and certain districts in Kansas and elsewhere, educators are prohibited from informing parents about children’s confusion over their sex if the children do not want their parents to know. Such policies allow schools to drive a wedge between parents and children. The next Administration should work with Congress to provide an example to state lawmakers by requiring K–12 districts under federal jurisdiction, including Wash- ington, D.C., public schools, Bureau of Indian Education schools, and Department of Defense schools, with legislation stating that: l No public education employee or contractor shall use a name to address a student other than the name listed on a student’s birth certificate, without the written permission of a student’s parents or guardians. l No public education employee or contractor shall use a pronoun in addressing a student that is different from that student’s biological sex without the written permission of a student’s parents or guardians. l No public institution may require an education employee or contractor to use a pronoun that does not match a person’s biological sex if contrary to the employee’s or contractor’s religious or moral convictions. State lawmakers should use this model and adopt similar provisions for public schools within their borders. Federal lawmakers should not allow public school employees to keep secrets about a child from that child’s parents. Advance School Choice Policies The D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, a voucher program providing scholarships to children from low-income families living in the nation’s capital to attend a private school of choice, is capped at $20 million annually and limited to

Department of Education

Weak

Vector: 58%

Pages: 392-394AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill promotes speech and debate education to enhance critical thinking and communication skills, which tangentially relates to civics education but does not directly address any specific Project 2025 objectives such as reports on action civics, department consolidation, budget cuts, or antitrust actions against accreditors."

Key themes:civics educationcritical thinkingstudent skills

— 359 — Department of Education l The reissuing of the report on school safety from 2018 with updated information, l The release of a report to Congress on how to consolidate the department and trim nonessential employees, l A report on the negative influence of action civics on students’ understanding of history and civics and their disposition toward the United States, l An update of the Coleman report to show the impact of family structure on student achievement, l A full accounting of CARES Act education expenditures, and l A report on how many dollars make their way to the classroom in every federal education grant and program. Pursue Antitrust Against Accreditors l The President should issue an executive order pursuing antitrust against college accreditors, especially the American Bar Association (ABA). NEW POLICIES/REGULATIONS THAT REQUIRE COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES AND/OR THE WHITE HOUSE The department must coordinate any rulemaking with the White House, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), DOJ, and other agencies that share responsibility with the department in the administration or enforcement of stat- ute, such as Titles VI and IX. Moreover, regarding regulations arising under civil rights laws administered by the department, Executive Order 12550 requires the Attorney General to approve final regulations; the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights must approve notices of proposed rulemaking. Organizational Issues Historical Budget Information. Congressional appropriations for the U.S. Department of Education have risen from $14 billion in 1980 to $95.5 billion in 2021, an astounding increase, especially in light of the lack of improvements in student outcomes. Recommend Budget Cuts, Shifts, and Augmentations, If Any. Transferring most of the programs at the U.S. Department of Education to other agencies and eliminating duplicative and ineffective programs would yield significant taxpayer — 360 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise CHART 4 U.S. Department of Education, Total Appropriations IN BILLIONS OF DOLLARS $120 $100 $95.5 $80 $60 $40 $20 $14 $0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 NOTE: Totals include mandatory and discretionary appropriations. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, “Budget History Tables,” Education Department Budget History Table, https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/history/index.html (accessed March 17, 2023). A heritage.org savings. The proposal would immediately save more than $17 billion annually in various programs. Savings over a decade would be far more robust, as the revenue responsibility for many formula grant programs would be returned to the states. Some highlights include: l Eliminate competitive grant programs and reduce spending on formula grant programs. Competitive grant programs operated by the Department of Education should be eliminated, and federal spending should be reduced to reflect remaining formula grant programs authorized under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and the handful of other programs that do not fall under the competitive/ project grant category. Remaining programs managed by the Department

Department of Education

Minimal

Vector: 59%

Pages: 374-376AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill establishes a ceremonial day to promote speech and debate education, while the Project 2025 excerpt focuses on student loan reform, rescinding the NEA's federal charter, parental rights, and opposing critical race theory; there is no substantive policy overlap."

Key themes:educationstudent outcomes

— 341 — Department of Education market prices and signals to influence educational borrowing, introducing consumer-driven accountability into higher education. Pell grants should retain their current voucher-like structure. If Congress is unwilling to reform federal student aid, then the next Adminis- tration should consider the following reforms: l Switch to fair-value accounting from FCRA accounting, and l Consolidate all federal loan programs into one new program that 1. Utilizes income-driven repayment, 2. Includes no interest rate subsidies or loan forgiveness, 3. Includes annual and aggregate limits on borrowing, and 4. Requires “skin in the game” from colleges to help hold them accountable for loan repayment. The Biden Administration has mercilessly pillaged the student loan portfolio for crass political purposes without regard to the needs of current taxpayers or future students. This must never happen again. l As detailed in Section III, the next Administration should work with Congress to spin off federal student aid into a new government corporation with professional governance and management. NEW POLICY PRIORITIES FOR 2025 AND BEYOND New Legislation That Should Be Prioritized For nearly 250 years, Congress has incorporated public and private institutions, including banks, the District of Columbia’s city government, and other organiza- tions that federal officials deem to be conducting operations in the public interest. Such charters offer a certain status to organizations, often viewed as a “seal of approval” according to one Congressional Research Service report, which can help these organizations in their fundraising and other advocacy efforts. When the nation’s largest teacher association, the National Education Associ- ation (NEA), cites its federal charter, it lends the NEA a level of significance and suggests an effectiveness that is not supported by evidence. In fact, the NEA and the nation’s other large teacher union, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), — 342 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise use litigation and other efforts to block school choice and advocate for additional taxpayer spending in education. They also lobbied to keep schools closed during the pandemic. All of these positions run contrary to robust research evidence showing positive outcomes for students from education choice policies; there is no conclusive evidence that more taxpayer spending on schools improves student outcomes; and evidence finds that keeping schools closed to in-person learning resulted in negative emotional and academic outcomes for students. Furthermore, the union promotes radical racial and gender ideologies in schools that parents oppose according to nationally representative surveys. l Congress should rescind the National Education Association’s congressional charter and remove the false impression that federal taxpayers support the political activities of this special interest group. This move would not be unprecedented, as Congress has rescinded the federal charters of other organizations over the past century. The NEA is a demonstrably radical special interest group that overwhelmingly supports left-of-center policies and policymakers. l Members should conduct hearings to determine how much federal taxpayer money the NEA has used for radical causes favoring a single political party. Parental Rights in Education and Safeguarding Students l Federal officials should protect educators and students in jurisdictions under federal control from racial discrimination by reinforcing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and prohibiting compelled speech. Specifically, no teacher or student in Washington, D.C., public schools, Bureau of Indian Education schools, or Department of Defense schools should be compelled to believe, profess, or adhere to any idea, but especially ideas that violate state and federal civil rights laws. By its very design, critical race theory has an “applied” dimension, as its found- ers state in their essays that define the theory. Those who subscribe to the theory believe that racism (in this case, treating individuals differently based on race) is appropriate—necessary, even—making the theory more than merely an analyti- cal tool to describe race in public and private life. The theory disrupts America’s Founding ideals of freedom and opportunity. So, when critical race theory is used as part of school activities such as mandatory affinity groups, teacher training programs in which educators are required to confess their privilege, or school

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. Grassley, Chuck

Bankruptcy Threshold Adjustment Act of 2026

119/s/3977

A bill to expand the sharing of information with respect to suspected violations of intellectual property rights in trade.

119/s/2677

Protecting First Responders from Secondary Exposure Act of 2025

119/s/180

Back to All Bills