Recycling Infrastructure and Accessibility Act of 2025

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/2145
Last Updated: July 16, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Miller-Meeks, Mariannette [R-IA-1]

ID: M001215

Follow the money

The bill

Recycling Infrastructure and Accessibility Act of 2025

HR. 2145, 119th Congress — read as touching Construction & Engineering.

The sponsor

Rep. Miller-Meeks, Mariannette [R-IA-1]

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

The money

$166,100 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Housing and Urban Development" section, p. 548-550 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 48 - 0.

May 20, 2026

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 House

🏛️

Senate 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

(sigh) Oh joy, another bill that's going to "save the planet" while lining the pockets of special interests and perpetuating bureaucratic incompetence.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Recycling Infrastructure and Accessibility Act of 2025 (HR 2145) is a pilot grant program aimed at improving recycling accessibility in underserved communities. The bill's primary objective is to provide funding for eligible entities to develop infrastructure, such as transfer stations and curbside recycling programs, in areas with limited access to recycling services.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill establishes a competitive grant program, administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which will award funds to eligible entities, including states, local governments, Indian tribes, and public-private partnerships. The grants can be used for projects that improve recycling accessibility in underserved communities, such as increasing transfer stations, expanding curbside recycling programs, and leveraging public-private partnerships.

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

* Underserved communities with limited access to recycling services * Eligible entities (states, local governments, Indian tribes, and public-private partnerships) that can apply for grants * The EPA, which will administer the grant program * Private companies involved in waste management and recycling

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of "throwing money at a problem" without addressing the underlying issues. By providing grants to develop infrastructure, the bill may create temporary jobs and stimulate local economies, but it does not address the root causes of inadequate recycling services in underserved communities.

The real beneficiaries of this bill will likely be private companies that receive contracts for waste management and recycling services, as well as politicians who can claim credit for "doing something" about environmental issues. Meanwhile, the EPA will have to deal with the bureaucratic headache of administering another grant program.

In short, HR 2145 is a Band-Aid solution that fails to address the systemic problems plaguing our recycling infrastructure. It's a perfect example of how politicians use feel-good legislation to distract from their own incompetence and lack of vision.

Diagnosis: Legislative Theater-itis, a chronic condition characterized by the tendency to propose bills that sound good but accomplish little. Treatment: a healthy dose of skepticism and a commitment to evidence-based policy-making.

Related Topics

Water & Air Quality RegulationsPublic Lands & Natural ResourcesClimate Change & Sustainability
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Miller-Meeks, Mariannette [R-IA-1]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$166,100
24 donors
PACs
$500
Organizations
$3,900
Committees
$0
Individuals
$160,200
1
POLITICAL COMMITTEE, NWF ACTION FUND
1 transaction
$500
1
US MARSHALS SERVICES
1 transaction
$2,900
2
HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP
1 transaction
$1,000

No committee contributions found

1
SMITH, DYAN
2 transactions
$16,600
2
HOGAN, PATRICK F
1 transaction
$13,200
3
HOLDEN, RONALD
1 transaction
$13,200
4
VANDEWALLE, LOLA L
1 transaction
$13,200
5
GLEESON, JOHN W
1 transaction
$11,600
6
RICHARDS, DANIEL
1 transaction
$6,600
7
WILLOX, NORMAN
1 transaction
$6,600
8
PFAUTCH, ROY
1 transaction
$6,600
9
BRADLEY, JACQUELINE
1 transaction
$6,600
10
BROIN, JEFF MR.
1 transaction
$6,600
11
JAY, JEFFREY
1 transaction
$6,600
12
RICKETTS, J. JOE
1 transaction
$6,600
13
MCCOY, JUDITH
1 transaction
$6,600
14
SINGER, PAUL
1 transaction
$6,600
15
SABIN, ANDREW
1 transaction
$6,600
16
GILLIAM, RICHARD
1 transaction
$6,600
17
BELTRAME, MARC
1 transaction
$6,600
18
WOLL, MARGO
1 transaction
$6,600
19
SCHWARZMAN, CHRISTINE
1 transaction
$6,600

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

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

Rep. Sherrill, Mikie [D-NJ-11]

ID: S001207

Top Contributors

10

1
SANZONE, MICHAEL
HSBC BANK • BANKER
IndividualGLEN RIDGE, NJ
$3,300
Nov 4, 2024
2
ST. ROMAIN, CLAUDETTE L.
SETON HALL UNIVERSITY • PROFESSOR
IndividualCHATHAM, NJ
$3,300
Oct 23, 2024
3
LUSTBERG, LAWRENCE S.
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualCHATHAM, NJ
$3,300
Oct 23, 2024
4
SLATER, FREDRIC
LRF SLATER COMPANIES, INC. • PRESIDENT
IndividualLIVINGSTON, NJ
$3,300
Oct 28, 2024
5
ST. ROMAIN, CLAUDETTE L.
SETON HALL UNIVERSITY • PROFESSOR
IndividualCHATHAM, NJ
$3,300
Oct 23, 2024
6
JOY, MARTHA
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualENGLEWOOD, FL
$3,300
Nov 3, 2024
7
CONNORS, SUSAN
NAGEL RICE, LLP • ATTORNEY
IndividualCHATHAM, NJ
$3,300
Oct 23, 2024
8
MILLER, VALERIE
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualBROOKLYN, NY
$3,300
Oct 27, 2024
9
MILLER, JOSHUA
THE BROWSER COMPANY OF NEW YORK • CEO
IndividualBROOKLYN, NY
$3,300
Oct 27, 2024
10
MINDICH, ERIC
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$3,300
Nov 20, 2024

Rep. Joyce, David P. [R-OH-14]

ID: J000295

Top Contributors

10

1
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND
PACBANNING, CA
$3,300
Jun 7, 2024
2
PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS
PACTEMECULA, CA
$3,300
May 15, 2024
3
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
PACATMORE, AL
$3,300
Apr 17, 2024
4
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON TRIBE
PACPRIOR LAKE, MN
$3,300
Jun 19, 2024
5
THE CHICKASAW NATION
PACADA, OK
$3,300
Jun 7, 2024
6
CHEROKEE NATION
PACTAHLEQUAH, OK
$3,300
Nov 1, 2024
7
SAN PABLO LYTTON CASINO
PACSAN PABLO, CA
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
8
PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS
PACTEMECULA, CA
$3,300
Oct 20, 2023
9
AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY
COMMARICOPA, AZ
$3,300
Mar 31, 2023
10
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
PACPALM SPRINGS, CA
$3,300
Apr 6, 2023

Rep. Tenney, Claudia [R-NY-24]

ID: T000478

Top Contributors

10

1
WINRED EARMARKS
PACARLINGTON, VA
$27,879
Oct 22, 2024
2
WINRED EARMARKS
PACARLINGTON, VA
$21,566
Oct 29, 2024
3
WINRED EARMARKS
PACARLINGTON, VA
$10,970
Nov 25, 2024
4
WINRED EARMARKS
PACARLINGTON, VA
$5,493
Nov 19, 2024
5
SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA
$2,000
Nov 5, 2024
6
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$2,000
Jun 18, 2024
7
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$2,000
Jun 18, 2024
8
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$1,000
Mar 31, 2023
9
TEXTOR, DONALD
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualLOCUST VALLEY, NY
$13,200
Apr 17, 2024
10
WINE, SCOTT
POLARIS • CEO
IndividualEXCELSIOR, MN
$6,600
Sep 30, 2024

Rep. McClellan, Jennifer L. [D-VA-4]

ID: M001227

Top Contributors

10

1
BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA
$1,500
May 24, 2023
2
BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA
$1,500
May 24, 2023
3
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$1,000
Dec 21, 2023
4
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$1,000
Dec 21, 2023
5
STARLEY LLC
OrganizationNORTH CHESTERFIELD, VA
$250
Oct 13, 2024
6
STARLEY LLC
OrganizationNORTH CHESTERFIELD, VA
$250
Oct 13, 2024
7
RICE, NANCY
LITTLE DIFFICULT RUN • CONSULTANT
IndividualVIENNA, VA
$6,600
Sep 23, 2024
8
RICE, NANCY
LITTLE DIFFICULT RUN • CONSULTANT
IndividualVIENNA, VA
$6,600
Sep 23, 2024
9
ABRAMSON, RONALD D
BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & ROONEY • ATTORNEY
IndividualWASHINGTON, DC
$3,300
Nov 15, 2023
10
FRIED, BARBARA J.
FRIED COMPANIES INC. • REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT
IndividualCROZET, VA
$3,300
Dec 19, 2023

Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-7]

ID: M001163

Top Contributors

10

1
SOCIETY OF INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
PACFAIRFAX, VA
$2,500
Feb 7, 2023
2
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$2,000
Mar 10, 2023
3
KINNEY, MARY
MGK STYLE • STYLIST/CEO
IndividualSACRAMENTO, CA
$3,300
Oct 30, 2024
4
KONG, MINDY
N/A • HOMEMAKER
IndividualSACRAMENTO, CA
$3,300
Oct 25, 2024
5
TSAKOPOULOS, KATINA
SELF-EMPLOYED • SOMATIC EXPERIENCING PRACTITIONER
IndividualRANCHO SANTA FE, CA
$3,300
Nov 1, 2024
6
TSAKOPOULOS, SOFIA
N/A • HOMEMAKER
IndividualSACRAMENTO, CA
$3,300
Nov 1, 2024
7
VISMARA, LOUIS A.
IndividualSACRAMENTO, CA
$3,300
Nov 1, 2024
8
WAGNER, BELAN KIRK
WAGNER KIRKMAN BLAINE KLOMPARENS • ATTORNEY
IndividualMATHER, CA
$3,300
May 30, 2023
9
KELLEY, LARRY D.
MCCLELLAN PARK • REAL ESTATE
IndividualMCCLELLAN, CA
$3,300
May 11, 2023
10
FRIEDMAN, MARK L.
FULCRUM PROPERTY GROUP • REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER
IndividualSACRAMENTO, CA
$3,300
Jun 14, 2023

Rep. Scott, Austin [R-GA-8]

ID: S001189

Top Contributors

10

1
YOCHA DEHE WINTUN NATION
OrganizationBROOKS, CA
$3,300
Jun 30, 2023
2
MUSCOGEE CREEK NATION
OrganizationOKMULGEE, OK
$2,000
Dec 27, 2023
3
FREEDOM TRAILERS LLC
OrganizationWILLACOOCHEE, GA
$2,000
Oct 15, 2023
4
MUSCOGEE CREEK NATION
OrganizationOKMULGEE, OK
$2,000
Jun 27, 2024
5
PINE LAND PROPERTY LLC
OrganizationGRAY, GA
$2,000
May 31, 2024
6
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,650
May 15, 2024
7
BUZZ KILL HONEY FARM
OrganizationVALDOSTA, GA
$1,000
Oct 29, 2023
8
MONTY VEAZEY AND COMPANY
OrganizationTIFTON, GA
$1,000
Oct 15, 2023
9
ON POINT HEALTH LLC
OrganizationTIFTON, GA
$1,000
Oct 15, 2023
10
STARPORT LOGISTICS. LLC
OrganizationBONAIRE, GA
$1,000
May 31, 2024

Rep. Stevens, Haley M. [D-MI-11]

ID: S001215

Top Contributors

10

1
MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND OF POTTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationSHELBYVILLE, MI
$3,300
Oct 31, 2024
2
EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS
OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC
$3,300
Nov 6, 2024
3
MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND OF POTTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationSHELBYVILLE, MI
$3,300
Dec 29, 2023
4
NOTTAWASEPPI HURON BAND OF THE POTAWATOMI
OrganizationFULTON, MI
$3,300
Mar 6, 2024
5
POKAGON BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationDOWAGIAC, MI
$3,300
Sep 29, 2023
6
SAGINAW CHIPPEWA INDIAN TRIBE
OrganizationMT PLEASANT, MI
$3,300
Sep 29, 2023
7
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,650
Jun 5, 2023
8
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,650
Apr 29, 2024
9
SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION
OrganizationEL CAJON, CA
$1,500
Oct 24, 2023
10
SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA
$1,000
Dec 29, 2023

Rep. Davids, Sharice [D-KS-3]

ID: D000629

Top Contributors

10

1
HO-CHUNK NATION
OrganizationBLACK RIVER FALLS, WI
$3,300
Oct 21, 2024
2
LEECH LAKE BAND OF OJIBWE
OrganizationCASS LAKE, MN
$3,300
Nov 4, 2024
3
MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND OF POTTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationSHELBYVILLE, MI
$3,300
Oct 23, 2024
4
PASCUA YAQUI TRIBE
OrganizationTUCSON, AZ
$3,300
Nov 1, 2024
5
PRAIRIE ISLAND TRIBAL COUNCIL
OrganizationWELCH, MN
$3,300
Oct 23, 2024
6
REDDING RANCHERIA
OrganizationREDDING, CA
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
7
THE UTE INDIAN TRIBE
OrganizationFORT DUCHESNE, UT
$3,300
Nov 15, 2024
8
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$3,300
Dec 29, 2023
9
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$3,300
Dec 29, 2023
10
HO CHUNK NATION
OrganizationBLACK RIVER FALLS, WI
$3,300
Dec 8, 2023

Rep. Vindman, Eugene Simon [D-VA-7]

ID: V000138

Top Contributors

10

1
LUX FOR VIRGINIA
OrganizationLADYSMITH, VA
$500
Mar 29, 2024
2
LUX FOR VIRGINIA
OrganizationLADYSMITH, VA
$500
Mar 31, 2024
3
FORSTER-BURKE, DIANE
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualCOTTONWOOD HEIGHTS, UT
$4,000
Apr 20, 2024
4
FORSTER-BURKE, DIANE
IndividualCOTTONWOOD HEIGHTS, UT
$4,000
May 5, 2024
5
VON STEIN, THOMSON
IndividualROCKVILLE, MD
$3,500
Aug 7, 2024
6
HULL, MEGAN
SELF • ACTIVIST
IndividualWASHINGTON, DC
$3,300
Nov 2, 2024
7
KAISER, GEORGE
GBK CORPORATION • EXECUTIVE
IndividualTULSA, OK
$3,300
Oct 25, 2024
8
PARSONS, KATHLEEN
NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualPOTOMAC, MD
$3,300
Oct 18, 2024
9
STAPLE, HARISE
SELF • MD
IndividualLOS ALTOS, CA
$3,300
Oct 18, 2024
10
HOLMES, LAURA
SELF • REAL ESTATE INVESTOR
IndividualBOCA RATON, FL
$3,300
Oct 22, 2024

Rep. Riley, Josh [D-NY-19]

ID: R000622

Top Contributors

10

1
HOPE SPRINGS FARM
OrganizationROXBURY, NY
$3,300
Aug 20, 2024
2
THE PLANTSMEN NURSERY
OrganizationGROTON, NY
$500
Oct 11, 2024
3
FLOWERS BY ORZEL
OrganizationWHITNEY POINT, NY
$300
May 6, 2024
4
FLOWERS BY ORZEL
OrganizationWHITNEY POINT, NY
$300
Jun 5, 2024
5
HOPE SPRINGS FARM
OrganizationROXBURY, NY
$50
Sep 13, 2024
6
KIRK, CLAY KENAN
SELF-EMPLOYED • INVESTOR
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$6,600
Sep 23, 2024
7
KIRK, GARRETT JR
SELF-EMPLOYED • INVESTOR
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$6,600
Sep 23, 2024
8
TRONE, DAVID J.
IndividualPOTOMAC, MD
$6,600
Jan 21, 2024
9
LANDEGGGER, GEORGE F.
IndividualRYE BROOK, NY
$5,000
Jul 31, 2024
10
FAIVUS, HARRY
SELF-EMPLOYED • PHYSICIAN
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$5,000
Oct 28, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Miller-Meeks, Mariannette [R-IA-1]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 82 nodes and 40 connections (57 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $258,115

Top Donors - Rep. Miller-Meeks, Mariannette [R-IA-1]

Showing top 24 donors by contribution amount

1 PAC2 Orgs2 Committees19 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

  • Section 2(g)(1) allows grant funds to be used for increasing the number of transfer stations, which involves construction and engineering work, benefiting firms in the construction and engineering industry.

  • Section 2(g)(3) allows leveraging public-private partnerships to reduce costs of collecting and transporting recyclable materials, which may involve energy infrastructure such as transport logistics and related facilities, benefiting companies in pipelines and energy infrastructure.

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 Housing and Urban Development

Weak
Vector: 63%
Pages: 548-550AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill addresses recycling accessibility in underserved communities, whereas the Project 2025 HUD section focuses on housing policy reforms, DEI/ESG critiques, and administrative changes; they share only a tangential concern for underserved communities and equity considerations."

Key themes:underserved communitiesequityinfrastructureESG

— 515 — Department of Housing and Urban Development 25. Process must prioritize where political leadership can implement administrative reforms through regulatory action and subregulatory guidance reforms. 26. China and other foreign nations should not be able to disrupt our nation’s housing markets, including by artificially driving up prices and reducing affordability and access to housing for Americans who are crowded out of the market by such market participation. 27. These initiatives are maintained under such designations as diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); critical race theory (CRT); black, indigenous, Pacific Islander, and other people of color (BIPOC); and environmental, social, and governance (ESG). 28. At a minimum, these efforts duplicate what the federal government already collects and assesses; at worst, they institute arbitrary procedures in real estate appraisal practices that undermine integrity and perversely introduce arbitrary biases into what should be an unbiased system for determining financial value. 29. Revise regulatory and subregulatory guidance, where applicable within statutory authorities, that adds unnecessary delay and costs to the construction and development of new housing and has been estimated to account for about 40 percent of new housing unit costs in multifamily housing. 30. The Biden Administration has issued a proposed rule to replace the Trump Administration’s “Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice” rule that had repealed earlier rules expanding AFFH enforcement. See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Fair Housing, “Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 153 (August 7, 2020), pp. 47899–47912, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-08-07/pdf/2020-16320.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023), and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Secretary, “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 27 (February 9, 2023), pp. 8516–8590, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-07-16/pdf/2015-17032.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 31. Certain pilot initiatives may encourage greater take-up of loan products designed for faster equity accumulation, including loans with shorter terms and accelerated amortization schedules. In concept, the FHA’s Home Equity Accelerator Loan (HEAL) and Good Neighbor Next Door (GNND) pilot initiatives might lead to meaningful wealth generation for first-time buyers, but they should be available to all eligible households only when they do not arbitrarily discriminate based on race or other characteristics. 32. Housing supply does remain a problem in the U.S., but constructing more units at the low end of the market will not solve the problem. Investors and developers can deliver at more efficient cost new units that will allow for greater upward mobility of rental and ownership housing stock and better target increased construction of mid-tier rental units. Further, and more fundamental to the housing supply challenge in markets across the U.S., localities can consider revising land use, zoning, and building regulations that constrict new housing development, adding time delays and costs that impede construction. Federal housing policy should get out of the way where possible and minimize the distortive impact that stimulating greater demand through loose lending can have in driving up housing prices for households that are looking for affordable entry into the housing market. 33. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Secretary, “Housing and Community Development Act of 1980: Verification of Eligible Status,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 91 (May 10, 2019), pp. 20589–20595, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-05-10/pdf/2019-09566.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 34. Reforms should contemplate rent payment flexibilities, allow escrow savings, and set maximum term limits that can reduce implicit penalties for increasing household incomes over eligibility terms for housing assistance and reweight waiting-list prioritization for two-parent households. 35. Some PHAs have been able to implement work requirements and term limit policies in various congressionally authorized demonstration programs, notably the Moving to Work (MTW) demonstration program established in 1996 for 39 PHAs (Congress has since authorized another 100 PHAs) in which participating MTW PHAs were given authority to implement rent reforms, work requirements and other experimental policies in rental assistance programs along with flexibilities in the use of capital and operating appropriations. 36. The FSS program has a general five-year term with a possible two-year extension, which could be applied at the term limit for overall benefits, and certain PHAs have imposed five-year to seven-year term limits. Families in these programs build escrow savings during their term eligibility that helps to facilitate successful transitions to family self-sufficiency and unassisted housing. — 516 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 37. HUD should implement administrative changes in regulation and guidance and seek statutory authority to end all Housing First directives of Continuum of Care (CoC) grantees and contract homelessness providers in addition to establishing restrictions on local Housing First policies where HUD grant funds are used. 38. The U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) was established in the 1990s, and numerous Administrations have devoted enormous resources to the Housing First model, experimenting with various ways to provide federally financed rapid rehousing and permanent housing opportunities. Housing First is a far-left idea premised on the belief that homelessness is primarily circumstantial rather than behavioral. The Housing First answer to homelessness is to give someone a house instead of attempting to understand the underlying causes of homelessness. Federal intervention centered on Housing First has failed to acknowledge that resolving the issue of homelessness is often a matter of resolving mental health and substance abuse challenges. Instead of the permanent supportive housing proffered by Housing First, a conservative Administration should shift to transitional housing with a focus on addressing the underlying issues that cause homelessness in the first place. 39. The Senate Low-Income First-Time Homebuyers (LIFT) Act would address this policy goal. See S. 2797, Low-Income First-Time Homebuyers Act of 2021 (LIFT Homebuyers Act of 2021), 117th Congress, introduced September 22, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/s2797/BILLS-117s2797is.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 40. FHA did not facilitate the widespread use of 30-year mortgages until the 1950s when, interacting with Federal Reserve policies, federal agencies began broader adoption of the mortgages, which, despite lowering the monthly repayment terms, result in slow equity accumulation and wealth-building opportunities. 41. The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 fundamentally revised the scope of federal regulation in the nation’s housing finance system, placing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under the purview of a newly established Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and establishing a Housing Trust Fund (HTF) that is administered in the HUD Office of Community Planning and Development. See H.R. 3221, Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, Public Law No. 110-289, 110th Congress, July 30, 2008, https://www.congress. gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 42. Guiding questions: What reforms should be proposed that could be accomplished within five years? What reforms can be done administratively, and what reforms would need legislative authorization? Are there functions that HUD administers that could be achieved more effectively at another department or agency? What big-picture reforms should be proposed that might take more than five years that would reorganize HUD and its programs to meet the objectives in the vision or mission? What would occur in the absence of these public finance subsidies? How much crowd-out do these subsidies create in the market? Would America be a seriously underhoused nation without these subsidies? Who are the policies intended to benefit? What organizational changes must be made? 43. The Faircloth Amendment (Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998) amended the Housing Act of 1937 to maintain public housing units at 1999 levels, preventing housing authorities from maintaining more public housing than they did then. H.R. 4194, Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999, Public Law No. 105-276, 105th Congress, October 21, 1998, Title V, https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ276/PLAW-105publ276.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). In recent years, the statutory restriction on new construction of public housing units has been circumvented through some narrow uses of preservation programs such as the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) program, initially authorized in 2012 and reauthorized several times since under higher program unit conversion caps. Congress also provided paths for renewal and continuation of a portion of existing public housing; project/site-based housing stock (refinancing with long-term HAP contract commitments); and Section 8 units through the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (MAHRA). H.R. 2158, Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998, Public Law No. 105-65, 105th Congress, October 27, 1997, Title V, https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ65/PLAW-105publ65.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 44. As the evolution of HUD rental assistance transitions away from the public housing model toward housing choice vouchers, there should be adequate landlord participation to ensure that the supply of housing units for rent in these programs meets the demand for rent among eligible tenants. This issue has been addressed in various ways, including by a task force instituted at the department during the Trump Administration, but could likely remain a challenge in the administration of the program.

Environmental Protection Agency

Weak
Vector: 61%
Pages: 458-460AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on expanding recycling access through EPA-administered grants, while Project 2025 seeks to limit EPA's regulatory authority and streamline its processes; both involve EPA and environmental protection but have divergent objectives."

Key themes:EPAenvironmental protectiongrant administration

— 425 — Environmental Protection Agency are statutorily required, and remove any regulatory differences between attainment and maintenance that are not explicitly required by law. l Streamline the process for state and local governments to demonstrate that their federally funded highway projects will not interfere with NAAQS attainment. l Adopt policies to prevent abuse of EPA’s CAA “error correction” authority.20 EPA historically has used this to coerce states into adopting its favored policies on pain of imposition of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). l Limit EPA’s reliance on CAA § 30121 general rulemaking authority to ensure that it is not abused to issue regulations for which EPA lacks substantive authority elsewhere in the statute. l If possible, return the standard-setting role to Congress. Climate Change l Remove the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) for any source category that is not currently being regulated. The overall reporting program imposes significant burdens on small businesses and companies that are not being regulated. This is either a pointless burden or a sword-of- Damocles threat of future regulation, neither of which is appropriate. l Establish a system, with an appropriate deadline, to update the 2009 endangerment finding. l Establish a significant emissions rate (SER) for greenhouse gasses (GHGs). Regulating Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act22 l Repeal Biden Administration implementing regulations for the AIM Act that are unnecessarily stringent and costly. l Refrain from granting petitions from opportunistic manufacturers to add new restrictions that further skew the market toward costlier refrigerants and equipment. — 426 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Conduct realistic cost assessments that reflect actual consumer experiences instead of the current unrealistic ones claiming that the program is virtually cost-free. Mobile Source Regulation by the Office of Transportation and Air Quality l Establish GHG car standards under Department of Transportation (DOT) leadership that properly consider cost, choice, safety, and national security. l Review the existing “ramp rate” for car standards to ensure that it is actually achievable. l Include life cycle emissions of electric vehicles and consider all of their environmental impacts. l Restore the position that California’s waiver applies only to California- specific issues like ground-level ozone, not global climate issues. l Ensure that other states can adopt California’s standards only for traditional/criteria pollutants, not greenhouse gases. l Stop the use of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to increase standards on airplanes. l Reconsider the Cleaner Trucks Initiative to balance the goal of driving down emissions without creating significant costs or complex burdens on the industry. Air Permitting Reforms for New Source Review (Pre-Construction Per- mits) and Title V (Operating Permits) l Develop reforms to ensure that when a facility improves efficiency within its production process, new permitting requirements are not triggered. l Restore the Trump EPA position on Once-In, Always-In (that major sources can convert to area sources when affiliated emissions standards are met). l Revisit permitting and enforcement assumptions that sources will operate 24 hours a day, 365 days a year; this artificially inflates a source’s potential to emit (PTE), which can result in more stringent permit terms.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Weak
Vector: 60%
Pages: 413-415AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill addresses recycling infrastructure and accessibility, while the Project 2025 excerpt focuses on Department of Energy grid programs, clean energy demonstrations, and related subsidies; they share only broad themes of federal infrastructure funding and public-private partnerships, with no direct policy overlap."

Key themes:infrastructure investmentpublic-private partnershipsfederal grant programs

— 380 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Budget EERE was funded at slightly more than $2.8 billion in FY 2021, and DOE requested slightly more than $4.0 billion for FY 2023.47 Congress needs to rescind the appropriated monies that EERE has not spent and begin fresh with new appropriations. GRID DEPLOYMENT OFFICE (GDO) Mission/Overview The Grid Deployment Office was established to implement parts of the Infra- structure Investment and Jobs Act. Pursuant to the IIJA, GDO administers funds appropriated by Congress to support transmission expansion and low/zero carbon resources. In addition, GDO is developing studies of the electric grid to address congestion, enhance reliability and resilience, and promote “clean” energy.48 Needed Reforms l End grid planning and focus instead on reliability. FERC and NERC have the primary responsibility for addressing reliability, states have the primary authority to site and permit transmission lines, and regional transmission organizations assist in planning regional transmission needs for parts of the country, but Congress granted some grid planning and siting authority to FERC and DOE through the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and IIJA, as well as grid funding through the Inflation Reduction Act. Instead of focusing on grid expansion for the benefit of renewable resources or supporting low/carbon generation, GDO should be incorporated into the reformed Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response, which would work to enhance the grid’s reliability and resilience. To the extent that they remain in effect, the funding programs that GDO oversees and administers should emphasize grid reliability, not renewables expansion. l Consider whether to defund the civil nuclear tax credit program and hydroelectric power efficiency and production incentives established in the IIJA and administered through GDO. If subsidies for renewable resources are not repealed, it may be necessary to continue subsidies for nuclear and hydro to ensure grid reliability. New Policies l Eliminate GDO and assign necessary activities to the reformed CESER. It appears that GDO’s current purpose is to promote the integration of low/zero carbon resources onto the grid by supporting subsidies for such resources and building new transmission facilities at — 381 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions a cost that poses a barrier to renewable generation expansion. However, some of the grants that it administers under the IIJA appear to be properly focused on enhancing the reliability and security of the electric grid. They should be reassigned to the reformed and expanded CESER. l End DOE/GDO’s role in grid planning for the benefit of renewable developers. Under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and IIJA, DOE is to perform grid congestion studies and has authority to identify National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETC). Under the Biden Administration, GDO is working on a National Transmission Planning Study and is administering $2.5 billion to support “nationally significant transmission lines, increase resilience by connecting regions of the country, and improve access to cheaper clean energy sources.”49 l Defund most GDO programs. GDO oversees nearly $20 billion in new appropriations created by the IIJA, including a grid modernization grant program, the transmission facilitation program, and the civil nuclear credit program, among others. Congress should rescind any money not already spent. Budget Congress appropriated $10 million for GDO in FY 2021, and DOE has requested $90.2 million for FY 2023.50 OFFICE OF CLEAN ENERGY DEMONSTRATION (OCED) Mission/Overview The OCED was established in December 2021 to implement the IIJA. Its mis- sion is “[to] deliver clean energy demonstration projects at scale in partnership with the private sector to accelerate deployment, market adoption, and the equi- table transition to a decarbonized energy system.”51 Needed Reforms l End market distortions and stop shifting technology and development risks to taxpayers. The OCED is distorting energy markets and shifting the risk of new technology deployment from the private sector to taxpayers. The IIJA provided more than $20 billion in government subsidies to help the private sector deploy and market clean energy and decarbonizing resources. Government should not be picking winners and losers and should not be subsidizing the private sector to bring resources to market.

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.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills