Countering Transnational Repression Act of 2025
Download PDFSponsored by
Rep. Pfluger, August [R-TX-11]
ID: P000048
Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Invalid Date
Introduced
đź“Ť 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
đź“š 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
Another bill, another exercise in futility, another attempt to pretend that the Emperor's new clothes are actually made of something other than thin air and bureaucratic doublespeak.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Countering Transnational Repression Act of 2025 (CTR) is a bill that claims to address the "growing threat" of transnational repression, which it defines as actions taken by foreign governments or their agents to target individuals in the United States and abroad. The main purpose of this bill is to create a new working group within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to analyze and monitor these threats.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The CTR creates a Transnational Repression Working Group, which will be responsible for:
* Analyzing and monitoring transnational repression and terrorism threats * Coordinating with other federal agencies and intelligence community partners * Providing annual assessments of incidents of transnational repression and terrorism threats
This bill also authorizes the Director of Homeland Security Investigations to appoint a Director of the Transnational Repression Working Group, who will report to the Secretary of DHS.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include:
* Individuals in the United States and abroad who may be targeted by foreign governments or their agents * Federal agencies, including DHS, the Office of Intelligence and Analysis, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) * State, local, Tribal, and territorial partners * The National Network of Fusion Centers
**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic example of "security theater," where politicians create new bureaucratic entities to address perceived threats without actually addressing the underlying issues. The CTR will likely:
* Increase bureaucracy and administrative costs within DHS * Provide a new platform for politicians to grandstand about national security while doing little to actually improve it * Potentially infringe on civil liberties, as the working group's monitoring activities may raise concerns about surveillance and data collection
In short, this bill is a solution in search of a problem, a symptom of a deeper disease: the tendency of politicians to prioritize appearances over actual results. It's a waste of time, money, and resources that could be better spent addressing real security threats.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have more important things to attend to – like diagnosing the terminal stupidity of our elected officials.
Related Topics
đź’° Campaign Finance Network
Rep. Pfluger, August [R-TX-11]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
Donor Network - Rep. Pfluger, August [R-TX-11]
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 17 nodes and 23 connections
Total contributions: $101,135
Top Donors - Rep. Pfluger, August [R-TX-11]
Showing top 16 donors by contribution amount
Project 2025 Policy Matches
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. Higher similarity scores indicate stronger thematic connections.
Introduction
— 135 — Department of Homeland Security Unfortunately for our nation, the federal government’s newest department became like every other federal agency: bloated, bureaucratic, and expensive. It also lost sight of its mission priorities. DHS has also suffered from the Left’s wokeness and weaponization against Americans whom the Left perceives as its political opponents. To truly secure the homeland, a conservative Administration needs to return the department to the right mission, the right size, and the right budget. This would include reorganizing the department and shifting significant resources away from several supporting components to the essential operational components. Prior- itizing border security and immigration enforcement, including detention and deportation, is critical if we are to regain control of the border, repair the historic damage done by the Biden Administration, return to a lawful and orderly immi- gration system, and protect the homeland from terrorism and public safety threats. This also includes consolidating the pieces of the fragmented immigration system into one agency to fulfill the mission more efficiently. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is a DHS com- ponent that the Left has weaponized to censor speech and affect elections at the expense of securing the cyber domain and critical infrastructure, which are threat- ened daily.2 A conservative Administration should return CISA to its statutory and important but narrow mission. The bloated DHS bureaucracy and budget, along with the wrong priorities, provide real opportunities for a conservative Administration to cut billions in spending and limit government’s role in Americans’ lives. These opportunities include privatizing TSA screening and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Insurance Program, reforming FEMA emergency spending to shift the majority of preparedness and response costs to states and localities instead of the federal government, eliminating most of DHS’s grant pro- grams, and removing all unions in the department for national security purposes. A successful DHS would: l Secure and control the border; l Thoroughly enforce immigration laws; l Correctly and efficiently adjudicate immigration benefit applications while rejecting fraudulent claims; l Secure the cyber domain and collaborate with critical infrastructure sectors to maintain their security; l Provide states and localities with a limited federal emergency response and preparedness;
Introduction
— 135 — Department of Homeland Security Unfortunately for our nation, the federal government’s newest department became like every other federal agency: bloated, bureaucratic, and expensive. It also lost sight of its mission priorities. DHS has also suffered from the Left’s wokeness and weaponization against Americans whom the Left perceives as its political opponents. To truly secure the homeland, a conservative Administration needs to return the department to the right mission, the right size, and the right budget. This would include reorganizing the department and shifting significant resources away from several supporting components to the essential operational components. Prior- itizing border security and immigration enforcement, including detention and deportation, is critical if we are to regain control of the border, repair the historic damage done by the Biden Administration, return to a lawful and orderly immi- gration system, and protect the homeland from terrorism and public safety threats. This also includes consolidating the pieces of the fragmented immigration system into one agency to fulfill the mission more efficiently. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is a DHS com- ponent that the Left has weaponized to censor speech and affect elections at the expense of securing the cyber domain and critical infrastructure, which are threat- ened daily.2 A conservative Administration should return CISA to its statutory and important but narrow mission. The bloated DHS bureaucracy and budget, along with the wrong priorities, provide real opportunities for a conservative Administration to cut billions in spending and limit government’s role in Americans’ lives. These opportunities include privatizing TSA screening and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Insurance Program, reforming FEMA emergency spending to shift the majority of preparedness and response costs to states and localities instead of the federal government, eliminating most of DHS’s grant pro- grams, and removing all unions in the department for national security purposes. A successful DHS would: l Secure and control the border; l Thoroughly enforce immigration laws; l Correctly and efficiently adjudicate immigration benefit applications while rejecting fraudulent claims; l Secure the cyber domain and collaborate with critical infrastructure sectors to maintain their security; l Provide states and localities with a limited federal emergency response and preparedness; — 136 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Secure our coasts and economic zones; l Protect political leaders, their families, and visiting heads of state or government; and l Oversee transportation security. OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SEC) In the next Administration, the Office of the Secretary should take on the fol- lowing key issues and challenges to ensure the effective operation of DHS. Expansion of Dedicated Political Personnel. The Secretary of Homeland Security is a presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed political appointee, but for budgetary reasons, he or she has historically been unable to fund a dedi- cated team of political appointees. A key first step for the Secretary to improve front-office functions is to have his or her own dedicated team of political appoin- tees selected and vetted by the Office of Presidential Personnel, which is not reliant on detailees from other parts of the department, to help ensure the completion of the next President’s agenda. An Aggressive Approach to Senate-Confirmed Leadership Positions. While Senate confirmation is a constitutionally necessary requirement for appointing agency leadership, the next Administration may need to take a novel approach to the confirmations process to ensure an adequate and rapid transition. For example, the next Administration arguably should place its nominees for key positions into similar positions as “actings” (for example, putting in a person to serve as the Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Commissioner of CBP while that person is going through the confirmation process to direct ICE or become the Secretary). This approach would both guarantee implementation of the Day One agenda and equip the department for potential emergency situations while still honoring the confirmation requirement. The department should also look to remove lower-level but nevertheless important positions that currently require Senate confirmation from the confirmation requirement, although this effort would require legislation (and might also be mooted in the event of legisla- tion that closes portions of the department that currently have Senate-confirmed leadership). Clearer, More Durable, and Political-Only Line of Succession. Based on previous experience, the department needs legislation to establish a more durable but politically oriented line of succession for agency decision-making purposes. The ideal sequence for line of succession is certainly debatable, except that in cir- cumstances where a career employee holds a leadership position in the department, that position should be deemed vacant for line-of-succession purposes and the next eligible political appointee in the sequence should assume acting authority. Further,
Introduction
— 694 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. Terrorism and Financial Intelligence (TFI) was created in 2004 as part of the larger reorganization of the U.S. government to promote homeland security following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. TFI is charged with the mission of disrupting international financial support for terrorists, weapons of mass destruction proliferation, narcotics trafficking, money laundering, and other national security threats. It is also responsible for implementing and enforcing economic sanctions programs and supporting the wider law enforcement commu- nity in investigating financial crimes. It is led by the Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. International Affairs protects and supports U.S. economic prosperity and national security by working to foster the most favorable external environment for sustained employment and economic growth in the United States. The most crucial functions of the Office of International Affairs relate to managing the U.S.–China Strategic Dialogue; representing U.S. interests in the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other multilateral development banks; and overseeing the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS). It is led by the Under Secretary for International Affairs. Tax Policy formulates and develops tax policies and programs and works with Congress to get them passed into law. It reviews and issues regulations drafted by attorneys from the IRS’s Office of Chief Counsel to administer the Internal Reve- nue Code, negotiates tax information exchange agreements with the tax authorities of foreign governments, participates in international tax organizations, and pro- vides economic and legal policy analysis for domestic and international tax policy decisions. This office also provides revenue estimates for the President’s budget. It is led by the Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy. Economic Policy reports on current and prospective economic developments and assists in the determination of appropriate economic policies. This office is responsible for the review and analysis of domestic economic issues and develop- ments in financial markets. The Treasurer of the United States is a statutory office that has been assigned varying duties in recent Administrations. In addition to performing public out- reach, treasurers have at times headed Treasury’s financial education program and overseen the U.S. Mint and Bureau of Engraving and Printing. Four Inspectors General provide independent audits, investigations, and over- sight of Treasury and its programs: The Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Treasury; Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration; Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program; and the Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery. Treasury Bureaus. Seven Treasury Department bureaus comprise 98 percent of the Treasury work force and are responsible for carrying out specific operations assigned to the department.
Showing 3 of 5 policy matches
About These Correlations
Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.