No New Burma Funds Act
Download PDFSponsored by
Rep. Williams, Nikema [D-GA-5]
ID: W000788
Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Invalid Date
Introduced
đ 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
đ 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 masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this farce and expose the underlying disease.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The No New Burma Funds Act (HR 4423) is a thinly veiled attempt to appear tough on human rights while actually doing nothing meaningful. The bill's primary objective is to continue the pause on disbursements and new financing commitments to the Government of Burma, which was initiated after the military coup in 2021. Wow, what a bold move â continuing a pause that already exists. I'm sure the Burmese government is shaking in its boots.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill directs the Secretary of the Treasury to continue the pause on World Bank disbursements and commitments to Burma unless it's deemed not in the national interest. Oh, what a clever loophole! This provision essentially gives the administration carte blanche to do whatever it wants while pretending to care about human rights.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects are involved: politicians looking for a PR boost, lobbyists pushing their agendas, and voters who will likely remain blissfully ignorant of the bill's true intentions. The Burmese government might be slightly inconvenienced, but let's not pretend this bill will actually impact their behavior.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** The real impact of this bill is zero. It's a symbolic gesture designed to appease human rights activists and give politicians a talking point for their next campaign speech. The Burmese government will continue to do as it pleases, and the World Bank will likely find ways to circumvent the pause.
Now, let's diagnose the underlying disease:
* **Symptom:** A meaningless bill that accomplishes nothing. * **Disease:** Congressional cowardice and a desire for cheap PR points. * **Treatment:** None. This is a terminal case of legislative incompetence.
In conclusion, HR 4423 is a masterclass in doing nothing while appearing to do something. It's a perfect example of the cynical games politicians play to maintain their grip on power. And we, the voters, are complicit in this farce by electing these charlatans time and again. Bravo, America!
Related Topics
đ° Campaign Finance Network
Rep. Williams, Nikema [D-GA-5]
Congress 119 ⢠2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
Donor Network - Rep. Williams, Nikema [D-GA-5]
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 21 nodes and 30 connections
Total contributions: $97,350
Top Donors - Rep. Williams, Nikema [D-GA-5]
Showing top 20 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
â 691 â 22 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY William L. Walton, Stephen Moore, and David R. Burton INTRODUCTION The U.S. Treasury Department has a broad regulatory and policy reach. The next Administration should make major policy changes to: (1) reduce regulatory impediments to economic growth that reduce living standards and endanger pros- perity; (2) reduce regulatory compliance costs that increase prices and cost jobs; (3) promote fiscal responsibility; (4) promote the international competitiveness of U.S. businesses; and (5) better respect the American peopleâs due process and privacy rights. These goals should be accomplished through: executive action (primar- ily treasury orders and treasury directives) and departmental reorganization; rulemakings; promoting constructive policies in Congress; actions in international organizations; and treaties. The primary subject matter focus of the incoming Administrationâs Treasury Department should be: l Tax policy and tax administration; l Fiscal responsibility; l Improved financial regulation; l Addressing the economic and financial aspects of the geopolitical threat posed by China and other hostile countries; â 692 â Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Reform of the anti-money laundering and beneficial ownership reporting systems; l Reversal of the racist âequityâ agenda of the Biden Administration; and l Reversal of the economically destructive and ineffective climate-related financial-risk agenda of the Biden Administration. BIDEN ADMINISTRATION TREASURY DEPARTMENT The Biden Administration Treasury Department has failed badly in achieving every one of the agencyâs core objectives. The financial affairs of the nation have seldom been in worse condition, with the national debt expanding by more than $4 trillion in Bidenâs first two years in office. No President in modern timesâperhaps everâhas been more fiscally reckless than has the Biden Administration. The soundness and stability of U.S. currency, the dollar, has been put at risk because of the worst inflation in four decades. American families have been made poorer by Bidenâs economic strategy of taxing, spending, borrowing, regulating, and printing money. The average family has seen real annual earn- ings fall about $6,000 during the Biden Administration.1 In 2022, the average Americanâs 401(k) plan dropped in value from $130,700 to $103,900âmore than 20 percent.2 Why has the Biden Administration failed to achieve virtually all components of its mission? Under the leadership of Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, the depart- ment has made âequityâ and âclimate changeâ among its top five priorities. The next Administration must act decisively to curtail activities that fall outside Trea- suryâs mandate and primary mission. Treasury must refocus on its core missions of promoting economic growth, prosperity, and economic stability. For a clear statement of Treasuryâs mission drift, one need look no further than Secretary Yellenâs introduction in the Treasury Departmentâs Fiscal Year 2022â2026 Strategic Plan: We will have to address the structural problems that have plagued our economy for decades: the decline in labor force participation, income and racial inequality, and serious underinvestment in crucial public goods like childcare, education, and physical infrastructure. And then there are rising challenges, like climate change, which, left unchecked, will undermine every aspect of our economy from supply chains to the financial system.3 Treasuryâs mission drift into a âwokeâ agenda, is exemplified in a comparison of Domestic Financeâs changed responsibilities from 2015 to 2023:
Introduction
â 691 â 22 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY William L. Walton, Stephen Moore, and David R. Burton INTRODUCTION The U.S. Treasury Department has a broad regulatory and policy reach. The next Administration should make major policy changes to: (1) reduce regulatory impediments to economic growth that reduce living standards and endanger pros- perity; (2) reduce regulatory compliance costs that increase prices and cost jobs; (3) promote fiscal responsibility; (4) promote the international competitiveness of U.S. businesses; and (5) better respect the American peopleâs due process and privacy rights. These goals should be accomplished through: executive action (primar- ily treasury orders and treasury directives) and departmental reorganization; rulemakings; promoting constructive policies in Congress; actions in international organizations; and treaties. The primary subject matter focus of the incoming Administrationâs Treasury Department should be: l Tax policy and tax administration; l Fiscal responsibility; l Improved financial regulation; l Addressing the economic and financial aspects of the geopolitical threat posed by China and other hostile countries;
Introduction
â 660 â Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Moreover, the International Trade Administrationâwhich âis centrally placed to craft and implement U.S. trade policyââshould counter âthe malign influence of China and other U.S. adversariesâ and strongly âdefend against trade violations.â In Chapter 22, William L. Walton, Stephen Moore, and David R. Burton note that under the Biden Administration, the Treasury Department has failed to achieve any of the agencyâs core objectives. Under the leadership of Secretary Janet Yellen, Treasury has placed âequityâ and âclimate changeâ among its top five pri- orities. The next Administration must act decisively to curtail activities that fall outside of Treasuryâs mandate and primary mission. Treasury must refocus on its core mission of promoting economic growth, prosperity, and economic stability. The authors add that âTreasury should make balancing the federal budget a mis- sion-critical objective.â The authors propose legislation to reform the tax code, writing, Tax policy has a powerful impact on the economy. The Treasury Department should develop and promote tax reform legislation that will promote prosperity. To accomplish this, tax reform should improve incentives to work, save, and invest. This, in turn, is accomplished primarily by reducing marginal tax rates, reducing the cost of capital, and broadening the tax base to eliminate tax-induced economic distortions by eliminating special-interest tax credits, deductions, and exclusions. Tax compliance costs will decline precipitously if the tax system is substantially simplified. The Treasury Department should also promote tax competition rather than supporting an international tax cartel. Chapter 22 includes proposals to reduce the intrusiveness and increase the accountability of the Internal Revenue Service. The chapter also explains how the interagency Committee on Foreign Invest- ment in the United States (CFIUS), chaired by Treasury, should realign its priorities to meet the United Statesâ current foreign policy threats, especially from China. It explains how Treasuryâs Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, which manages the anti-money laundering/countering the financing of terrorism (AML-CFT) programs, can be improved to reduce the burden on small firms and improve the effectiveness of the AML-CFT regime. In Chapter 25, Karen Kerrigan describes the Small Business Administration (SBA) as a âsprawling, unaccountable agencyâ replete with âwaste, fraud, and mis- managementâ and guilty of âmission creep.â Moreover, its âinitiatives aimed at âinclusivityâ are in fact creating exclusivity and stringent selectivity in deciding what types of small businesses and entities can use SBA programs.â According to Kerrigan, the Office of Advocacy âis one of the bright spots within the SBA that a conservative Administration could supercharge to dismantle extreme regulatory â 661 â Section 4: The Economy policies and advance limited-government reforms that promote economic free- dom and opportunity.â She recommends that it receive a big increase in funding and staffing and then undertake âa research agenda that includes measuring the total cost that federal regulation imposes on small businesses.â This would be one important step in making sure that âthe SBA under a conservative Administration would meet the needs of Americaâs small-business owners and entrepreneurs, not special interests.â Former White House director of the domestic policy council Paul Winfree writes in Chapter 24 that the Federal Reserve actually causes âinflationary and recessionary cycles.â He says, âA core problem with government control of mone- tary policy is its exposure to two unavoidable political pressures: pressure to print money to subsidize government deficits and pressure to print money to boost the economy artificially until the next election.â The Fed has also added a âmoral hazardâ due to its âhistory of bailing out private firms when they engage in excess speculation.â At a âminimum,â Winfree writes, âfull employmentâ should be elim- inated from the Federal Reserveâs mandate, ârequiring it to focus on price stability alone.â The Fed should not be allowed to incorporate âenvironmental, social, and governance factors into its mandate.â It should be compelled âto specify its target range for inflation.â Its last-resort lending practices, âwhich are directly respon- sible for âtoo big to fail,ââ should be curbed. Its mission, and alternatives to the Fed, should be explored by a commission created for that purpose. And a central bank digital currency, which âwould provide unprecedented surveillance and potential control of financial transactions,â should be rejected. Even more ambitiously, Winfree suggests that the next Administration should think about proposing legislation that would âeffectively abolishâ the Federal Reserve and replace it with âfree banking,â whereby âneither interest rates nor the supply of moneyâ would be âcontrolled by government.â Free banking would produce a âstable and soundâ currency and a âstrongâ financial system, âwhile allowing lending to flourish.â Alternatively, Winfree writes, the next Administra- tion should âconsider the feasibility of a return to the gold standard.â
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.