To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 401 North Elm Street in Tuskegee, Alabama, as the "Tuskegee Airmen Memorial Post Office".
Download PDFSponsored by
Rep. Figures, Shomari [D-AL-2]
ID: F000481
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, brought to you by the esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** Ah, yes, the "Tuskegee Airmen Memorial Post Office" bill. Because what America really needs is another post office with a fancy name. The main purpose of this bill is to stroke the egos of its sponsors and provide a feel-good moment for the constituents back home. It's a classic case of "Look, we're doing something!" while actually accomplishing nothing.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** Oh boy, this one's a doozy. The bill designates a single post office in Tuskegee, Alabama, as the "Tuskegee Airmen Memorial Post Office." Wow, I bet that took hours of intense deliberation and debate. The only change to existing law is that any reference to this post office will now include its new, fancy name. Because, clearly, this is a pressing issue that required immediate attention.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Let's see... the affected parties include:
* The sponsors of the bill, who get to pat themselves on the back for "honoring" the Tuskegee Airmen. * The constituents in Alabama, who will no doubt be thrilled to have a post office with a new name (yawn). * The United States Postal Service, which will now have to update its records and signage. Oh, the humanity! * And, of course, the Tuskegee Airmen themselves, whose legacy is being used as a prop for this legislative farce.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** Ah, the impact of this bill? Well, let me put on my thinking cap... (tapping sound) Hmm... I've got it! The potential impact of this bill is that people might feel slightly warmer and fuzzier about their government. For a whole 30 seconds. Until they realize that nothing actually changed.
In conclusion, HR 6006 is a perfect example of legislative malpractice. It's a pointless exercise in self-aggrandizement, designed to distract from the real issues facing this country. But hey, at least it's not as bad as some of the other bills floating around Congress. That's like saying a patient with terminal cancer has a slightly better prognosis than one with Ebola. Congratulations, America! You've got a new post office name to brag about. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have real problems to solve â like diagnosing the underlying disease that is our legislative system.
Related Topics
đ° Campaign Finance Network
Rep. Figures, Shomari [D-AL-2]
Congress 119 ⢠2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
Donor Network - Rep. Figures, Shomari [D-AL-2]
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 25 nodes and 30 connections
Total contributions: $76,300
Top Donors - Rep. Figures, Shomari [D-AL-2]
Showing top 24 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 543 â Department of the Interior 68. Karen Budd Falen, âBidenâs â30 By 30 Planâ: A Slap at American Private Property Rights,â Cowboy State Daily, April 15, 2021, https://cowboystatedaily.com/2021/04/15/bidens-30-by-30-plan-a-slap-at-american-private- property-rights/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 69. U.S. Department of the Interior, âOrder No. 3396: Rescission of Secretaryâs Order 3388, âLand and Water Conservation Fund Implementation by the U.S. Department of the Interior,ââ February 11, 2021, https://www. doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so-3396-signed-2-11-21-final.pdf (accessed March 17, 2021). 70. Ibid. 71. Associated Press, âUte Indian Tribe Criticizes Bidenâs Camp Hale Monument Designation,â KUER 90.1, October 13, 2022. 72. William Perry Pendley, âTrump Wants to Free Up Federal Lands, His Interior Secretary Fails Him,â National Review Online, September 25, 2017, https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/09/secretary-interior-ryan-zinke- monuments-review-trump-executive-order-antiquities-act-environmentalists/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 73. The Oregon and California Revested Lands Sustained Yield Management Act of 1937, Public Law 75-405, 43 U.S. Code § 2601. 74. Ibid., and American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d 184, 187 (D.D.C. 2019). 75. American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d, pp. 187â188. 76. Federal Register, Vol. 55, No. 26 (June 26, 1990), p. 26114â26194. 77. Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 114 (June 13, 2000), pp. 37249â37252. 78. Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 11 (January 18, 2017), pp. 6145â6150. 79. American Forest Resource Council v. Hammond, 422 F. Supp. 3d 184 (D.D.C. 2019). 80. U.S. Department of the Interior, âFinal Consent Decrees/Settlement Agreements,â https://www.doi.gov/ solicitor/transparency/final (accessed March 16, 2023). 81. Michael Doyle, âInterior Order Erases Litigation Website,â E&E News, June 17, 2022, https://www.eenews.net/ articles/interior-order-erases-litigation-website/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 82. Rob Roy Ramey, On the Origin of Specious Species (Lexington Books 2012), pp. 77â97. 83. William Perry Pendley, âKilling Jobs to Save the Sage Grouse: Junk Science, Weird Science, and Plain Nonsense,â Washington Times, May 31, 2012, https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/31/killing- jobs-to-save-the-sage-grouse/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 84. Michael Lee, âWyomingâs Push to Delist Grizzly Bears from Endangered Species List Faces Opposition from Anti-Hunting Group,â Fox News, January 21, 2022, https://www.foxnews.com/politics/wyoming-delist-grizzly- endangered-species-list-opposition-anti-hunting-group (accessed March 18, 2023). 85. News release, âTrump Administration Returns Management and Protection of Gray Wolves to States and Tribes Following Successful Recovery Efforts,â October 29, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/trump- administration-returns-management-and-protection-gray-wolves-states-and-tribes (accessed March 18, 2023). 86. 50 Code of Federal Regulations §17, and Sean Paige, ââRewildingâ Will Backfire on Colorado,â The Gazette, June 19, 2022, https://gazette.com/opinion/guest-column-rewilding-will-backfire-on-colorado/article_ d0016672-ed79-11ec-b027-abe62ba840a1.html (accessed March 18, 2023). 87. Madeleine C. Bottrill et al., âIs Conservation Triage Just Smart Decision Making?â Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Vol. 23, No. 12 (December 2008), pp. 649â654, https://karkgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/Bottrill-et-al-2008. pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 88. Rob Roy Ramey II, testimony before the Committee on Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, April 8, 2014, https://naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rameytestimony4_8.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 89. Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, Public Law 95â87. 90. Pennsylvania is the nationâs third-largest coal producer, and its state program was the model for SMCRA. 91. Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 207 (October 26, 2020), pp. 67631â67635. 92. U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, âApproximate Original Contour,â INEâ26, June 23, 2020, https://www.osmre.gov/sites/default/files/pdfs/directive1003.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 93. Tim Gallaudet and Timothy R. Petty, âFederal Action Plan for Improving Forecasts of Water Availability,â National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, October 2019, https://www.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/ legacy/document/2019/Oct/Federal%20Action%20Plan%20for%20Improving%20Forecasts%20of%20 Water%20Availability.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). â 544 â Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 94. 32 U.S. Code, ch. 52. 95. Donald J. Trump, âPresidential Memorandum on Promoting the Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West,â October 19, 2018, https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/presidential- memorandum-promoting-reliable-supply-delivery-water-west/ (accessed March 17, 2023). 96. U.S. Department of the Interior, âLand Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations,â https://www.doi.gov/ buybackprogram (accessed March 18, 2023). 97. Great American Outdoors Act, Public Law 116â152.
Introduction
â 160 â Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Officerâs procurement of innovative technology; and the facilities plan, including the consolidation into the St. Elizabethâs campus. They should also be prepared to help implement any end to unionization of DHS components in response to an executive order pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 7103.15 Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO). DHS responsibilities to work with Congress have been split between the Office of Legislative Affairs (OLA) and OCFO. OLA deals with the authorizing committees on policy issues, and OCFO works with the appropriations committees on budget planning, execution, and reprogramming. This split creates communication and visibility issues within DHS and inconsistency in answers to Congress. This is an issue not only within the HQ model, but also through- out the components. Either appropriations personnel should be moved to OLA and there should be a âdotted lineâ reporting structure to OCFO, or a policy that OLA per- sonnel must be included on communications to Congress should be implemented. To avoid âanswer shoppingâ by congressional staff, particularly appropriations staff, all budget communications from the OCFO, including from the CFO him/ herself, should first be provided to the Director of OLA to ensure consistency of information, messaging, and answers. This may be deemed awkward given that the OCFO is a Senate-confirmed position, but it is necessary to avoid inaccuracies and inconsistencies in messaging. Federal Protective Service (FPS). FPS needs federal agents to develop, share, and receive operational information and maintain direct contact with the Secretary in the midst of heightened threats. Before the summer 2020 civil unrest, position- ing FPS under MGMT was justified, but given the current climate, they should not be reporting through MGMT. This may be especially problematic if a Management Directorate Under Secretary lacking law enforcement or military experience is in place when a situation like summer 2020 arises. FPS should report to the Secretary as other components (e.g., FLETC) do. This would add little to the Secretaryâs current burden unless or until civil unrest arises, at which point reporting to the Secretary creates a direct line between the primary DHS decision-maker (S1 or S2) and the FPS Director. Regarding operational communication, there should be information-sharing mandates (MOAs)âwhich are applicable under specific circumstances where fed- eral facilities are involvedâbetween FPS and the U.S. Marshals, U.S. Park Police, and FBI. Agreements with U.S. Capitol Police and Supreme Court Police should also be considered, but it is noteworthy that those entities are jurisdictionally out- side of the executive branch. OFFICE OF STRATEGY, POLICY, AND PLANS (PLCY) Department-Level Reforms. PLCY should perform a complete inventory, analysis, and reevaluation of the departmentâs domestic terrorism lines of effort to ensure that they are consistent with the Presidentâs priorities, congressional authorization, and Americansâ constitutional rights. â 161 â Department of Homeland Security PLCY should likewise do a complete inventory, analysis, and evaluation of any of the departmentâs work, in coordination with social media outlets, to censor or otherwise change or affect Americansâ speech. PLCY should comprehensively report on and publish this history in full so that the American people can know the facts. The department should remove all personnel who participated in any of this activity. The department has significant authority and budget to provide grants for var- ious purposes. This effort is diffused across components and lacks central policy thought and coordination. PLCY should set a departmentwide policy that estab- lishes how granting choices are to be made and is consistent with the Presidentâs priorities. PLCY should clear all granting decisions to ensure that they are con- sistent with the new policy. PLCY-Wide Reforms. PLCY should work with Congress to streamline the departmentâs reporting requirements. Because there has not been a departmen- tal reauthorization bill and these requirements have been added piecemeal over two decades, they significantly overlap and even conflictâwasting resources and distracting from the departmentâs mission. PLCY should seek the elimination of the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review. Issue-Area Reforms. PLCY should bolster its Immigration Statistics program and make it the one-stop shop for the timely production of all department immi- gration statistics and analysis. OFFICE OF INTELLIGENCE AND ANALYSIS (I&A) The Office of Intelligence and Analysis should be eliminated both because it has not added value and because it has been weaponized for domestic politi- cal purposes. The Intelligence Community (IC) already provides raw intelligence to DHS components. In addition, the FBI, National Counter Terrorism Center, and other agencies where necessary already provide holistic threat assessment products to federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial governments as well as to private-sector entities at both the classified and unclassified levels where appropriate. I&Aâs work as an interlocuter between the IC and DHS componentsâ individual intelligence operations on the one hand and government and the private sector on the other, as well as between the IC and the components, is at best duplicative. At worst, it is used and discussed in the media as a political tool, resulting in more harm than good to the U.S. government and IC writ large. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which is not a member of the IC, should create cyber intelligence products in a collaborative fashion with the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command. Such efforts would lead to timelier usable classified and unclassified products for stakeholders that exceed the quality and capability of I&Aâs efforts. This same principle applies to other
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.