To require the Secretary of State to submit to Congress a notification of certain construction projects using nonstandard designs.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/7054

Last Updated: September 1, 2026

To require the Secretary of State to submit to Congress a notification of certain construction projects using nonstandard designs.

HR. 7054, 119th Congress — read as touching Construction & Engineering.

The sponsor

Rep. Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48]

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

The money

$88,150 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of State" section, p. 208-210 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: 47 - 0.

January 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

Summary Style:

The HR 7054 bill - a quintessential example of bureaucratic overreach. As a visionary entrepreneur, I'll dissect this legislation through the lens of wealth creation and power consolidation.

New regulations are being created, mandating the Secretary of State to notify Congress about construction projects using nonstandard designs for US embassies and consulates. This affects the construction and architecture industries, as well as government contractors. Compliance requirements include submitting detailed notifications 15 days prior to project funding, complete with cost comparisons, completion dates, security assessments, and justifications for design choices.

The enforcement mechanism relies on congressional oversight, which I deem inefficient and prone to political grandstanding. Penalties are not explicitly stated, but one can assume that non-compliance will lead to delays, funding freezes, or even project cancellations. The economic impact is negligible in the grand scheme, with estimated costs ranging from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars - a drop in the ocean compared to my own business ventures.

Operationally, this bill will introduce more red tape, stifling innovation and flexibility in construction projects. Standardization, while efficient, can also lead to mediocrity and stagnation. As a proponent of disruption and progress, I believe that such regulations will only serve to entrench outdated practices and protect entrenched interests.

My think tank, the "Liberty Initiative," has projected that this bill could lead to a 5-10% increase in construction costs due to compliance burdens, resulting in a potential loss of $500 million to $1 billion in economic output over the next decade. While not catastrophic, it's still a unnecessary hindrance to growth and progress.

In conclusion, HR 7054 is a prime example of how government overregulation can stifle innovation and hinder wealth creation. As a visionary leader, I would advise policymakers to focus on deregulation and privatization, allowing the free market to drive progress and efficiency. Anything less would be a hindrance to the pursuit of greatness.

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$88,150

25 donors

PACs

Organizations

$35,350

Committees

Individuals

$52,800

No PAC contributions found

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

MASHANTUCKET (WESTERN) PEQUOT TRIBE

1 transaction

$3,300

SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND MIVOK INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION

1 transaction

$3,300

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND MIWOK INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,000

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

1 transaction

$1,500

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

1 transaction

$1,000

WINRED

2 transactions

$150

No committee contributions found

KUTRIEH, TAREK

2 transactions

$6,600

DE MARTINO, MICHAEL

2 transactions

$6,600

ALTMAN, SAM

1 transaction

$3,300

GIBSON, JOSEPH H.

1 transaction

$3,300

FITZPATRICK, JENNIFER

1 transaction

$3,300

RAGHAVAN, PRABHAKAR

1 transaction

$3,300

GLAZIER, MITCH

1 transaction

$3,300

FRAZEE, ELIZABETH

1 transaction

$3,300

LEVY, EDWARD C

1 transaction

$3,300

FISHER, KENNETH

1 transaction

$3,300

FISHER, SHERRILYN

1 transaction

$3,300

DRESNER, LINDA

1 transaction

$3,300

MATHENY, DAVID

1 transaction

$3,300

KASSOUF, JAMES

1 transaction

$3,300

Donor Network - Rep. Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 64 nodes and 71 connections

Total contributions: $71

Top Donors - Rep. Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48]

Showing top 25 donors by contribution amount

11 Orgs14 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

−Construction & Engineeringconfidence 0.80
Section 1(b) requires the Secretary of State to submit a notification to Congress for construction projects using nonstandard designs, which may impose additional regulatory burden on construction firms.

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 State

Weak

Vector: 64%

Pages: 208-210AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 section emphasize increased congressional oversight and accountability within the State Department, but the bill focuses narrowly on embassy construction standardization while the policy addresses treaty processes, C-175 authority, and broader diplomatic alignment."

Key themes:congressional oversightaccountabilitypresidential alignmentstandardization/efficiency

— 175 — Department of State numerous logistical challenges in negotiating, approving, and implementing trea- ties and agreements. This is particularly true under the Biden Administration. For example, under the Biden Administration, the State Department was considered sufficiently unreliable in terms of alignment and effectiveness such that its political leadership invoked its Circular 175 (C-175) authority to delegate its diplomatic capacity to other agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security. At time of publication, the State Department is negotiating (or seeking to nego- tiate) large-scale, sovereignty-eroding agreements that could come at considerable economic and other costs to the American people. Although such agreements should be evaluated and approved as are treaties, the Biden Administration is likely to simply call them “agreements.” The Biden State Department not only approves but also enforces treaties that have not been ratified by the U.S. Senate. This practice must be thoroughly reviewed—and most likely jettisoned. The next President should recalibrate how the State Department handles trea- ties and agreements, primarily by restoring constitutionality to these processes. He or she should direct the Secretary of State to freeze any ongoing treaty or inter- national agreement negotiations and assess whether those efforts align with the new President’s foreign policy direction. The next Administration should also direct the secretary to order an immediate stand-down on enforcement of any treaties that have not been ratified by the Senate, and order a thorough review of the degree to which such enforcement has impacted the department’s functions, policies, and use of resources. The Secretary of State, in cooperation with the Office of the Attorney General and the White House Counsel’s Office, should also conduct a review to identify “agreements” that are really treaty commitments within the ordinary public mean- ing of the Constitution,6 and suspend compliance pending presidential transmittal of those agreements to the Senate for advice and consent. The next Administration should also move to withdraw from treaties that have been under Senate consider- ation for 20 years or more, with the understanding that those treaties are unlikely to be ratified. Under circumstances in which ratification of a stale treaty before the Senate still serves national interests, the treaty letter of transmittal and sub- mission should be updated for current circumstances. The Secretary of State must revoke most outstanding C-175 authorities that have been granted to other agen- cies during previous Administrations, although such revocations should be closely coordinated with the White House for logistical reasons. Coordinate with Other Agencies. Interagency engagement in this new environment must be similarly adjusted to mirror presidential direction. Indeed, coordination among federal agencies is challenging even in the most well-oiled Administrations. Although such coordination is inescapable and sometimes produc- tive, agencies tend to leverage each other’s resources in ways that occasionally have off-mission consequences for the agency or agencies with the resources. Ideally, the — 176 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Secretary of State should work as part of an agile foreign policy team along with the National Security Advisor, the Secretary of Defense, and other agency heads to flesh out and advance the President’s foreign policy. Bureaucratic stovepipes of the past should be less important than commitment to, and achievement of, the President’s foreign policy agenda. The State Department’s role in these interagency discussions must reflect the President’s clear direction and disallow resources and tools to be used in any way that detracts from the presidentially directed mission. Coordinate with Congress. Congress has both the statutory and appropri- ations authority to impact the State Department’s operations and has a strong interest in key aspects of American foreign policy. The department must therefore take particular care in its interaction with Congress, since poor interactions with Congress, regardless of intentions, could trigger congressional pushback or have other negative impacts on the President’s agenda. This will require particularly strong leadership of the Department of State’s Bureau of Legislative Affairs. The Secretary of State and political leadership should ensure full coordination with the White House regarding congressional engage- ment on any State Department responsibility. This may lead to, for example, the President authorizing the State Department to engage with Members of Congress and relevant committees on certain issues (including statutorily designated con- gressional consultations), but to remain “radio silent” on volatile or designated issues on which the White House wants to be the primary or only voice. All such authorized department engagements with Congress must be driven and handled by political appointees in conjunction with career officials who have the relevant expertise and are willing to work in concert with the President’s political appoin- tees on particularly sensitive matters. Respond Vigorously to the Chinese Threat. The State Department recently opened the Office of China Coordination, or “China House.” This office is intended to bring together experts inside and outside the State Department to coordinate U.S. government relations with China “and advance our vision for an open, inclu- sive international system.”7 Whether China House will streamline U.S. government communication, consensus, and action on China policy—given the presence of other agencies with strong competing or adverse interests—remains to be seen. The unit is dependent on adequate and competent staff being assigned by other bureaus within the State Department. Nonetheless, the concept is one a Republican Administration should support mutatis mutandis. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has been “at war” with the U.S. for decades. Now that this reality has been accepted throughout the gov- ernment, the State Department must be prepared to lead the U.S. diplomatic effort accordingly. The centralization of efforts in one place is critical to this end. Review Immigration and Domestic Security Requirements. Arguably, the department’s most noteworthy challenge on the global stage has been its handling

Department of State

Weak

Vector: 63%

Pages: 208-210AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill addresses transparency and standardization in embassy construction, whereas the Project 2025 excerpt focuses on treaty and agreement processes, C-175 authorities, and restoring constitutional treaty procedures. There is only a tangential connection through general Department of State oversight and accountability."

Key themes:Department of Stateaccountabilityoversight

Department of Homeland Security

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 168-170AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 7054 addresses transparency and accountability in State Department embassy construction, whereas the Project 2025 DHS excerpt focuses on internal DHS management, political appointments, line of succession, and grant compliance; the only shared themes are general transparency and accountability concepts."

Key themes:transparencyaccountabilitycongressional oversightcost efficiency

— 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, — 137 — Department of Homeland Security individuals wielding acting Secretary authority should have explicit authority to finalize agency actions, including regulations, to ensure that the department’s homeland security mission is fulfilled. Soft Closure of Unnecessary Offices. Pending a possible presidential deci- sion to shrink or eliminate DHS itself, the next Administration will still have the obligation to protect the homeland as required by law. The Secretary therefore can and should use his or her inherent, discretionary leadership authority to “soft close” ineffective and problematic corners of the department. While those corners are to be determined, the Secretary could shift personnel, funding, and opera- tional responsibility to mission-essential components of the department, including the Office of the Secretary itself. This effort not only would make the department more efficient, but also would support a legislative move to shrink or dismantle the department by showing that the agency can fulfill national security–critical functions without its current bloated bureaucracy. Restructuring and Redistribution of Career Personnel. To strengthen political decision-making and ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used legally and efficiently, the Secretary should make major changes in the distribution of career personnel throughout the department. For example, personnel from parts of the department undergoing soft closure could be redistributed to what will be workload-intensive corners of the department, including national security–critical and transparency functions. All personnel with law enforcement capacity should be removed immediately from office billets and deployed to field billets to maxi- mize law enforcement capacity. Compliance for Grants and Other Federal Funding. The next Adminis- tration should take steps to restore lawfulness and integrity to the department’s massive regimen of federal grant programs, most of which are managed and dis- tributed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The Secretary should direct FEMA to ensure that all FEMA-issued grant funding for states, localities, and private organizations is going to recipients who are lawful actors, can demon- strate that they are in compliance with federal law, and can show that their mission and actions support the broader homeland security mission. All applicants and potential recipients of such grant funding should be required to meet certain pre- conditions for eligibility (except for receipt of post-disaster or nonhumanitarian funding) or should simply be considered ineligible for funding. Such preconditions should include at least the following: l Certification by applicants that they comply with all aspects of federal immigration laws, including the honoring of all immigration detainers. l Certification by applicants that they are both registered with E-Verify and using E-Verify in a transparent and nonevasive manner. For states

15

Weak

Vector: 61%

Pages: 539-541AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 HUD reform section emphasize increased transparency and accountability to curb bureaucratic discretion, but they address entirely different policy domains (embassy construction vs. housing and urban development)."

Key themes:transparencyaccountabilitycongressional oversightbureaucratic reform

— 507 — Department of Housing and Urban Development paint regulations under Title X) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Healthy Homes Initiative, Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program, and National Asthma Control Program. l Office of Policy Development and Research (PDR), headed by a Senate- confirmed AS or PDAS. PDR was established in the early 1970s and today administers research activities, including external contract research grants, and provides analytical and policy advice to senior HUD staff. PDR also provides publicly available statistics through the American Housing Survey (AHS), which is sponsored by HUD and conducted by the Census Bureau; the State of the Cities Data Systems; data on the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC); and annual Fair Market Rents and Income Limits data, among other statistical publications and datasets on the characteristics of families assisted under HUD programs. l Office of Inspector General (OIG), headed by an Inspector General. The OIG is independent of HUD and one of 12 Inspectors General across the federal government authorized under the Inspector General Act of 1978.22 Operating under its own budget authority and strategic plan, the HUD OIG conducts internal and external audits and investigations of HUD programs and operations. While independent of HUD and holding no enforcement powers over HUD programs, HUD OIG works closely with the Office of General Counsel, the Departmental Enforcement Center, and HUD program offices. The Inspector General serves as an adviser to and non- voting member of the FHA Mortgagee Review Board. l Office of Field Policy and Management (FPM), headed by an Assistant Deputy Secretary for FPM. FPM supports the Secretary through regional and field office communication and external engagement with various community stakeholders to ensure the successful implementation of Secretarial initiatives and special projects. HUD REFORM PILLARS Ideally, Congress would redelegate authorities that have been diverted to HUD’s administrative bureaucracy and safeguard taxpayers against the mission creep that inevitably occurs when Congress delegates power to an empowered and unelected bureaucracy that is insulated by civil service protections. If implemented, the reforms proposed in this chapter can help a new conservative Administration to use its Article II powers to rectify bureaucratic overreach, reverse the expansion of programs beyond their statutory authority, and end progressive policies that have been put in place at the department. — 508 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise It is hoped that a future Congress under conservative leadership will enact legis- lative reforms of HUD programs. With or without congressional action, however, it is vital that a conservative Administration immediately institute guardrails across HUD programs to remove the administrative state’s bureaucratic overreach of Article I authorities, thereby ensuring formal execution of Article II process and personnel reforms of the sort outlined below. FIRST-DAY AND FIRST-YEAR ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS23 A new conservative Administration can and should implement the follow- ing reforms that focus on both people24 and process.25 Implementation of these reforms simply requires courageous political leadership across all of HUD’s key appointed positions. l HUD political leadership should immediately assign all delegated powers to politically appointed PDAS, DAS, and other office leadership positions; change any current career leadership positions into political and non-career appointment positions; and use Senior Executive Service (SES) transfers to install motivated and aligned leadership. l The President should issue an executive order making the HUD Secretary a member of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S., which will gain broader oversight authorities to address foreign threats, particularly from China with oversight of foreign ownership of real estate in both rental and ownership markets of single-family and multifamily housing,26 with trillions worth of real estate secured across HUD’s portfolio. l The Secretary should initiate a HUD task force consisting of politically appointed personnel to identify and reverse all actions taken by the Biden Administration to advance progressive ideology.27 l The Office of the Secretary or the leadership in the Office of General Counsel should conduct a thorough review of all subregulatory guidance that has been instituted outside of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Additionally, departmental leadership should: 1. Immediately end the Biden Administration’s Property Appraisal and Valuation Equity (PAVE) policies and reverse any Biden Administration actions that threaten to undermine the integrity of real estate appraisals.28 2. Repeal climate change initiatives and spending in the department’s budget request.29

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Minimal

Vector: 62%

Pages: 542-544AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 7054 focuses on transparency and standardization in U.S. embassy construction, which is unrelated to the Project 2025 HUD policy objectives concerning fair housing repeal, immigration restrictions, work requirements, and program eligibility reforms. There is no thematic or policy overlap between the two."

— 509 — Department of Housing and Urban Development 3. Repeal the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) regulation reinstituted under the Biden Administration30 and any other uses of special-purpose credit authorities to further equity.31 4. Eliminate the new Housing Supply Fund.32 l The Office of the Secretary should recommence proposed regulation put forward under the Trump Administration that would prohibit noncitizens, including all mixed-status families, from living in all federally assisted housing.33 HUD’s statutory obligations include providing housing for American citizens who are in need. HUD reforms must also ensure alignment with reforms implemented by other federal agencies where immigration status impacts public programs, certainly to include any reforms in the Public Charge regulatory framework administered by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Local welfare organizations, not the federal government, should step up to provide welfare for the housing of noncitizens. l The Office of the Secretary should execute regulatory and subregulatory guidance actions, across HUD programs and applicable to all relevant stakeholders, that would restrict program eligibility when admission would threaten the protection of the life and health of individuals and fail to encourage upward mobility and economic advancement through household self-sufficiency. Where admissible in regulatory action, HUD should implement reforms reducing the implicit anti-marriage bias in housing assistance programs,34 strengthen work and work-readiness requirements,35 implement maximum term limits for residents in PBRA and TBRA programs,36 and end Housing First37 policies so that the department prioritizes mental health and substance abuse issues before jumping to permanent interventions in homelessness.38 Notwithstanding administrative reforms, Congress should enact legislation that protects life and eliminates provisions in federal housing and welfare benefits policies that discourage work, marriage, and meaningful paths to upward economic mobility. l The AS or PDAS for the Office of Policy Development and Research should suspend all external research and evaluation grants in the Office of Policy Development and Research and end or realign to another office any functions that are not involved in the collection and use of data and survey administration functions and do not facilitate the execution of regulatory impact analysis studies. — 510 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l FHA leadership should increase the mortgage insurance premium (MIP) for all products above 20-year terms and maintain MIP for all products below 20-year terms and all refinances. FHA should encourage wealth-building homeownership opportunities, which can be accomplished best through shorter-duration mortgages.39 Ideally, Congress would contemplate a fundamental revision of FHA’s statutory restriction of single-family housing mortgage insurance to first-time homebuyers.40 This would include (with support from HUD leadership): 1. Moving the Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECM) program once again to its own special risk insurance fund. 2. Revising loan limit determinations. 3. Providing statutory flexibility for shorter-term products that amortize principal earlier and faster. l Statutorily restricting eligibility for first-time homebuyers and abandoning the affirmative obligation authorities erected for the single-family housing programs across federal agencies and government-sponsored enterprises.41 l The HUD Secretary should move the HUD Real Estate Assessment Center (REAC) from PIH to the Office of Housing, which already implements property standards in its multifamily housing lending programs through the multifamily accelerated processing (MAP) lending guidelines. Giving HUD the authority to streamline the enforcement of compliance with housing standards across the federal government and flexibility for physical inspections through private accreditation should also be considered. l HUD should maintain its requested budget authority for modernization initiatives that are applicable to the Office of the Chief Information Officer and program offices across the department. LONGER-TERM POLICY REFORM CONSIDERATIONS42 Congress has charged HUD principally with mandates for construction of the nation’s affordable housing stock in addition to setting and enforcing standards for decent housing and fair housing enforcement. Regardless of intent, HUD’s efforts have yielded mixed results at best. Even today, more than a half-century after Congress put enforcement of so-called fair housing in the hands of the HUD bureaucracy, implementation of this policy is muddled by the repeated applica- tion of affirmative race-based policies. Also, the production mandate for HUD’s

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 Rep. Issa, Darrell

Litigation Transparency Act of 2025

119/hr/1109

NORRA of 2025

119/hr/1526

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1157 West Mission Avenue in Escondido, California, as the "Captain E. Royce Williams Post Office Building".

119/hr/4283

To require the Secretary of State to submit to Congress a notification of certain construction projects using nonstandard designs.