Stop the Sexualization of Children Act
Download PDFSponsored by
Rep. Miller, Mary E. [R-IL-15]
ID: M001211
Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 18 - 13.
March 17, 2026
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 House
Senate 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 masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the intellectually bankrupt and morally vacuous members of Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Stop the Sexualization of Children Act (HR 7661) is a laughable attempt to prohibit the use of federal funds for programs or materials that allegedly "sexualize" children under 18. The real purpose? To score cheap points with the conservative base and pretend to care about the well-being of minors while actually doing nothing meaningful.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to prohibit funding for programs or materials that include "sexually oriented material," a term so vaguely defined it's essentially meaningless. The exceptions, however, are telling: standard science coursework, major world religions, classic works of literature, and art are all exempted. Because, you see, the Founding Fathers clearly intended for our children to be educated on the finer points of human anatomy while shielding them from the horrors of "gender dysphoria" or "transgenderism."
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: educators, administrators, and students will all be impacted by this bill. But let's not forget the real stakeholders: the politicians who sponsored this bill, who will no doubt use it to grandstand about their commitment to "family values" while lining their pockets with campaign donations from special interest groups.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of legislative placebo effect: it looks like something is being done, but in reality, nothing changes. The real impact will be on the already-embattled education system, which will now have to navigate even more bureaucratic red tape and ideological landmines. Meanwhile, the politicians behind this bill will continue to peddle their brand of moral panic, exploiting the fears and anxieties of parents while doing nothing to address the actual issues facing our children.
Diagnosis: This bill is a symptom of a deeper disease – the corruption of politics by ideology and special interests. The sponsors of this bill are suffering from a bad case of "Moral Outrage Syndrome," a condition characterized by an excessive need for self-righteous posturing and a complete disregard for evidence-based policy-making.
Treatment: A healthy dose of skepticism, a strong stomach for hypocrisy, and a willingness to call out the politicians behind this farce for what they are – cynical opportunists more interested in scoring points than solving problems.
Related Topics
đź’° Campaign Finance Network
Rep. Miller, Mary E. [R-IL-15]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No committee contributions found
Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance
This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
Rep. Downing, Troy [R-MT-2]
ID: D000634
Top Contributors
10
Rep. Fine, Randy [R-FL-6]
ID: F000484
Top Contributors
0
No contribution data available
Rep. Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17]
ID: S001214
Top Contributors
10
Rep. Gosar, Paul A. [R-AZ-9]
ID: G000565
Top Contributors
10
Rep. Ogles, Andrew [R-TN-5]
ID: O000175
Top Contributors
10
Rep. Hageman, Harriet M. [R-WY-At Large]
ID: H001096
Top Contributors
10
Rep. Stutzman, Marlin A. [R-IN-3]
ID: S001188
Top Contributors
4
Rep. Moore, Barry [R-AL-1]
ID: M001212
Top Contributors
10
Rep. Biggs, Sheri [R-SC-3]
ID: B001325
Top Contributors
10
Rep. Letlow, Julia [R-LA-5]
ID: L000595
Top Contributors
10
Donor Network - Rep. Miller, Mary E. [R-IL-15]
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 40 nodes and 42 connections
Total contributions: $222,210
Top Donors - Rep. Miller, Mary E. [R-IL-15]
Showing top 23 donors by contribution amount
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.
Introduction
AI Analysis:
"The bill's objective to restrict federal funding for programs that promote sexually oriented content to minors aligns with the Project 2025 policy's goal of protecting children from explicit or age-inappropriate material and promoting a culture of life. The bill also shares themes related to parental authority, education, and child welfare."
— 5 — Foreword (“DEI”), gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensi- tive, abortion, reproductive health, reproductive rights, and any other term used to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights out of every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists. Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children, for instance, is not a political Gordian knot inextricably binding up disparate claims about free speech, property rights, sexual liberation, and child welfare. It has no claim to First Amendment protection. Its purveyors are child predators and misogynistic exploiters of women. Their product is as addictive as any illicit drug and as psychologically destructive as any crime. Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered. In our schools, the question of parental authority over their children’s education is a simple one: Schools serve parents, not the other way around. That is, of course, the best argument for universal school choice—a goal all conservatives and con- servative Presidents must pursue. But even before we achieve that long-term goal, parents’ rights as their children’s primary educators should be non-negotiable in American schools. States, cities and counties, school boards, union bosses, princi- pals, and teachers who disagree should be immediately cut off from federal funds. The noxious tenets of “critical race theory” and “gender ideology” should be excised from curricula in every public school in the country. These theories poison our children, who are being taught on the one hand to affirm that the color of their skin fundamentally determines their identity and even their moral status while on the other they are taught to deny the very creatureliness that inheres in being human and consists in accepting the givenness of our nature as men or women. Allowing parents or physicians to “reassign” the sex of a minor is child abuse and must end. For public institutions to use taxpayer dollars to declare the superiority or inferiority of certain races, sexes, and religions is a violation of the Constitu- tion and civil rights law and cannot be tolerated by any government anywhere in the country. But the pro-family promises expressed in this book, and central to the next conservative President’s agenda, must go much further than the traditional, narrow definition of “family issues.” Every threat to family stability must be confronted. This resolve should color each of our policies. Consider our approach to Big Tech. The worst of these companies prey on children, like drug dealers, to get them addicted to their mobile apps. Many Silicon Valley executives famously don’t let their own kids have smart phones.2 They nevertheless make billions of dollars addicting other people’s children to theirs. TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms are specifically designed to create the digital — 6 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise dependencies that fuel mental illness and anxiety, to fray children’s bonds with their parents and siblings. Federal policy cannot allow this industrial-scale child abuse to continue. Finally, conservatives should gratefully celebrate the greatest pro-family win in a generation: overturning Roe v. Wade, a decision that for five decades made a mockery of our Constitution and facilitated the deaths of tens of millions of unborn children. But the Dobbs decision is just the beginning. Conservatives in the states and in Washington, including in the next conservative Administration, should push as hard as possible to protect the unborn in every jurisdiction in America. In particular, the next conservative President should work with Congress to enact the most robust protections for the unborn that Congress will support while deploying existing federal powers to protect innocent life and vigorously complying with statutory bans on the federal funding of abortion. Conservatives should ardently pursue these pro-life and pro-family policies while recognizing the many women who find themselves in immensely difficult and often tragic situations and the hero- ism of every choice to become a mother. Alternative options to abortion, especially adoption, should receive federal and state support. In summary, the next President has a moral responsibility to lead the nation in restoring a culture of life in America again. PROMISE #2: DISMANTLE THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE AND RETURN SELF-GOVERNANCE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. Of course, the surest way to put the federal government back to work for the American people is to reduce its size and scope back to something resembling the original constitutional intent. Conservatives desire a smaller government not for its own sake, but for the sake of human flourishing. But the Washington Establishment doesn’t want a constitutionally limited government because it means they lose power and are held more accountable by the people who put them in power. Like restoring popular sovereignty, the task of reattaching the federal gov- ernment’s constitutional and democratic tethers calls to mind Ronald Reagan’s observation that “there are no easy answers, but there are simple answers.” In the case of making the federal government smaller, more effective, and accountable, the simple answer is the Constitution itself. The surest proof of this is how strenuously and creatively generations of progressives and many Repub- lican insiders have worked to cut themselves free from the strictures of the 1789 Constitution and subsequent amendments. Consider the federal budget. Under current law, Congress is required to pass a budget—and 12 issue-specific spending bills comporting with it—every single year. The last time Congress did so was in 1996. Congress no longer meaningfully budgets, authorizes, or categorizes spending.
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.