AWRC Act of 2025

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/7889
Last Updated: September 15, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Wittman, Robert J. [R-VA-1]

ID: W000804

Follow the money

The bill

AWRC Act of 2025

HR. 7889, 119th Congress — read as touching AI & Cloud Infrastructure.

The sponsor

Rep. Wittman, Robert J. [R-VA-1]

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

The money

$151,800 raised

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

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Energy and Related Commissions" section, p. 425-427 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

September 14, 2026

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

Passed House

Senate Review

📍 Current Status

Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.

🎉

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

**HR 7889 – AWRC Act of 2025: A Legislative Placebo for a Thirsty Nation**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** Let’s cut through the bureaucratic fog: this bill doesn’t solve water scarcity, drought, or crumbling infrastructure. Its stated goal is to reauthorize the Water Resources Research and Technology Institutes program—a sleepy corner of federal bureaucracy that’s been limping along since 1984. The real objective? To slap a fresh coat of “innovation” paint on a rusted pipe and call it progress. By name-dropping “artificial intelligence” in Section 2, Congress pretends it’s futuristic while doing nothing to address the fact that AI won’t make it rain in Arizona. This is legislative cosplay: looking busy while the aquifers keep dropping.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill makes three kinds of changes: trivial, confusing, and mildly consequential. - Section 2 adds “including the growing artificial intelligence industry” to the list of private sector partners—because nothing says “water security” like letting tech bros pitch neural networks for predicting evaporation. - Section 3 is a typographical nightmare: it renumbers subsections, strikes redundant phrases (“subsection 104(g) of this Act” → “subsection (g)”), and generally cleans up congressional copy-paste errors from decades ago. Think of it as proofreading a term paper written by a sleep-deprived intern. - The substance: it reauthorizes $16 million per year (FY 2026–2029) for water research institutes, with up to 20% earmarked for interstate water problems. That’s less than the annual budget of a single mid-sized university’s engineering department. Groundbreaking.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** - **Water Research Institutes**: Get a nominal funding extension—enough to keep the lights on but not enough to hire more than a grad student or two. They’ll now have to pretend AI is relevant to their work to satisfy the bill’s buzzword mandate. - **Private Industry (AI Sector)**: Granted symbolic access to federal water research dollars—likely to fund PowerPoint presentations, not actual hydrology. Expect vague partnerships where Silicon Valley sells “disruption” to bureaucrats who still use fax machines. - **Congress**: Gets to claim it’s “advancing water research” while avoiding any real investment in infrastructure, conservation, or climate adaptation. A win for optics, a loss for anyone who drinks water. - **Taxpayers**: Subsidize a feel-good exercise in legislative navel-gazing. Your money funds seminars on blockchain for water rights—because why fix leaks when you can tokenize them?

**Potential Impact & Implications** Impact? Minimal. This is not a drought bill. It’s a reauthorization bill with a thesaurus and a grudge against clear language. The $64 million over four years is a rounding error in federal spending—less than what we spend daily on air conditioning the Pentagon. The AI mention is pure pandering: a desperate attempt to make stale science sound sexy. The interstate water focus is sensible but underfunded—like giving a band-aid to someone hemorrhaging. In short: HR 7889 is legislative homeopathy. It dilutes meaningful action into oblivion, then sells the vial as a cure. It won’t quench anyone’s thirst—but it will keep the research institutes employed just long enough to publish another paper no one reads. Congratulations, Congress. You’ve diagnosed the symptom and prescribed a sugar pill. Again.

Related Topics

Research & Innovation PolicyWater & Air Quality RegulationsGovernment Operations & Accountability
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Wittman, Robert J. [R-VA-1]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$151,800
19 donors
PACs
$6,600
Organizations
$6,600
Committees
$0
Individuals
$138,600
1
THE CHICKASAW NATION
2 transactions
$6,600
1
CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA
1 transaction
$3,300
2
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
1 transaction
$3,300

No committee contributions found

1
KEHOE, MICHAEL PATRICK
1 transaction
$13,200
2
GIFFORD, BILLY
2 transactions
$13,200
3
PAYNE, DANIEL E.
2 transactions
$13,200
4
CASEY, ARTHUR S.
2 transactions
$13,200
5
KILMER, ANDREA
2 transactions
$13,200
6
KANTNER, CHRIS
1 transaction
$6,600
7
HOLLAND, BRIAN K.
1 transaction
$6,600
8
HOLLAND, JENNIFER
1 transaction
$6,600
9
MCCONN, RICHARD
1 transaction
$6,600
10
MADERA, PAUL
1 transaction
$6,600
11
SHAH, RAJ
1 transaction
$6,600
12
THOMPSON, BRUCE
1 transaction
$6,600
13
WITTERSHEIM, RAYMOND
1 transaction
$6,600
14
KELLY, SUSAN
1 transaction
$6,600
15
SCHWARZMAN, STEPHEN A.
1 transaction
$6,600
16
SCHWARZMAN, CHRISTINE H.
1 transaction
$6,600

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Brownley, Julia [D-CA-26]

ID: B001285

Top Contributors

24

1
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$3,300
Mar 5, 2024
2
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$3,300
Mar 5, 2024
3
BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA
$2,000
Jun 28, 2024
4
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$1,000
Feb 23, 2024
5
PRISELAC, TOM M.
CEDAR SINAI HEALTH SYSTEMS • EXECUTIVE
IndividualSANTA MONICA, CA
$3,300
Oct 31, 2024
6
BUCHMAN, MICHELLE J.
N/A • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualCARBONDALE, CO
$3,300
Nov 18, 2023
7
CONROY, ROBERTA
N/A • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualSANTA MONICA, CA
$3,300
Dec 1, 2023
8
SAVAGE, KEVIN
N/A • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualBEVERLY HILLS, CA
$3,300
Dec 31, 2023
9
STEVENS, SETH R.
SOUTHERN CA PERMANENTE GROUP • DERMATOLOGIST
IndividualNEWBURY PARK, CA
$3,300
Oct 28, 2023
10
UNTERMAN, JANET M.
N/A • NOT EMPLOYED
IndividualPACIFIC PALISADES, CA
$3,300
Dec 8, 2023

Rep. Lawler, Michael [R-NY-17]

ID: L000599

Top Contributors

21

1
MURTAGH, COSSU, VENDITTI & CASTRO-BLANCO, LLP
OrganizationWHITE PLAINS, NY
$1,000
Feb 24, 2024
2
BATMASIAN, JAMES
INVESTMENTS LIMITED • OWNER
IndividualBOCA RATON, FL
$6,600
Sep 27, 2023
3
BATMASIAN, JAMES
IndividualBOCA RATON, FL
$6,600
Sep 29, 2023
4
AUSTIN, ROBERT
UNAKA CO., INC. • BUSINESSMAN
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$6,600
Jul 18, 2024
5
SILVERMAN, JEFFREY
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualSURFSIDE, FL
$6,534
Feb 15, 2024
6
SILVERMAN, JEFFREY
IndividualSURFSIDE, FL
$6,534
Feb 22, 2024
7
SCALA, MARY ELLEN
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualPORT CHESTER, NY
$5,300
Aug 27, 2023
8
DEUTSCH, SHMULEY
SELF • PRESIDENT
IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY
$3,900
Jun 24, 2024
9
DEUTSCH, SHMULEY
IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY
$3,900
Jun 25, 2024
10
PERLMUTTER, RAFUEL
GOLDEN TASTE • CEO
IndividualSPRING VALLEY, NY
$3,400
Jun 24, 2024

Rep. McGuire, John J. [R-VA-5]

ID: M001239

Top Contributors

0

No contribution data available

Rep. Griffith, H. Morgan [R-VA-9]

ID: G000568

Top Contributors

20

1
BUNN, JAMES O.
CENTRAL COAL CO • MINING ENGINEER
IndividualBRISTOL, VA
$3,300
Dec 18, 2024
2
CHARLES, DAVID
MOOD PRODUCTS GROUP LLC • EXECUTIVE
IndividualAUSTIN, TX
$3,300
Dec 4, 2023
3
HAMER, JONATHAN S.
MASTERY CONSULTING • BUSINESS CONSULTANT
IndividualRANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
$3,300
Dec 22, 2023
4
JOURNAY, JUSTIN
3CHI • EXECUTIVE
IndividualFISHERS, IN
$3,300
Dec 22, 2023
5
PATEL, GOPESH
VLS PHARMACY INC • PHARMACIST
IndividualNEW HYDE PARK, NY
$3,300
Oct 26, 2023
6
RAY, RICHIE
RICHIE'S SPECIALTY PHARMACY • PHARMACIST
IndividualTHE WOODLANDS, TX
$3,300
Oct 27, 2023
7
RAY, RICHIE
RICHIE'S SPECIALTY PHARMACY • PHARMACIST
IndividualTHE WOODLANDS, TX
$3,300
Oct 27, 2023
8
WORLEY, JEFFREY
COLUMBIA CONSULTING • EXECUTIVE
IndividualARGYLE, TX
$3,300
Dec 6, 2023
9
BLUMENFELD, JACOB
QUEST MANAGEMENT GROUP LLC • REAL ESTATE
IndividualBALTIMORE, MD
$3,300
Feb 23, 2024
10
CRANE, DAVID
BOSE PUBLIC AFFAIRS GROUP • CONSULTANT
IndividualALEXANDRIA, VA
$3,300
Mar 6, 2024

Rep. Hurd, Jeff [R-CO-3]

ID: H001100

Top Contributors

26

1
OTERO COUNTY REPUBLICAN WOMEN
OrganizationLA JUNTA, CO
$2,000
Nov 22, 2024
2
GARY DOEHLING PC
OrganizationGRAND JUNCTION, CO
$2,000
Jan 22, 2024
3
MESA COUNTY REPUBLICAN MEN'S CLUB
OrganizationGRAND JUNCTION, CO
$500
Nov 22, 2024
4
DEARMAN CONSULTING LLC
OrganizationMEEKER, CO
$500
Feb 12, 2024
5
L BAR SLASH RANCH
OrganizationMEEKER, CO
$500
Feb 12, 2024
6
MONTEZUMA COUNTY REPUBLICAN CENTRAL COMMITTEE
OrganizationCORTEZ, CO
$200
Oct 30, 2024
7
BENSON, BRUCE
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualDENVER, CO
$5,000
Nov 1, 2024
8
ABBOTT, DEBRA
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualMONTROSE, CO
$3,300
Sep 30, 2024
9
ABBOTT, SARAH
IRELAND STAPLETON PRYOR AND PASCOE PC • LAWYER
IndividualMONTROSE, CO
$3,300
Sep 3, 2024
10
ABBOTT, THOMAS
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualMONTROSE, CO
$3,300
Sep 30, 2024

Rep. McDowell, Addison P. [R-NC-6]

ID: M001240

Top Contributors

20

1
FLOW, MEGHAN
HOMEMAKER • HOMEMAKER
IndividualLEWISVILLE, NC
$6,600
Mar 1, 2024
2
FLOW, MEGHAN
IndividualLEWISVILLE, NC
$6,600
Feb 29, 2024
3
KING, SEBASTIAN
SELF EMPLOYED • CONSULTANT
IndividualPFAFFTOWN, NC
$3,435
May 28, 2024
4
JOHNSON, BRIAN
IndividualALEXANDRIA, VA
$3,300
Oct 23, 2024
5
BROWN, THOMAS
MINDSET • PARTNER
IndividualCHEVY CHASE, MD
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
6
TOWNSEND, JOHN
PAY TEL COMMUNICATIONS • OWNER
IndividualKERNERSVILLE, NC
$3,300
Oct 20, 2024
7
BRAUER, CAMILLA
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualBRIDGETON, MO
$3,300
Sep 20, 2024
8
BRAUER, STEPHEN
HUNTER ENGINEERING • CHAIRMAN
IndividualBRIDGETON, MO
$3,300
Sep 18, 2024
9
SHAHEEN, LAWRENCE
SELF-EMPLOYED • ATTORNEY
IndividualCHARLOTTE, NC
$3,300
Jul 16, 2024
10
CANNON, CRAIG
KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON • ATTORNEY
IndividualWINSTON SALEM, NC
$3,300
Dec 31, 2024

Rep. Pingree, Chellie [D-ME-1]

ID: P000597

Top Contributors

37

1
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$5,000
Aug 6, 2024
2
MASHANTUCKET PEQUOT TRIBAL NATION
OrganizationMASHANTUCKET, CT
$3,300
Oct 30, 2024
3
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$3,300
Jun 5, 2023
4
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$3,300
Jun 11, 2024
5
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$3,300
Jun 18, 2024
6
MOORETOWN RANCHERIA
OrganizationOROVILLE, CA
$3,300
Sep 30, 2024
7
FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA
OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA
$1,700
Sep 19, 2024
8
CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA
OrganizationDURANT, OK
$1,650
Sep 30, 2023
9
AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY
OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ
$1,000
Oct 18, 2024
10
MUSCOGEE CREEK NATION
OrganizationOKMULGEE, OK
$1,000
Dec 26, 2023

Rep. Shreve, Jefferson [R-IN-6]

ID: S001229

Top Contributors

20

1
SASSO, APRIL
HOMEMAKER • HOMEMAKER
IndividualCARMEL, IN
$6,600
Oct 30, 2024
2
PONDER, JACQUELINE
BOWMAN FAMILY HOLDINGS • LAWYER
IndividualGREENWOOD, IN
$3,437
Oct 29, 2024
3
KING, CHRISTOPHER M.
RUNNEBOHM CONSTRUCTION, INC. • OWNER
IndividualSHELBYVILLE, IN
$3,300
Jun 7, 2024
4
CALDWELL, JORDAN
CALDWELL'S INC. • EXECUTIVE
IndividualSHELBYVILLE, IN
$3,300
Oct 20, 2024
5
DOPPELT, BRIAN
BAINBRIDGE COMPANIES • EXECUTIVE
IndividualBOCA RATON, FL
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
6
KING, KYLIE A.
HOMEMAKER • HOMEMAKER
IndividualSHELBYVILLE, IN
$3,300
Oct 20, 2024
7
SASSO, RICK C.
INDIANA SPINE GROUP • PHYSICIAN
IndividualCARMEL, IN
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
8
SCHUMACHER, AMY MAE
THE HERITAGE GROUP • CEO
IndividualCARMEL, IN
$3,300
Oct 22, 2024
9
MCALLISTER, CHRIS
TARBERT PROPERTIES LP • PARTNER
IndividualINDIANAPOLIS, IN
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
10
ZINK, JAMES C.
ZINK DISTRIBUTING • CHAIRMAN / CEO
IndividualINDIANAPOLIS, IN
$3,300
Nov 2, 2024

Rep. Kiggans, Jennifer A. [R-VA-2]

ID: K000399

Top Contributors

23

1
AIPAC- EARMARKS
PACWASHINGTON, DC
$2,000
Oct 22, 2024
2
PEAKE FOR SENATE
COMLYNCHBURG, VA
$500
Jan 9, 2024
3
PEAKE FOR SENATE
COMLYNCHBURG, VA
$250
Jan 9, 2024
4
KEHOE, MICHAEL
KINSALE MGMT INC • CEO
IndividualRICHMOND, VA
$13,200
Jun 8, 2023
5
MITCHUM, ELZA
C & M INDUSTRIES • PRESIDENT
IndividualCHESAPEAKE, VA
$6,600
Oct 18, 2023
6
SILVERMAN, JEFFREY
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualMIAMI BEACH, FL
$6,600
Oct 17, 2023
7
PERRY, J DOUGLAS
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualNORFOLK, VA
$6,600
Nov 6, 2023
8
WEEKLEY, RICHARD
SELF EMPLOYED • REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$6,600
Nov 8, 2023
9
GILLIAM, MARVIN
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualBRISTOL, VA
$6,600
Mar 30, 2024
10
BOHANNON, DAVID
LONDON BRIDGE TRADING INC. • PRESIDENT
IndividualVIRGINIA BEACH, VA
$6,600
May 23, 2024

Rep. McClain Delaney, April [D-MD-6]

ID: M001232

Top Contributors

0

No contribution data available

Donor Network - Rep. Wittman, Robert J. [R-VA-1]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

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

Loading...

Showing 45 nodes and 53 connections

Total contributions: $53

Top Donors - Rep. Wittman, Robert J. [R-VA-1]

Showing top 19 donors by contribution amount

1 PAC2 Orgs16 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

  • Section 2 amends the Water Resources Research Act to include 'including the growing artificial intelligence industry' in the congressional declaration of purpose, indicating a benefit to AI industry through research funding eligibility.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Wittman, Robert J. [R-VA-1])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HELPS

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 Energy and Related Commissions

Strong
Vector: 63%
Pages: 425-427AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The AWRC Act's focus on integrating artificial intelligence into water resources research and transferring resulting technologies to private and public stakeholders aligns closely with Project 2025's emphasis on advancing AI and natural resource development technologies for American benefit and ensuring swift private-sector transfer of federally funded R&D."

Key themes:artificial intelligencenatural resource developmentprivate sector technology transferbenefits to Americans

— 393 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions l Ensure that R&D funds are used for projects that protect and advance that edge. l Ensure that successful advances, with a focus on new natural resource development technologies, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and space, are transferred swiftly to American interests in the private sector. New Policies l Focus on benefits to Americans. OTT’s operations should be based on the recognition that the new technologies generated by American taxpayers’ investment in DOE are a significant national security asset rather than some neutral scientific gift to humanity. l Increase oversight and coordination. OTT needs to be vigilant in overseeing and coordinating OTT offices associated with each National Lab. For security and economic espionage reasons, the work funded by the American people needs to be protected, and when commercialized, it needs to go to American businesses. OFFICE OF SCIENCE (SC) Mission/Overview The Office of Science (SC) supports and oversees research facilities and pro- grams that cover basic science through its application to the demonstration and deployment of energy technologies. SC oversees 10 of the 17 DOE National Labs and 28 major federal research user facilities. Its mission is to preserve U.S. leader- ship in science, fund and perform basic research, and provide the scientific facilities that the private sector is unable or unwilling to provide. New initiatives include quantum information sciences and artificial intelligence. SC is led by a Senate-con- firmed Director at the Assistant Secretary level and has eight program offices.82 Needed Reforms The next conservative President should commit the United States to scientific dominance to support national and economic security, especially in light of similar efforts by China. To aid in this effort, the Office of Science should: l Return to its primary mission: nonpartisan and basic science. SC’s mission should be international leadership in basic and early applied science and provision of world-leading facilities for this work. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Inflation Reduction Act mark the major — 394 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise reorientation of DOE primarily from defense applications in the NNSA and basic and early applied science across SC and the applied offices to a massive federal research, development, demonstration, and commercialization body.83 Distraction from SC’s basic science mission should be prevented. l Increase the level of accountability. The National Laboratories need to be more directly accountable to the Secretary of Energy and Congress for their work and management. New Policies l Commit to U.S. science dominance. The United States is losing its dominance in scientific discoveries and technological development. China and other adversaries have been stealing American science and technology for years and are now on the verge of dominating science—a development that is fraught with negative strategic and economic implications for the United States. The next Administration must commit itself to ensuring that the U.S. continues to dominate scientific discovery and technological advancement. l Refocus on mission and eliminate duplication and waste. The Administration should work with Congress to rationalize the National Lab network to meet specific national objectives (such as the NNSA laboratories’ role in national defense) and conduct basic research that the private sector would not otherwise conduct. Activities that duplicate those of other government agencies or the private sector should be eliminated. l Properly manage the National Labs’ contributions to the private sector. SC should improve private-sector access to the National Labs, through programs like the GAIN voucher program and consistent with national security considerations, while ensuring that the economic benefits of taxpayer-funded technologies flow back to taxpayers through patent- review sharing or a revolving fund. Budget The Office of Science was appropriated slightly more than $7 billion in FY 2021, and DOE requested slightly less than $7.8 billion for FY 2023.84 OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (EM) Mission/Overview The Office of Environmental Management’s mission is to “complete the safe cleanup of [the] environmental legacy resulting from decades of nuclear

Environmental Protection Agency

Moderate
Vector: 62%
Pages: 479-481AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on water resources research and collaboration, including AI integration, which aligns with Project 2025's broader environmental protection goals under the EPA section, particularly concerning water quality and infrastructure. However, it does not directly address the specific EPA regulatory provisions or deregulatory aims highlighted in the Project 2025 policy excerpts."

Key themes:water researchenvironmental protectiontechnology integrationfederal-state collaboration

— 447 — Environmental Protection Agency 19. 42 U.S. Code § 7426(b), https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7426 (accessed January 26, 2023). 20. 42 U.S. Code § 7410(k)(5)–(6), https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7410 (accessed January 26, 2023). 21. 42 U.S. Code § 7601(a), https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7601 (accessed January 26, 2023). 22. 42 U.S. Code § 7675, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7675 (accessed January 26, 2023). 23. 42 U.S. Code § 7411, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7411 (accessed January 26, 2023). 24. 42 U.S. Code § 7411(d). 25. 42 U.S. Code § 7412, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7412 (accessed January 26, 2023). 26. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Summary of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq. (1972),” last updated July 6, 2022, https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-water-act (accessed January 26, 2023). 27. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Summary of the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. §300f et seq, (1974),” last updated September 12, 2022, https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-safe-drinking- water-acthttps://www.epa.gov/sdwa (accessed January 26, 2023). 28. Memorandum from David P. Ross, Assistant Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, to Office of Water Program Directors, “Subject: Office of Water Policy for Draft Documents,” August 6, 2019, https:// www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/documents/ow_policy_for_draft_documents_to_ow_program_ directors_signed_002.pdf (accessed January 26, 2023). 29. 33 U.S. Code § 1341, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/33/1341 (accessed January 26, 2023). 30. Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006), https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/547/04-1034/ index.pdf (accessed January 25, 2023). 31. 33 U.S. Code § 1318, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/33/1318 (accessed January 26, 2023). 32. 33 U.S. Code § 1342, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/33/1342 (accessed January 26, 2023). 33. 33 U.S. Code § 1344, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/33/1344 (accessed January 26, 2023). 34. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Summary of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. §6901 et seq. (1976),” last updated September 12, 2022, https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary- resource-conservation-and-recovery-act (accessed January 27, 2023). 35. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Summary of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (Superfund), 42 U.S.C. §9601 et seq. (1980),” last updated September 12, 2022, https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-comprehensive-environmental-response- compensation-and-liability-act (accessed January 27, 2023). 36. 42 U.S. Code § 7412(r), https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7412 (accessed January 27, 2023). 37. 42 U.S. Code § 6924(n), https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/6924 (accessed January 27, 2023). 38. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Summary of the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. §2601 et seq. (1976),” last updated October 4, 2022, https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-toxic-substances- control-act (accessed January 27, 2023). 39. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Summary of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, 7 U.S.C. §136 et seq. (1996),” last updated September 12, 2022, https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/ summary-federal-insecticide-fungicide-and-rodenticide-act (accessed January 27, 2023). 40. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Summary of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. §301 et seq. (2002),” last updated September 12, 2022, https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-federal- food-drug-and-cosmetic-act (accessed January 27, 2023). 41. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act,” last updated March 24, 2022, https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/frank-r- lautenberg-chemical-safety-21st-century-act (accessed January 27, 2023), and “Highlights of Key Provisions in the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act for the 21st Century,” last updated February 12, 2020, https:// www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/highlights-key-provisions-frank-r-lautenberg- chemical (accessed January 27, 2023). 42. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Summary of the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §1531 et seq. (1973),” last updated September 12, 2022, https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-endangered- species-act (accessed January 27, 2023). 43. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “PRIA Overview and History,” last updated July 19, 2022, https://www. epa.gov/pria-fees/pria-overview-and-history (accessed January 27, 2023). — 448 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 44. Table, “EPA Budget by National Program Manager and Major Office,” in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, United States Environmental Protection Agency Fiscal Year 2023 Justification of Appropriation Estimates for the Committee on Appropriations, p. 1076. 45. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “All Federal Advisory Committees at EPA,” last updated March 10, 2023, https://www.epa.gov/faca/all-federal-advisory-committees-epa (accessed March 20, 2023). 46. For example, EPA has steadfastly refused to follow Clean Air Act requirements that the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee provide, in the words of the U.S. Supreme Court, “unquestionably pertinent” advice on the “relative contribution to air pollution concentrations of natural… activity” as well as “any adverse public health, welfare, social, economic, or energy effects which may result from various strategies for attainment and maintenance” of the NAAQS. Memorandum from E. Scott Pruitt, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, to Assistant Administrators, “Subject: Back-to-Basics Process for Reviewing National Ambient Air Quality Standards,” May 9, 2018, p. 4, https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-05/documents/ image2018-05-09-173219.pdf (accessed January 25, 2023) (cited hereafter as Pruitt Memorandum, May 9, 2018), and Whitman v. American Trucking Associations, 531 U.S. 457, 470 n.2 (2001), https://supreme. justia.com/cases/federal/us/531/457/case.pdF (accessed January 25, 2023). Similarly, EPA has refused to follow legal requirements dating to the late 1970s regarding congressional requests for scientific advice. Pruitt Memorandum, May 9, 2018; U.S. Government Accountability Office, “EPA Science and Advisory Panels: Preliminary Observations on the Processes for Providing Scientific Advice,” testimony of J. Alfredo Gómez, Director, Natural Resources and Environment, GAO, before the Subcommittee on Superfund, Waste Management, and Regulatory Oversight, Committee on Environment and Public Works, U.S. Senate, GAO-15-636T, May 20, 2015, https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-15-636t (accessed January 25, 2023); and U.S. Government Accountability Office, “EPA Science Advisory Board: Policy Statement on Science Quality and Integrity,” GAO-17-526R, June 8, 2017, https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-17-526r.pdf (accessed January 25, 2023). 47. 31 U.S. Code § 3729 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/3729 (accessed March 20, 2023). 48. See Pruitt Memorandum, May 9, 2018. 49. H.R. 4383, Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, 92nd Congress, October 6, 1972, https://www. congress.gov/92/statute/STATUTE-86/STATUTE-86-Pg770.pdf (accessed March 20, 2023). 50. 15 U.S. Code Chapter 56A, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/chapter-56A (accessed January 27, 2023). 51. Indian Environmental General Assistance Act of 1992, 42 U.S. Code § 4368b, https://www.law.cornell.edu/ uscode/text/42/4368b (accessed January 27, 2023). 52. See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of General Counsel, EPA Legal Tools to Advance Environmental Justice, May 2022, https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-05/EJ%20Legal%20 Tools%20May%202022%20FINAL.pdf (accessed January 25, 2023), and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of General Counsel, Office of Policy, “Interim Environmental Justice and Civil Rights in Permitting Frequently Asked Questions,” August 2022, https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-08/EJ%20 and%20CR%20in%20PERMITTING%20FAQs%20508%20compliant.pdf (accessed January 25, 2023). 53. 2 U.S. Code §§ 2000d–2000d-7, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/chapter-21/subchapter-V (accessed January 27, 2023). 54. Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina, No. 1:14CV954 (M.D.N.C. Sep. 30, 2019), https://www.leagle.com/decision/infdco20191008j38 (accessed January 27, 2023). 55. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 2 Environmental Justice Action Plan, p. 24, https://www. epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-03/documents/region_2_environmental_justice_action_plan.pdf (accessed January 27, 2023). 56. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Summary of the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq. (1969),” last updated September 12, 2022, https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-national- environmental-policy-act (accessed January 27, 2023). 57. 31 U.S. Code § 1115, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/1115 (accessed January 27, 2023).

Department of Agriculture

Weak
Vector: 63%
Pages: 347-349AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The AWRC Act focuses on water resources research and AI integration, while the Project 2025 excerpt centers on USDA nutrition programs, school meals, and conservation policy reforms. There is only tangential overlap in that water research could indirectly support agricultural water use and conservation efforts mentioned in the USDA section."

Key themes:water resourcesagricultureconservationfederal fundinginterstate coordination

— 315 — Department of Agriculture 79. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “WIC Data Tables,” December 9, 2022, https:// www.fns.usda.gov/pd/wic-program (accessed December 16, 2022). 80. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, “Regulations and Information on the Manufacture and Distribution of Infant Formula,” May 16, 2022, https://www.fda.gov/food/infant-formula-guidance-documents-regulatory- information/regulations-and-information-manufacture-and-distribution-infant-formula (accessed December 14, 2022). 81. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “History of the National School Lunch Program,” January 17, 2008, https://www.fns.usda.gov/nslp/program-history (accessed December 14, 2022). 82. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “School Breakfast Program History,” July 24, 2013, https://www.fns.usda.gov/sbp/program-history (accessed December 14, 2022), and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “History of the National School Lunch Program.” 83. Crystal FitzSimons, “Free School Meals for All Is the Key to Supporting Education and Health Outcomes,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol 41, No. 1 (2022), pp. 358–364, https://econpapers.repec.org/ article/wlyjpamgt/v_3a41_3ay_3a2022_3ai_3a1_3ap_3a358-364.htm (accessed December 14, 2022). 84. Jonathan Butcher and Vijay Menon, “Returning to the Intent of Government School Meals: Helping Students in Need,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3399, March 22, 2019, https://www.heritage.org/sites/ default/files/2019-03/BG3399.pdf. 85. Daren Bakst and Jonathan Butcher, “A Critical Fix to the Federal Overreach on School Meals,” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 4976, July 11, 2019, https://www.heritage.org/hunger-and-food-programs/report/ critical-fix-the-federal-overreach-school-meals. 86. Ibid., and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “Community Eligibility Provision,” April 19, 2019, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/community-eligibility-provision (accessed December 16, 2022). 87. See Payment Accuracy, https://www.paymentaccuracy.gov/ (accessed December 16, 2022). 88. Payment Accuracy, “Payment Integrity Scorecard,” https://www.cfo.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/Q3/ FNS%20National%20School%20Lunch%20Program%20(NSLP)%20Payments%20Integrity%20Scorecard%20 FY%202022%20Q3.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 89. U.S. Government Accountability Office, “School Meals Programs: USDA Has Reported Taking Some Steps to Reduce Improper Payments But Should Comprehensively Assess Fraud Risks,” GAO–19–389, May 21, 2022, https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-19-389 (accessed December 14, 2022). 90. Payment Accuracy, “Payment Integrity Scorecard.” 91. White House, “Fact Sheet: The American Families Plan,” April 28, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/ briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/28/fact-sheet-the-american-families-plan/ (accessed December 14, 2022). 92. Universal School Meals Program Act of 2021, S. 1530, 117th Cong., 1st Sess., https://www.congress.gov/ bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1530 (accessed December 14, 2022). 93. See, for example, U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Find Meals for Kids When Schools Are Closed,” Food and Nutrition Service, September 22, 2022, https://www.fns.usda.gov/meals4kids (accessed December 16, 2022), and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, “Seamless Summer and Other Options for School,” July 16, 2013, https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/seamless-summer-and-other-options-schools (accessed December 16, 2022). 94. Tom Driscoll, “From the Field: Farmers Are the Original Conservationists,” National Farmers Union, August 30, 2017, https://nfu.org/2017/08/30/from-the-field-farmers-are-the-original-conservationists/ (accessed December 16, 2022). 95. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, “Conservation Programs,” https://www.fsa.usda.gov/ programs-and-services/conservation-programs/index (accessed December 16, 2022), and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, “Programs and Initiatives,” https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/ programs-initiatives (accessed December 16, 2022). 96. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, “Conservation Reserve Program: About the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP),” https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/conservation- programs/conservation-reserve-program/ (accessed December 16, 2022). — 316 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 97. American Bakers Association et al., letter to U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, March 23, 2022, https://www.dropbox.com/s/yfyv04ilkom11zd/USDA%20Letter%20to%20Secretary%20Vilsack%20on%20 Tools%20to%20Address%20Global%20Commodity%20Supply%20Challenges%203.23.22_.pdf?dl=0 (accessed December 15, 2022). It is also necessary to increase food production to mitigate high food inflation. Approximately 25 percent of idled land is considered prime farmland. Therefore, one-quarter of idled land is merely idling, not producing food—and this does not include other land that may viably be used for food production. The Conservation Reserve Program should be eliminated. There are also two issues connected to property rights and fairness that should be addressed: challenging NRCS determinations and problems with USDA easements. To be eligible for many USDA programs, farmers must comply with certain conservation provisions enforced by NRCS. Conservation compliance of wetlands and highly erodible lands consist of federal restrictions that prevent farmers from using parts of their property. If farmers plant crops or modify the areas federal officials deem protected, farmers can lose all access to USDA programs and support. For farmers, there are real, practical concerns to challenging NRCS determinations, including the time and costs of challenging the federal bureaucracy. NRCS is empowered to declare areas wetlands and highly erodible areas, which are therefore off limits for farming. If these wetland-or-erodible-declared areas are used in a manner deemed unacceptable by federal officials, NRCS may revoke access to federal resources and subsidies by making technical determinations that carry potential penalties. There must be a fair and reasonable process for farmers to challenge such actions. See Daren Bakst, “Food Price Inflation Continues to Worsen. Here’s What Should Be Done About It,” The Daily Signal, April 25, 2022, https:// www.dailysignal.com/2022/04/25/food-price-inflation-continuing-to-worsen-heres-what-should-be-done- about-it/ (accessed December 15, 2022); American Bakers Association et.al., letter to Vilsack; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, “Conservation Compliance Appeals Process,” https://www. nrcs.usda.gov/getting-assistance/compliance/conservation-compliance-appeals-process (accessed December 15, 2022); and Chris Bennett, “Regulatory Hell: Farmer and Veteran Wins 10-Year Wetlands Fight With Government,” AG Web, August 30, 2021, https://www.agweb.com/news/crops/crop-production/regulatory-hell-farmer-and- veteran-wins-10-year-wetlands-fight (accessed December 15, 2022). 98. Fortunately, there are already resources available to help states establish their own wetlands conservation programs. One particular example, the American Legislative Exchange Council’s Wetlands Mapping and Protection Act model policy, is available for states to define the procedures, guidelines, and administration of wetlands programs. American Legislative Exchange Council, “Wetlands Mapping and Protection Act,” November 16, 2017, https://alec.org/model-policy/wetlands-mapping-and-protection-act/ (accessed December 16, 2022). The new Administration should focus on best practices instead of imposing prescriptive federal practices. It should support the policies contained within the “NRCS Wetland Compliance and Appeals Reform Act” and modify NRCS compliance rules to protect farmers and ranchers by adding protections against regulatory overreach—such as banning the practice of re-engaging farmers in new technical determinations appeals processes for the same areas of their farms. See NRCS Wetland Compliance and Appeals Reform Act, S. 4931, 117th Cong., 2nd Sess., https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/4931?s=1&r=8 (accessed December 15, 2022). 99. Ibid 100. See, for example, Daren Bakst and Jeremy Dalrymple, “Reducing Federal Barriers for the Sale of Meat,” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 5078, June 1, 2020, https://www.heritage.org/agriculture/report/ reducing-federal-barriers-the-sale-meat, and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service, “State Inspection Programs,” updated January 12, 2023, https://www.fsis.usda.gov/inspection/state- inspection-programs (accessed December 15, 2022). 101. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service, “Cooperative Interstate Shipping Program,” September 7, 2022, https://www.fsis.usda.gov/inspection/state-inspection-programs/cooperative- interstate-shipping-program (accessed December 15, 2022). 102. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “State Inspection Programs.” 103. The Senate bill removes obstacles for both meat and poultry. The House version does not appear to cover poultry. New Markets for State-Inspected Meat and Poultry Act of 2021, S. 107, 117th Cong., 1st Sess., https:// www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/107#:~:text=This%20bill%20allows%20meat%20and,be%20 sold%20in%20interstate%20commerce (accessed December 15, 2022), and Expanding Markets for State- Inspected Meat Processors Act of 2021, H.R. 1998, 117th Cong., 1st Sess., https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th- congress/house-bill/1998 (accessed December 15, 2022).

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.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills