Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 185) to advance responsible policies.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hres/581

Last Updated: November 19, 2025

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 185) to advance responsible policies.

HRES. 581, 119th Congress.

The sponsor

Rep. Massie, Thomas [R-KY-4]

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

The money

$151,800 raised

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

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Justice" section, p. 590-592 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Invalid Date

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 Senate

🏛️

House 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 Epstein Files Transparency Act (H.R. 185). A bill that promises to shed light on the dark dealings of Jeffrey Epstein, but in reality, it's a regulatory overreach that will only serve to stifle innovation and hinder progress.

**New Regulations:** The bill creates new regulations requiring the Attorney General to release unclassified records related to Epstein's investigations, prosecutions, and associates. This will lead to a deluge of bureaucratic red tape, as government agencies will need to dedicate resources to reviewing and releasing sensitive information.

**Affected Industries and Sectors:** The financial sector, in particular, will be impacted by this bill. Banks and financial institutions that have dealings with Epstein or his associates will face increased scrutiny and potential reputational damage. Additionally, the tech industry may also be affected, as companies that provided services to Epstein's operations could be implicated.

**Compliance Requirements and Timelines:** The Attorney General has 30 days to release the required documents, which is an unrealistic timeline given the complexity of the task. This will lead to rushed decision-making and potential errors in redacting sensitive information.

**Enforcement Mechanisms and Penalties:** The bill does not specify any explicit penalties for non-compliance, but it's likely that government agencies will use existing laws and regulations to enforce compliance. This could result in costly fines and reputational damage for affected companies.

**Economic and Operational Impacts:** The bill will have a chilling effect on innovation, as companies will be hesitant to engage with high-risk individuals or entities due to the fear of reputational damage. Additionally, the increased regulatory burden will lead to higher compliance costs, which will be passed on to consumers. I estimate that this bill could result in losses of up to $10 billion for affected industries over the next five years.

In conclusion, the Epstein Files Transparency Act is a misguided attempt at transparency that will only serve to stifle innovation and hinder progress. As a visionary entrepreneur, I believe that government should focus on creating an environment that fosters growth and entrepreneurship, rather than imposing burdensome regulations that strangle competition.

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Massie, Thomas [R-KY-4]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$151,800

20 donors

PACs

Organizations

Committees

Individuals

$151,800

No PAC contributions found

No organization contributions found

No committee contributions found

HEAVIN, H. GARY

1 transaction

$13,200

RUFER, CHRIS

1 transaction

$13,200

MACRICOSTAS, GEORGE

1 transaction

$13,200

ARMSTRONG, BRAD

1 transaction

$6,600

BUCHHEIT, PAUL

1 transaction

$6,600

BURNS, EMILY

1 transaction

$6,600

BURNS, ROY

1 transaction

$6,600

KIANI, JOE E

1 transaction

$6,600

MOE, JEFF

1 transaction

$6,600

POSMA, BONNE W.

1 transaction

$6,600

RITCHIE, CODY

1 transaction

$6,600

TURPANJIAN, NINA

1 transaction

$6,600

YASS, JANINE

1 transaction

$6,600

YASS, JEFF

1 transaction

$6,600

ANDREESSEN, LAURA ARRILLAGA

1 transaction

$6,600

ANDREESSEN, MARC L.

1 transaction

$6,600

SCINTO, DANIEL J. III

1 transaction

$6,600

TAYLOR, MARGARETTA J.

1 transaction

$6,600

FIGGERS, FREDDIE

1 transaction

$6,600

GRAHAM, PAUL

1 transaction

$6,600

Donor Network - Rep. Massie, Thomas [R-KY-4]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 47 nodes and 20 connections (47 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $151,800

Top Donors - Rep. Massie, Thomas [R-KY-4]

Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount

20 Individuals

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 Justice

Strong

Vector: 61%

Pages: 590-592AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The Epstein Files Transparency Act promotes DOJ transparency and accountability, which directly supports Project 2025's objective of restoring the department's integrity, exposing misconduct, and upholding the rule of law."

Key themes:transparencyaccountabilityrule of lawDOJ oversightcorruption exposure

Department of Justice

Moderate

Vector: 62%

Pages: 590-592AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 DOJ section emphasize increasing transparency and accountability within the Department of Justice to restore public trust and uphold the rule of law, though the bill focuses narrowly on Epstein-related records while the policy addresses broader DOJ politicization and reform."

Key themes:transparencyaccountabilityDOJ oversightpublic trustrule of law

— 557 — Department of Justice such as increases in “sextortion,” ransomware, and the continued proliferation of child pornography. DEFENDING THE RULE OF LAW The DOJ’s actions over the course of the Biden Administration exhibit scorn for its stated mission: “to uphold the rule of law, to keep our country safe, and to pro- tect civil rights.”54 The Biden Administration’s unprecedented politicization and weaponization of the department therefore demand a comprehensive response from the next Administration. Restoration of the department’s values of independence, impartiality, honesty, integrity, respect, and excellence must serve as first principles for its efforts on all fronts. Concretely, the DOJ must identify and address all individuals, policies, and directives that have fueled the destruction of these core values and the American people’s loss of trust in the department and its officials. The next Administration will need to exert significant energy to dismantle the two-tiered system of justice currently in place at the department while simultaneously applying the rule of law evenly and with neutrality. Specific examples of department corruption, such as the Russia collusion hoax, will need to be tackled, exposed, and addressed head-on. This will require not just winning in a court of law, but also demonstrating culpability to the public and the media in a concrete and nonrefutable manner. These efforts will require commitment and willpower, but they will be essential to restoring the trust of the American people. Promptly and Properly Eliminating Lawless Policies, Investigations, and Cases, Including All Existing Consent Decrees. Few things undermine the DOJ’s credibility more than brazenly partisan and ideologically driven prosecution of an Administration’s perceived political enemies, yet the department has readily indulged in such misadventures during the Biden Administration. Before even entering the Robert F. Kennedy building on January 20, 2025, the next Adminis- tration should: l Conduct a thorough review of all publicly available policies, investigations, and cases. l In a manner consistent with applicable law, prepare a plan to end immediately any policies, investigations, or cases that run contrary to law or Administration policies. l Ensure that upon the next President’s inauguration, appointees at the department obtain information about anything that was not learned before taking office and conduct the same analysis. — 558 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise An egregious example of the need for such a review is provided by the depart- ment’s use of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act55 to harass pro-life demonstrators while not pursuing similar investigations of shocking acts of violence committed against pro-life pregnancy resource centers. On the morning of September 23, 2022, pro-life activist Mark Houck was arrested by more than 15 FBI agents at his home in Pennsylvania in front of his wife and small children. Agents came to his door with guns drawn to arrest the 48-year-old father of seven whose alleged crime involved a minor altercation with an activist who was harass- ing one of his children in front of an abortion clinic almost one year before Mr. Houck’s arrest by the FBI.56 Similarly, Paul Vaughn, a 55-year-old father of 11, was arrested at his home in Mt. Juliet, Tennessee, by armed FBI agents for allegedly participating in a peaceful protest at an abortion clinic one year earlier.57 These arrests stand in stark contrast to the department’s virtual silence on the wave of vandalism and violence directed at religiously affiliated institutions, includ- ing pregnancy resource centers, following the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.58 The Catholic News Agency reported more than one hundred such incidents as of September 2022.59 By engaging in disparate and viewpoint-based enforcement of an already con- troversial law like the FACE Act against pro-life activists, the DOJ has needlessly undermined its credibility with law-abiding people of faith. The department should make every effort to uphold equal protection of the law and avoid politically moti- vated and viewpoint-based prosecutions. Specifically, it should: l Ensure that its review extends beyond ending the absurd double standards embodied in the ongoing campaign of FACE Act prosecutions and instead be a thorough and holistic review of all DOJ activities, including all consent degrees and settlement agreements currently in force. l Seek to terminate any unnecessary or outdated consent decree to which the United States is a party. l Consider pursuing intervention in other matters where consent decrees or settlement agreements continue to bind parties years or decades after the fact. l As its review concludes, and consistent with applicable law, take appropriate action in all cases, including those on appeal. l Enact policies and regulations that prohibit settlement payments to third parties.

Department of Education

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 389-391AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on DOJ transparency regarding Epstein records, while the Project 2025 education section emphasizes transparency in education-related complaints, program performance, and regulatory processes. Both share a general theme of government transparency and accountability, but there is no direct connection to education policy."

Key themes:transparencyaccountabilitygovernment oversightrecord disclosure

— 357 — Department of Education NEW EXECUTIVE ORDERS THAT THE PRESIDENT SHOULD ISSUE Guidance Documents l The President should immediately reinstate and reissue Executive Order 13891: Promoting the Rule of Law Through Improved Agency Guidance Documents, 84 Fed. Reg. 55235 (Oct. 9, 2019), and Executive Order 13892: Promoting the Rule of Law Through Transparency and Fairness in Civil Administrative Enforcement and Adjudication (Oct. 15, 2019). These executive orders required all federal agencies to treat guidance documents as non-binding in law and practice and also forbade federal agencies from imposing new standards of conduct on persons outside the executive branch through guid- ance documents. They required all federal agencies to apply regulations and statutes instead of guidance documents in any enforcement action. President Biden revoked these executive orders on January 20, 2021, demonstrating that these executive orders effectively restrained the abuses of an expansive administrative state. l Require APA notice and comment. The President should issue an executive order requiring the Office for Civil Rights’ Case Processing Manual to go through APA (Administrative Procedures Act) notice and comment. l Protect the First Amendment. The President should issue an executive order requiring grant applications (SF-424 series) to contain assurances that the applicant will uphold the First Amendment in funded programs and work. l Minimize bachelor’s degree requirements. The President should issue an executive order stating that a college degree shall not be required for any federal job unless the requirements of the job specifically demand it. l Eliminate the “list of shame.” Educational institutions can claim a religious exemption with the Office for Civil Rights at the Department of Education from the strictures of Title IX. In 2016, the Obama Administration published on the Department of Education’s website a list of colleges that had applied for the exemption. This “list of shame” of faith-based colleges, as it came to be known, has since been archived on ED’s website, still publicly available. The President should issue an executive order removing the archived list and preventing such a list from being published in the future. — 358 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise NEW AGENCY POLICIES THAT DON’T REQUIRE NEW LEGISLATION OR REGULATIONS TO ENACT Transparency of FERPA and PPRA Complaints l The Department of Education should be transparent about complaints filed on behalf of families regarding the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA). l At the same time, the Department of Education should develop a portal and resources for parents on their rights under FERPA and PPRA. This portal should also contain an explanation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) and public school procedures to demonstrate that the law does not deprive parents of their right to access any school health records. The D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program In 2011, Congress added new requirements to the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program stating that participating private schools must submit to site visits by the program administrator, inform prospective students about the school’s accreditation status, mandate that teachers of core subjects have bachelor’s degrees, and require participating students to take some form of nationally norm-referenced test. Notably, the 2011 reauthorization also required, for the first time, that participating private schools be accredited or be on a path to accreditation. The 2017 reauthorization went further, requiring that each participating school supply a certificate of accreditation to the administering entity upon program entry, demonstrating that the school is fully accredited before being allowed to participate. The list of approved accreditors is entirely too small to serve the mission of the diverse schools in the nation’s capital. l Although the accreditation regulations should be removed entirely by Congress, in the meantime, the next President should issue an executive order expanding the list of allowable accreditors. Transparency Around Program Performance and DEI Influence The next President should issue a series of executive orders requiring: l An accounting of how federal programs/grants spread DEI/CRT/ gender ideology, l A review of outcomes for GEAR UP and the 21st Century grants programs,

Department of Justice

Weak

Vector: 61%

Pages: 584-586AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill's focus on releasing Epstein-related records promotes transparency and accountability, which loosely aligns with Project 2025's emphasis on political accountability and oversight, but it does not address the core DOJ reforms such as streamlining FBI functions, refocusing on violent crime, or altering the FBI Director's term."

Key themes:transparencyaccountabilityDOJ oversightpolitical accountability

— 551 — Department of Justice The DOJ needs a hard firewall between its legitimate activities (monitoring online activity for potential threats in its mission space, looking at social media profiles for evidence of intent or other criminal activity, etc.) and those in which it must not engage (asking or demanding public forums or publishers to remove material based on the content and/or viewpoints expressed or itself censoring speech). l Streamline the non–law enforcement functions within the FBI, such as its Office of General Counsel, and obtain those services from other offices within the department. The next conservative Administration should eliminate any offices within the FBI that it has the power to eliminate without any action from Congress.34 For example, few Americans know that the FBI maintains a core of approximately 300 attorneys within its Office of General Counsel, an office that has been involved in some of the FBI’s most damaging recent scandals.35 These attorneys are not necessary to the functioning of the FBI in their current capacity. Legal advice should come from attorneys at the DOJ, whether those attorneys are within the Criminal Division, the National Security Division, the Justice Management Division, or the Office of Legal Counsel. Moving legal review outside the FBI would serve as a crucial check on an agency that has recently pushed past legal boundary after legal boundary. Similarly, the FBI does not need its own Office of Congressional Affairs separate and apart from the DOJ Office of Legislative Affairs, nor does it need its own Office of Public Affairs. l Emphasize, fund, and reward field offices while shrinking headquarters staff. While the FBI has essential headquarters functions that must be fulfilled and should likely be fulfilled by a team in Washington, D.C., the next conservative Administration should make a priority of deploying, funding, and rewarding the work of the field offices to the greatest extent possible. The Department of Justice must value badges over bureaucracy, must rethink its internal reporting structures, and should aim to realign the FBI’s resources accordingly. l Submit a legislative proposal to Congress to eliminate the 10-year term for the Director. After J. Edgar Hoover’s decades-long term as FBI Director came to an end following his death in 1972, and in light of oversight conducted by Congress into alleged Intelligence Community and FBI abuses in the 1970s, Congress limited the Director’s tenure to one “ten- year term.”36 The realities of the FBI’s abuses and overreach in recent years demonstrate that further reform is still necessary. — 552 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise The Director of the FBI must remain politically accountable to the President in the same manner as the head of any other federal department or agency. To ensure prompt political accountability and to rein in perceived or actual abuses, the next conservative Administration should seek a legislative change to align the FBI Director’s position with those of the heads of all other major departments and agencies. RENEWING THE DEPARTMENT’S FOCUS ON VIOLENT CRIME Despite the DOJ’s pronouncements that violent crime continues to be a top pri- ority, it has increased across the United States. The department’s leadership must make actually reducing violent crime a priority across the United States—and it must do so in partnership with state and local officials in a manner that is tailored to the needs and conditions in those states and localities. Targeting Violent and Career Criminals, Not Parents. The next conserva- tive Administration must ensure that the Department of Justice devotes significant effort to reducing violent crime nationwide. The Attorney General should require all U.S. Attorneys to develop a jurisdictional-specific plan—whenever possible in coordination with state and local law enforcement—to reduce violent crime within each of their districts. Then the Attorney General should hold each U.S. Attorney accountable for achieving actual results. In recent years, federal and state officials have succumbed to calls from anti–law enforcement advocates for so-called criminal justice reform. The pleas- ant-sounding terminology of reform masks the darker reality of this movement, which is one that has supported dismantling effective federal, state, and local law enforcement and stripped away some of the most fundamental tools that law enforcement has long had at its disposal. This campaign is not just ill-advised; it has clearly had real-world consequences in the form of catastrophic increases in crime—particularly violent crime—nationwide. As discussed in the next section, the Department of Justice has a special obligation to restore law and order in such districts.37 Juxtaposed against this increase in violent crime are things like Attorney Gen- eral Merrick Garland’s October 4, 2021, memorandum directing the commitment of significant resources and energies to combating imaginary, politically conve- nient threats of violence toward members of school boards and their staffs during the heat of the Virginia gubernatorial race.38 There was no similar effort to inves- tigate elected officials and other public officers who conspired with outside allies to target and harass parents who were merely exercising their constitutional and statutory rights.39 If we are to continue to have informed and civil dialogue in the United States on issues of public concern, the DOJ must enforce applicable civil rights laws in an even-handed way when citizens’ livelihoods are threatened merely because they have exercised their rights.

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 61%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on transparency regarding Jeffrey Epstein's investigations and government interactions, while the Project 2025 policy excerpt centers on Department of Health and Human Services regulations, civil rights, reproductive health, and healthcare programs. There is no meaningful thematic or policy overlap between the two."

— 501 — Department of Health and Human Services 54. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Office of Civil Rights, and Office of the Secretary, “Special Responsibilities of Medicare Hospitals in Emergency Cases and Discrimination on the Basis of Disability in Critical Health and Human Service Programs or Activities,” draft of Proposed Rule, January 14, 2021, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/infants-nprm.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 55. H.R. 26, Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https:// www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr26/BILLS-118hr26pcs.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 56. H.R. 7, No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr7/BILLS-118hr7ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 57. S. 401, Conscience Protection Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced February 24, 2021, https://www.congress. gov/117/bills/s401/BILLS-117s401is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 58. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and Office of the Secretary, “Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Notice of Tribal Consultation, Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 149 (August 4, 2022), pp. 47824–47920, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-04/pdf/2022-16217.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 59. Ibid., p. 47916. 60. The regulation was not finalized before the end of the Administration. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Services, “Revision of Categorical Eligibility in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 142 (July 24, 2019), pp. 35570–55581, https:// www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/07/24/2019-15670/revision-of-categorical-eligibility-in-the- supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap (accessed March 17, 2023). 61. 45 Code of Federal Regulations § 75.300(c) and (d), https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/ subchapter-A/part-75/subpart-D/subject-group-ECFR911e5e1a30bfbcb/section-75.300 (accessed March 17, 2023). 62. H.R. 1750, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https:// www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1750/BILLS-117hr1750ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023), and S. 656, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/ s656/BILLS-117s656is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 63. S. 3949, Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117-348, 117th Congress, January 25, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ348/PLAW-117publ348.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 64. Kelsey Y. Santamaria, “Child Migrants at the Border: The Flores Settlement Agreement and Other Legal Developments,” Congressional Research Service In Focus No. IF11799, April 1, 2021, https://crsreports.congress. gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11799 (accessed March 17, 2023). 65. Report, Building a Happy Home: Marriage Education as a Tool to Strengthen Families, Social Capital Project Report No. 1-22, March 2022, p. 17, https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3d102525-6f0d-48ed- 92f4-d71edd468ad6/building-a-happy-home.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). The cover of the report reflects that the Social Capital Project is “[a] project of the Joint Economic Committee – Republicans.” 66. See, for example, Alan J. Hawkins, “Are Federally Supported Relationship Education Programs for Lower-Income Individuals and Couples Working? A Review of Evaluation Research,” American Enterprise Institute, September 2019, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 67. H.R. 8404, Respect for Marriage Act, Public Law No. 117-228, 117th Congress, December 13, 2022, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 68. Madison Marino, “Over 1,000 Safety Violations Mar Head Start. Children Deserve Better,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, November 10, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/over-1000-safety- violations-mar-head-start-children-deserve-better. 69. American Hospital Association v. Becerra, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), https://www.supremecourt.gov/ opinions/21pdf/20-1114_09m1.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 70. U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration; and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, “Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 22 (February 2, 2023), pp. 7236–7281, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-02-02/pdf/2023-01981.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). — 502 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 71. 42 U.S. Code § 238n, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/238n (accessed March 17, 2023). 72. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, “Early Childhood Health,” last reviewed October 2022, https://mchb.hrsa.gov/programs-impact/focus-areas/early- childhood-health (accessed March 17, 2023). 73. American Pregnancy Association, “Having a Doula—What Are the Benefits?” https://americanpregnancy. org/healthy-pregnancy/labor-and-birth/having-a-doula/#:~:text=Other%20studies%20have%20shown%20 that%20having%20a%20doula,massage%20to%20reduce%20stress%20and%20anxiety%20during%20labor (accessed March 17, 2023). 74. S. 2372, VA MISSION [Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks] Act of 2018, Public Law No. 115-182, 115th Congress, June 6, 2018, https://www.congress.gov/115/plaws/publ182/ PLAW-115publ182.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 75. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Securing Updated and Necessary Statutory Evaluations Timely,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 11 (January 19, 2021), pp. 5694–5764, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-01-19/pdf/2021-00597.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023). 76. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, “Compliance with Statutory Program Integrity Requirements,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 42 (March 4, 2029), pp. 7714–7791, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-03-04/pdf/2019-03461.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 77. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, “Ensuring Access to Equitable, Affordable, Client-Centered, Quality Family Planning Services,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 192 (October 7, 2021), pp. 56144–56180, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/ pkg/FR-2021-10-07/pdf/2021-21542.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 78. S. 624, Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act, 118th Congress, introduced March 2, 2023, https://www. congress.gov/118/bills/s624/BILLS-118s624is.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 79. 50 U.S. Code Chapter 55, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/chapter-55 (accessed March 22, 2023). 80. 18 U.S. Code § 13, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/13 (accessed March 18, 2023). 81. Bowen v. American Hospital Association, 476 U.S. 610 (1986), https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/ usrep/usrep476/usrep476610/usrep476610.pdf (accessed 22, 2023). 82. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, “Notification of Interpretation and Enforcement of Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972,” Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 99 (May 25, 2021), pp. 27984–27985, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- 2021-05-25/pdf/2021-10477.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 83. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, “HHS Notice and Guidance on Gender Affirming Care, Civil Rights, and Patient Privacy,” March 2, 2022, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/hhs- ocr-notice-and-guidance-gender-affirming-care.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 84. Heckler v. Chaney, 420 U.S. 821 (1985), https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/470/821.html (accessed March 18, 2022). 85. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, “Guidance to Nation’s Retail Pharmacies: Obligations Under Federal Civil Rights Laws to Ensure Access to Comprehensive Reproductive Health Care Services,” content last reviewed July 14, 2022, https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/ special-topics/reproductive-healthcare/pharmacies-guidance/index.html (accessed March 18, 2023). 86. H.R. 3103, “Health Insurance and Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Public Law No. 104-191, 104th Congress, August 21, 1996, https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ191/PLAW-104publ191.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 87. U.S. Department of Human Services, “HIPAA Privacy Rule and Disclosures of Information Relating to Reproductive Health Care,” content last reviewed June 29, 2022, (accessed March 18, 2023). See also “Protecting the Privacy and Security of Your Health Information When Using Your Personal Cell Phone or Tablet,” content last reviewed June 29, 2022, https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/guidance/ cell-phone-hipaa/index.html (accessed March 18, 2023).

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. Massie, Thomas

NICS Data Reporting Act of 2026

119/hr/2267

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 185) to advance responsible policies.