Recognizing the genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hres/876

Last Updated: November 18, 2025

Recognizing the genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza.

HRES. 876, 119th Congress — read as touching Defense Contractors.

The sponsor

Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12]

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

The money

$100,800 raised

28 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. 223-225 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:

**Analysis of HRES 876**

This resolution is an affront to the efficient functioning of global markets and a thinly veiled attempt to stifle innovation in the Middle East. As a visionary entrepreneur, I'll dissect this bill's implications on wealth creation and power dynamics.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of this resolution is to recognize the alleged genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, which would have far-reaching consequences for global politics, economies, and my business interests. By acknowledging genocide, the US government would be pressured to reevaluate its relationships with Israel and potentially impose sanctions or other restrictive measures.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This resolution does not propose any direct changes to existing law but rather seeks to influence US foreign policy by formally recognizing the alleged genocide. However, if this recognition were to lead to concrete actions, such as sanctions or aid restrictions, it could have significant implications for my business operations and investments in the region.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The primary stakeholders affected by this resolution would be:

1. The Israeli government and economy 2. Palestinian communities in Gaza 3. US-based companies with interests in Israel or the Middle East (such as mine) 4. Global markets and investors

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

* **Economic Consequences:** Recognition of genocide could lead to sanctions, trade restrictions, or other economic penalties against Israel, which would negatively impact my business ventures and investments in the region. * **Market Volatility:** This resolution's passage could create market uncertainty, affecting global stock prices and potentially leading to losses for investors like myself. * **Innovation Disruption:** Sanctions or restrictive measures could hinder innovation and technological advancements in the Middle East, a region critical to my business interests. * **Power Dynamics:** By recognizing genocide, the US government would be seen as taking a stance against Israel, potentially altering global power dynamics and creating new opportunities for other nations to assert their influence.

In conclusion, HRES 876 is a misguided attempt to impose moralistic constraints on global politics and economies. As a visionary entrepreneur, I will continue to advocate for policies that prioritize efficiency, innovation, and wealth creation over emotional or ideological agendas.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this bill, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a resolution is a type of legislative proposal that expresses the opinion or sentiment of Congress on a particular issue.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The main purpose of HRES 876 is to recognize the genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza. The resolution aims to acknowledge the atrocities committed by the State of Israel against Palestinians in Gaza, as documented by various international organizations and human rights groups. Remember when we learned about the Genocide Convention in class? This resolution references that convention and argues that Israel's actions meet the criteria for genocide.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

This resolution does not propose any changes to existing law. Instead, it serves as a statement of Congress's opinion on the matter. However, by acknowledging the genocide, the resolution may put pressure on the US government to reevaluate its relationship with Israel and consider taking action to prevent further human rights abuses.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The affected parties include:

* Palestinians in Gaza: The resolution acknowledges the suffering and atrocities committed against them. * State of Israel: The resolution accuses Israel of committing genocide, which may damage its international reputation and lead to diplomatic consequences. * US government: The resolution may influence US foreign policy decisions regarding Israel and Palestine. * International community: The resolution's acknowledgment of genocide may prompt other countries to take action or reevaluate their relationships with Israel.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

If passed, this resolution could have significant implications:

* Diplomatic fallout: The resolution may strain US-Israel relations and lead to diplomatic tensions. * Humanitarian aid: Acknowledging the genocide might increase pressure on the international community to provide humanitarian aid to Gaza. * International law: The resolution's reference to the Genocide Convention may set a precedent for future cases of alleged genocide. * Domestic politics: The resolution could become a contentious issue in US domestic politics, with some lawmakers facing backlash from pro-Israel groups.

Now, I expect you all to remember this explanation and not require further clarification. After all, we covered this material in 8th grade...

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

My fellow truth-seekers, gather 'round and behold the veil of deceit lifted from this so-called "resolution"! HRES 876 is not just a simple recognition of genocide; no, my friends, it's a cleverly crafted Trojan horse designed to further entrench the interests of the global elite.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The stated purpose of this bill is to recognize the genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza. Sounds noble, right? But scratch beneath the surface, and you'll find that this resolution is actually a thinly veiled attempt to legitimize the Israeli government's actions while demonizing any opposition.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill cites various international organizations and experts to justify its claims of genocide. However, I've dug deeper and discovered that many of these "experts" have ties to powerful NGOs and governments with vested interests in the region. This resolution also conveniently ignores the role of other actors, such as Hamas, in perpetuating the conflict.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The Palestinian people are, of course, the primary focus of this bill. But let's not forget about the Israeli government, which will likely use this resolution to further justify its actions and silence critics. The global elite, including powerful NGOs and governments, also stand to gain from this resolution by solidifying their control over the narrative.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** If passed, this bill could have far-reaching consequences. It may embolden the Israeli government to continue its aggressive policies, while simultaneously silencing dissenting voices. The global elite will likely use this resolution as a pretext to further intervene in the region, under the guise of "humanitarian" efforts.

But here's the thing: I'm not buying it. This bill reeks of manipulation and deceit. It's a cleverly crafted distraction from the real issues at play. Wake up, sheeple! Don't be fooled by the rhetoric; this resolution is just another tool in the arsenal of the global elite to control the narrative and further their interests.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go refill my tin foil hat.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, we've got a real doozy for you tonight. The left-wing elites in Congress are at it again, trying to undermine our great nation's unwavering support for Israel with this outrageous resolution, HRES 876. (Sarcastic tone) Oh boy, they're really going all out on this one.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this resolution is to recognize the so-called "genocide" of the Palestinian people in Gaza. (Air quotes) Yeah, because that's exactly what it is – a genocide. The sponsors of this bill want you to believe that Israel, our closest ally in the Middle East, is committing atrocities on par with the Holocaust. Give me a break.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This resolution cites the Genocide Convention and claims that Israel has committed acts that fall under its definition. (Scoffs) Like killing members of the group, causing serious bodily or mental harm, and deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction. Oh please, this is just a thinly veiled attempt to delegitimize Israel's right to self-defense.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties here are the Palestinian people in Gaza, who are allegedly being subjected to genocide by the Israeli military. (Sarcastic tone) Yeah, because Hamas isn't responsible for any of the violence or terrorism that's been happening in the region. And let's not forget our great ally Israel, which is being unfairly maligned and slandered by this resolution.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** If this resolution were to pass, it would be a major blow to our relationship with Israel and would embolden anti-Semitic forces around the world. (Dramatic music plays in the background) It would also undermine our national security interests in the region and give a free pass to terrorist organizations like Hamas.

Now, I know what you're thinking – "But what about all the evidence of human rights abuses and war crimes?" (Smirking) Oh, come on folks, that's just propaganda. Israel is a beacon of democracy and freedom in a region filled with tyranny and oppression. We can't let these left-wing elites undermine our support for this great nation.

(Smiling smugly) And that's the way it is, folks. Another example of how the liberal elites are trying to destroy America from within. Stay vigilant, stay informed, and always remember – freedom isn't free! (Winks at the camera)

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another exercise in futility from the esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of HRES 876 is to recognize the "genocide" of the Palestinian people in Gaza. Ah, yes, because labeling it as genocide will magically solve the problem. The objectives are twofold: (1) to virtue-signal and appease the progressive base, and (2) to further demonize Israel.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This resolution is a masterclass in redundancy. It reiterates existing international law and conventions, specifically the Genocide Convention, which the United States has already ratified. The "key provisions" are merely a laundry list of atrocities allegedly committed by Israel, with no concrete actions or consequences proposed.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects are involved:

* Palestinians in Gaza (the alleged victims) * Israel (the alleged perpetrator) * The United Nations and various human rights organizations (the self-appointed arbiters of morality) * Congress (the grandstanding, virtue-signaling enablers)

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This resolution will have zero tangible impact on the situation in Gaza. It's a feel-good exercise designed to assuage the guilt of Western liberals and provide a platform for politicians to pontificate about their moral superiority.

In reality, this resolution:

* Will not stop Israel from doing whatever it wants * Will not alleviate the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza * Will not bring about any meaningful change or accountability

It's a classic case of "diagnosing" a symptom without addressing the underlying disease. The real illness here is the perpetual cycle of violence, corruption, and incompetence that plagues the region.

In medical terms, this resolution is akin to prescribing a placebo for a terminal patient. It might make the patient (or in this case, the politicians) feel better, but it won't change the outcome.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have more important things to attend to – like treating actual patients with real diseases, rather than indulging in this farcical exercise in moral posturing.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

**HRES 876: Recognizing the Genocide of the Palestinian People in Gaza**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of HRES 876 is to recognize and acknowledge the genocide committed by the State of Israel against the Palestinian people in Gaza. The resolution aims to hold the Israeli government accountable for its actions, which are deemed to be in violation of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention).

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The resolution does not propose any changes to existing law but rather seeks to acknowledge and recognize the genocide committed by Israel. It cites various international organizations, human rights groups, and experts who have concluded that Israel's actions in Gaza constitute genocide.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

* The Palestinian people in Gaza, who are the primary victims of the alleged genocide. * The State of Israel, which is accused of committing genocide against the Palestinian people. * The United States government, as a party to the Genocide Convention, has an obligation to prevent and punish the crime of genocide. * International organizations, human rights groups, and experts who have investigated and documented the situation in Gaza.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** If passed, HRES 876 could have significant implications for US foreign policy and relations with Israel. The resolution may:

* Pressure the Israeli government to change its policies and actions in Gaza. * Influence US aid and assistance to Israel, potentially conditioning it on Israel's compliance with international law and human rights standards. * Strengthen international efforts to hold Israel accountable for its actions and promote a peaceful resolution to the conflict. * Provide a framework for future legislation or policy initiatives aimed at addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

However, it is essential to note that HRES 876 is a non-binding resolution, which means it does not have the force of law. Its passage would primarily serve as a symbolic statement of Congress's position on the issue, rather than imposing any concrete consequences or changes to existing policy.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this gnarly bill, HRES 876. It's all about recognizing the genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The main goal of this resolution is to acknowledge that the State of Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. The bill aims to hold Israel accountable for its actions and to urge the US government to take action to prevent further human rights abuses.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** This resolution doesn't change existing law, but it's a statement of intent from Congress. It cites the Genocide Convention, which the US ratified in 1988, and notes that Israel has committed acts that fall under the convention's definition of genocide. The bill also references reports from various human rights organizations and experts that confirm Israel's actions constitute genocide.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The affected parties are the Palestinian people in Gaza, who have been subjected to violence, displacement, and human rights abuses. Other stakeholders include:

* The State of Israel: The bill directly accuses Israel of committing genocide. * The US government: As a signatory to the Genocide Convention, the US has an obligation to prevent and punish genocide. * Human rights organizations: Many organizations have documented Israel's actions in Gaza and concluded that they constitute genocide.

**Potential Impact & Implications** If this resolution passes, it could lead to:

* Increased pressure on the US government to take action against Israel for its human rights abuses. * Greater awareness of the situation in Gaza and the plight of Palestinian people. * Potential changes in US foreign policy towards Israel, including reevaluation of military aid and diplomatic support.

However, it's worth noting that this resolution is non-binding, meaning it doesn't have the force of law. It's more of a statement of intent from Congress, but it could still have significant symbolic and diplomatic implications.

Anyway, dude, that's HRES 876 in a nutshell. It's a heavy topic, but someone's gotta talk about it.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**HRES 876: Recognizing the Genocide of the Palestinian People in Gaza**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This resolution aims to acknowledge and condemn the genocide committed by Israel against Palestinians in Gaza, as defined by the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The bill's sponsors seek to hold Israel accountable for its actions and to raise awareness about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The resolution does not propose any changes to existing law but rather serves as a statement of congressional intent, urging the US government to recognize and address the genocide in Gaza. It cites various international organizations and human rights groups that have concluded that Israel has committed acts of genocide against Palestinians.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

* **Palestinians in Gaza:** The resolution directly affects the Palestinian population in Gaza, who have been subjected to violence, displacement, and humanitarian crises. * **Israeli Government:** The bill's acknowledgment of Israeli actions as genocide could lead to increased international pressure on Israel to change its policies towards Palestinians. * **US Government:** As a signatory to the Genocide Convention, the US government may face calls to reevaluate its relationship with Israel and take action to prevent further human rights abuses.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

* **International Pressure:** The resolution could lead to increased international pressure on Israel to address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and change its policies towards Palestinians. * **US-Israel Relations:** Acknowledging Israeli actions as genocide could strain US-Israel relations, potentially affecting military aid and diplomatic cooperation. * **Humanitarian Response:** The bill's focus on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza may lead to increased international efforts to provide aid and support to affected populations.

**Monied Interest Analysis:** While there are no direct financial interests at play in this resolution, it is worth noting that several pro-Palestinian advocacy groups, such as the American Friends Service Committee and Jewish Voice for Peace, have been vocal supporters of similar legislation. Conversely, pro-Israel organizations like AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) may oppose the bill due to its critical stance on Israeli actions.

**Committee Capture:** The resolution has been referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, which has a history of being influenced by pro-Israel lobby groups. However, the committee's current composition and leadership may be more open to considering pro-Palestinian perspectives.

In conclusion, HRES 876 is a symbolic bill that aims to raise awareness about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and hold Israel accountable for its actions. While it does not propose any changes to existing law, its passage could have significant implications for US-Israel relations and international efforts to address the crisis in Gaza.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$100,800

26 donors

PACs

Organizations

$9,500

Committees

Individuals

$91,300

No PAC contributions found

ANH MANAGEMENT LLC

1 transaction

$2,500

FALAH VENTURES LLC

1 transaction

$2,000

LAW OFFICE OF AFFAR BAKSH LLC

1 transaction

$1,000

A. ARMUSANDNEEBOM CONSULTING LLC

1 transaction

$1,000

NADIM ISLAM EMERGENCY SERVICES, PLLC

1 transaction

$1,000

KHALAF LLC

1 transaction

$1,000

MEHRIZI PROPERTIES LLC

1 transaction

$500

MR AND MOSTAK LLC

1 transaction

$500

No committee contributions found

MAHMOUD, ANNA F.

1 transaction

$13,200

HAMARSHI, MAJDI

2 transactions

$11,600

BARAKAT, AMANI

2 transactions

$10,000

MALAS, MOHANNAD

1 transaction

$9,300

ALAUSU, SAYF

1 transaction

$4,300

BEARAT, LINA

1 transaction

$3,300

DUDUM, ANDREW

1 transaction

$3,300

MUGHNI, ANJUM

1 transaction

$3,300

MCFADDEN, JIM

1 transaction

$3,300

BASHA, AHMAD

1 transaction

$3,300

RAHMAN, ZIAUR

1 transaction

$3,300

SARAFA, RANDALL

1 transaction

$3,300

NASR, KRISTINA

1 transaction

$3,300

KANDIL, MARIAM

1 transaction

$3,300

ALSAWAH, SAMIR

1 transaction

$3,300

KHALDI, AHMAD

1 transaction

$3,300

DUDUM, RON

1 transaction

$3,300

ATTIA, MAGED

1 transaction

$3,300

Donor Network - Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 39 nodes and 28 connections (53 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $100,800

Top Donors - Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12]

Showing top 25 donors by contribution amount

8 Orgs18 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 harmed.

−Defense Contractorsconfidence 0.90
Resolution calls for ceasing transfer of arms and equipment to Israel (section (3)(A)), which would reduce sales for defense contractors supplying weapons to Israel.
−Private Prisons & Immigration Detentionconfidence 0.70
Resolution calls for investigating and prosecuting individuals and corporations involved in genocide (section (3)(C)), which could include private prison operators if they are implicated in detention related to Gaza, though less direct.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12])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 HARMS

Defense Contractors$8,967
from 25 contributions
- FAISAL, MUNIR$6,600
- KELLEY, DEBORAH$1,025
- SULEIMAN, LIANA$500
- ALBARRAN, CESAR$500
- AHMAD, MUHAMMAD$195
Private Prisons & Immigration Detention$200
from 2 contributions
- ABDELGANY, SOMAYA$200

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: 56%

Pages: 223-225AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on recognizing alleged genocide in Gaza and holding Israel accountable, while the Project 2025 policy emphasizes reevaluating U.S. funding and participation in international organizations based on their alignment with U.S. interests and sovereignty. There is minimal thematic overlap, as the bill does not address international organization reform, funding accountability, or sovereignty concerns central to the Project 2025 stance."

Key themes:international organizationshuman rightsU.S. foreign policy

— 191 — Department of State nations, but it is not the only option—and American diplomats should be clear- eyed about international organizations’ strengths and weaknesses. When such institutions act against U.S. interests, the United States must be prepared to take appropriate steps in response, up to and including withdrawal. The manifest failure and corruption of the World Health Organization (WHO) during the COVID-19 pandemic is an example of the danger that international organizations pose to U.S. citizens and interests. The next Administration must end blind support for international organi- zations. If an international organization is effective and advances American interests, the United States should support it. If an international organization is ineffective or does not support American interests, the United States should not support it. Those that are effective will still require constant pressure from U.S. officials to ensure that they remain effective. Serious consideration should also be given to withdrawal from organizations that no longer have value, quietly undermine U.S. interests or goals, or disproportionately rely on U.S. financial con- tributions to survive. The Trump Administration’s “tough love” approach to international organiza- tions served American interests. For example, the Trump Administration withdrew from, or terminated funding for, the United Nations Human Rights Council, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, and the WHO. The results were redeployment of taxpayer dollars to better uses—and other organizations “getting the message” that the United States will not allow itself and its money to be used to undermine its own interests. The Biden Administration reversed many of these decisions. Currently, U.S. funding for international organizations is more than $16 billion in fiscal year 2021—a sharp increase from $10.8 billion in fiscal year 2015.19 Millions of American taxpayer dollars go to support policies and initiatives that hurt the United States and American citizens. The next Administration should direct the Secretary of State to initiate a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of U.S. participation in all international organizations. This review should take into account long-standing provisions in federal law that prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars to promote abortion, popu- lation control, and terrorist activities, as well as other applicable restrictions on funding for international organizations and agencies with a view to withholding U.S. funds in cases of abuses. International organizations should not be used to promote radical social pol- icies as if they were human rights priorities. Doing so undermines actual human rights and weakens U.S. credibility abroad. The next Administration should use its voice, influence, votes, and funding in international organizations to pro- mote authentic human rights and respect for sovereignty based on the binding — 192 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise international obligations contained in treaties that have been constitutionally ratified by the U.S. government. It must promote a strict text-based interpreta- tion of treaty obligations that does not consider human rights treaties as “living instruments” both within the State Department and within international organi- zations that receive U.S. funding, including by making respect for sovereignty and authentic human rights a litmus test of personnel decisions and elections processes within international organizations. The U.S. Commission on Unalienable Human Rights focused on the primacy of civil and political rights in its inaugural report, which remains an important guidepost for bilateral and multilateral engagements on human rights. The com- mission’s report is a roadmap for revamping and reenergizing U.S. human rights policy and should be the basis for both structural and policy changes throughout the State Department.20 All U.S. multilateral engagements must be reevaluated in light of the work of the commission, and initiatives that promote controversial policies must be halted and rolled back. It is paramount to create a healthy culture of respect for life, the family, sover- eignty, and authentic human rights in international organizations and agencies. To support this goal, the U.S. led an effort during the Trump Administration to forge a consensus among like-minded countries in support of human life, women’s health, support of the family as the basic unit of human society, and defense of national sovereignty. The result was the Geneva Consensus Declaration on Women’s Health and Protection of the Family.21 All U.S. foreign policy engagements that were pro- duced and expanded under the Obama and Biden Administrations must be aligned with the Geneva Consensus Declaration and the work of the U.S. Commission on Unalienable Human Rights. The U.S. government should not and cannot promote or fund abortion in inter- national programs or multilateral organizations. Technically, the United States can prevent its international funding from going toward abortions, but the U.S. will have a greater impact by including like-minded nations and building on the coali- tion launched through the Geneva Consensus Declaration, with a view to shaping the work of international agencies by functioning as a united front. The COVID-19 pandemic made it painfully clear that both international organi- zations—and some countries—are only too willing to trample human rights in the name of public health. For example, the WHO was, and remains, willing to support the suppression of basic human rights, partially because of its close relationship with human rights abusers like the PRC. The next Administration should unequivocally embrace the premise that humanity and the international community can simultaneously tackle pandem- ics and other emergent health threats without impeding the rights of people. It must also become a vocal surrogate for people in countries where rights are being suppressed in the name of health. This will likely require greater restrictions on

14

Weak

Vector: 55%

Pages: 482-484AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on recognizing a foreign genocide, which tangentially relates to the Project 2025 theme of protecting human life, but it does not address the domestic health, conscience, or family policies outlined in the Project 2025 objectives."

Key themes:protection of lifehuman rightsaccountability

— 450 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Goal #1: Protecting Life, Conscience, and Bodily Integrity. The Secretary should pursue a robust agenda to protect the fundamental right to life, protect con- science rights, and uphold bodily integrity rooted in biological realities, not ideology. From the moment of conception, every human being possesses inherent dignity and worth, and our humanity does not depend on our age, stage of development, race, or abilities. The Secretary must ensure that all HHS programs and activities are rooted in a deep respect for innocent human life from day one until natural death: Abortion and euthanasia are not health care. A robust respect for the sacred rights of conscience, both at HHS and among gov- ernments and institutions funded by it, increases choices for patients and program beneficiaries and furthers pluralism and tolerance. The Secretary must protect Americans’ civil rights by ensuring that HHS programs and activities follow the letter and spirit of religious freedom and conscience-protection laws. Radical actors inside and outside government are promoting harmful identity politics that replaces biological sex with subjective notions of “gender identity” and bases a person’s worth on his or her race, sex, or other identities. This destructive dogma, under the guise of “equity,” threatens American’s fundamental liberties as well as the health and well-being of children and adults alike. The next Secretary must ensure that HHS programs protect children’s minds and bodies and that HHS programs respect parents’ basic right to direct the upbringing, education, and care of their children. Goal #2: Empowering Patient Choices and Provider Autonomy. Basic eco- nomics holds that costs tend to decrease and quality and options tend to increase when there is robust and free competition in the provision of goods and services. Health care is no exception. Health care reform should be patient-centered and market-based and should empower individuals to control their health care–related dollars and decisions. Of course, providers who deliver health care also need the freedom to address the unique needs of their patients. States should be the primary regulators of the medical profession, and the federal government should not restrict providers’ abil- ity to discharge their responsibilities or limit their ability to innovate through government pricing controls or irrational Medicare and Medicaid reimburse- ment schemes. Finally, America’s broken insurance system, run largely through confusing pro- vider networks and third-party payers (employers), induces overconsumption of health care, limits consumer shopping, and hides true costs from patients. The federal government should focus reform on reducing burdens of regulatory compliance, unleashing innovation in health care delivery, ceasing interference in the daily lives of patients and providers, allowing alternative insurance coverage options, and returning control of health care dollars to patients making decisions with their providers about their health care treatments and services. — 451 — Department of Health and Human Services Goal #3: Promoting Stable and Flourishing Married Families. Families comprised of a married mother, father, and their children are the foundation of a well-ordered nation and healthy society. Unfortunately, family policies and programs under President Biden’s HHS are fraught with agenda items focusing on “LGBTQ+ equity,” subsidizing single-motherhood, disincentivizing work, and penalizing marriage. These policies should be repealed and replaced by policies that support the formation of stable, married, nuclear families. Working fathers are essential to the well-being and development of their children, but the United States is experiencing a crisis of fatherlessness that is ruining our children’s futures. In the overwhelming number of cases, fathers insulate children from physical and sexual abuse, financial difficulty or poverty, incarceration, teen pregnancy, poor educational outcomes, high school failure, and a host of behavioral and psychological problems. By contrast, homes with non-related “boyfriends” present are among the most dangerous place for a child to be. HHS should prioritize married father engagement in its messaging, health, and welfare policies. In the context of current and emerging reproductive technologies, HHS policies should never place the desires of adults over the right of children to be raised by the biological fathers and mothers who conceive them. In cases involving biolog- ical parents who are found by a court to be unfit because of abuse or neglect, the process of adoption should be speedy, certain, and supported generously by HHS. Goal #4: Preparing for the Next Health Emergency. The COVID-19 pan- demic demonstrated how catastrophic a micromanaging, misinformed, centralized, and politicized federal government can be. Basic human rights, medical choice, and the doctor–patient relationship were trampled without scientific justification and for extended periods of time. Excess deaths, not due to COVID-19, skyrocketed because of forced lockdowns, isolation, vaccine-related mass firings, and colossal disruptions of the economy and daily rhythms of life. The federal government’s public health apparatus has lost the public’s trust. Before the next national public health emergency, this apparatus must be funda- mentally restructured to ensure a transparent, scientifically grounded, and more nimble, efficient, transparent, and targeted response that respects the unique needs and input of patient populations and providers. Every one of the overreaching policies during the pandemic—from lockdowns and school closures to mask and vaccine mandates or passports—received its supposed legal justification from the state of emergency declared (and renewed) by the HHS Secretary. Tellingly, however, the threshold for what constitutes a public health emergency—how many cases, hospitalizations, deaths, etc.—was never defined. For the sake of democratic accountability, we must know with clarity what will trigger the next emergency declaration and, just as important, what will trigger its end.

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 55%

Pages: 506-508AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill addresses foreign policy and genocide recognition regarding Israel-Palestine, while the Project 2025 excerpt focuses on domestic HHS policies on abortion, transgender coverage, and related health regulations; there is no substantive thematic overlap."

— 474 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise no abortions, preempts no pro-life state laws, and explicitly requires stabilization of the unborn child. HHS should rescind the guidance and end CMS and state agency investigations into cases of alleged refusals to perform abortions. DOJ should agree to eliminate existing injunctions against pro-life states, withdraw its enforcement lawsuits, and in lawsuits against CMS on the guidance agree to injunctions against CMS and withdraw appeals of injunctions. l Reissue a stronger transgender national coverage determination. CMS should repromulgate its 2016 decision that CMS could not issue a National Coverage Determination (NCD) regarding “gender reassignment surgery” for Medicare beneficiaries. In doing so, CMS should acknowledge the growing body of evidence that such interventions are dangerous and acknowledge that there is insufficient scientific evidence to support such coverage in state plans. l Enforce EMTALA. The undeniable reality of abortion is that it does do not always result in a dead baby, and these born-alive babies are left to die. HHS should use EMTALA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act,53 which prohibits disability discrimination, to investigate instances of infants born alive and left untreated in covered hospitals. CMS, OCR, and OIG should be required to follow through on these investigations with specific enforcement actions. HHS should revive a Trump Administration proposed regulation, “Special Responsibilities of Medicare Hospitals in Emergency Cases and Discrimination on the Basis of Disability in Critical Health and Human Service Programs or Activities,”54 to achieve this end. In addition, Congress should pass the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act55 to require that proper medical care be given to infants who survive an abortion and to establish criminal consequences for practitioners who fail to provide such care. l Permanently codify both the Hyde family of amendments and the protections provided by the Weldon Amendment. Congress can accomplish this through legislation such as the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act56 (Hyde) and the Conscience Protection Act57 (Weldon). — 475 — Department of Health and Human Services Radical Redefinition of Sex. On August 4, 2022, HHS published a proposed rule entitled “Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities.”58 This rule addresses nondiscrimination provisions of the Affordable Care Act, known as Section 1557, which is enforced by the Office for Civil Rights and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Section 1557 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and sex in covered health programs or activities. Under the proposed rule, sex is redefined: “Discrimination on the basis of sex includes, but is not limited to, discrimination on the basis of sex stereotypes; sex characteristics, including intersex traits; pregnancy or related conditions; sexual orientation; and gender identity.”59 In other words, the department proposes to interpret Section 1557 as if it created special privileges for new classes of people, defined in ways that are highly ideological and unscientific. The redefinition of sex to cover gender identity and sexual orientation and pregnancy to cover abortion should be reversed in all HHS and CMS programs as was done under the Trump Administration. This includes the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Low-income families who rely on CHIP should not be coerced, pressured, or otherwise encouraged to embrace this ideologically moti- vated sexualization of their children. However, while the Biden Administration’s Section 1557 regulation should be altered and corrected, the lactation room requirements added in the regulation should either be consistently included in any upcoming Section 1557 rulemaking or be proposed in a new individual rule. COVID-19 Vaccination and Mask Requirements. Health care workers were praised for their self-sacrifice in caring for sick patients at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, but then they were fired if they objected to receiving COVID- 19 vaccines with or without complying with onerous masking requirements and regardless of whether they already had the virus and had gained natural immunity. With the disease being endemic and constantly mutating, vaccines and univer- sal masking in health care facilities do not have appreciable benefits in reducing COVID-19 transmission throughout the community. Moreover, more recent COVID strains pose fewer health risks than the earlier strains, and the pandemic has been declared to be at an end. CMS should: l Announce nonenforcement of the Biden Administration’s COVID-19 vaccination mandate on Medicaid and Medicare hospitals. l Revoke corresponding guidance and regulations. l Refrain from imposing general COVID-19 mask mandates on health care facilities or personnel.

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 55%

Pages: 488-490AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on recognizing alleged genocide in Gaza and foreign policy, whereas the Project 2025 excerpt concerns domestic HHS policies on abortion, family formation, and CDC data reporting; there is no substantive thematic or policy overlap."

— 455 — Department of Health and Human Services family formation. It should ensure that it is not promoting abortion as health care. It should fund studies into the risks and complications of abortion and ensure that it corrects and does not promote misinformation regarding the comparative health and psychological benefits of childbirth versus the health and psychological risks of intentionally taking a human life through abortion. The CDC oversaw and funded the development and testing of the COVID-19 vaccines with aborted fetal cell lines, insensitive to the consciences of tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of people who objected to taking a vac- cine with such a link to abortion. As evidenced by litigation across the country, it is likely that thousands were fired unjustly because of the exercise of their consciences or faith on this question, which could have been avoided with a modicum of concern for this issue from CDC. There is never any justification for ending a child’s life as part of research, and the research benefits from splicing or growing aborted fetal cells and aborted baby body parts can easily be provided by alternative sources. All such research should be prohibited as a matter of law and policy. CDC should update its public messaging about the unsurpassed effectiveness of modern fertility awareness–based methods (FABMs) of family planning and stop publishing communications that conflate such methods with the long-eclipsed “rhythm” or “calendar” methods. CDC should fund studies exploring the evi- dence-based methods used in cutting-edge fertility awareness. Data Collection. The CDC’s abortion surveillance and maternity mortality reporting systems are woefully inadequate. CDC abortion data are reported by states on a voluntary basis, and California, Maryland, and New Hampshire do not submit abortion data at all. Accurate and reliable statistical data about abortion, abortion survivors, and abortion-related maternal deaths are essential to timely, reliable public health and policy analysis. Because liberal states have now become sanctuaries for abortion tourism, HHS should use every available tool, including the cutting of funds, to ensure that every state reports exactly how many abortions take place within its borders, at what gestational age of the child, for what reason, the mother’s state of residence, and by what method. It should also ensure that statistics are separated by category: spontaneous miscarriage; treatments that incidentally result in the death of a child (such as chemotherapy); stillbirths; and induced abortion. In addition, CDC should require monitoring and reporting for complications due to abortion and every instance of children being born alive after an abortion. Moreover, abortion should be clearly defined as only those procedures that intentionally end an unborn child’s life. Miscarriage management or standard ectopic pregnancy treatments should never be conflated with abortion. Comparisons between live births and abortion should be tracked across vari- ous demographic indicators to assess whether certain populations are targeted by — 456 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise abortion providers and whether better prenatal physical, mental, and social care improves infant outcomes and decreases abortion rates, especially among those who are most vulnerable. The Ensuring Accurate and Complete Abortion Data Reporting Act of 20239 would amend title XIX of the Social Security Act and Public Health Service Act to improve the CDC’s abortion reporting mechanisms by requiring states, as a condition of federal Medicaid payments for family planning services, to report streamlined variables in a timely manner. The CDC should immediately end its collection of data on gender identity, which legitimizes the unscientific notion that men can become women (and vice versa) and encourages the phenomenon of ever-multiplying subjective identities. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION (FDA) The FDA’s mission includes ensuring the safety and efficacy of drugs, biological products, and medical devices. Federal Laws That Shield Big Pharma from Competition. Because generics generally cost far less than brand-name drugs, consumers begin to save money as soon as a generic product comes on the market. The vast majority are very afford- able with 93 percent of generic products costing $20 or less. Savings would be even higher under proposals that prevent brand-name man- ufacturers from slowing down or impeding the entrance of generic products into the marketplace. Specifically, the FDA should prohibit pharmaceutical companies from purposely sitting on their legally available right to be the first to sell generic versions of their drugs. Additionally, Congress should create legal remedies for generic companies to obtain samples of brand-name products for their generic development efforts and should prohibit meritless “citizen petitions” submitted by manufacturers to delay approval of a generic competitor.10 Approval Process for Laboratory-Developed or Modified Medical Tests. Learning from the failed early COVID-19 testing experience, Congress and the FDA should focus on reforming laws and regulations governing medical tests, especially with respect to laboratory-developed tests. Commercial tests are developed with the intention of being widely marketed, distributed, and used, while laboratory-developed tests are created with the intention of being used solely within one laboratory. A test developed by a lab in accordance with the protocols developed by another lab (non-commercial sharing) currently constitutes a “new” laboratory-developed test because the lab in which it will be used is different from the initial developing lab. To encourage interlab- oratory collaboration and discourage duplicative test creation (and associated regulatory and logistical burdens), the FDA should introduce mechanisms through which laboratory-developed tests can easily be shared with other laboratories with- out the current regulatory burdens.11

Agency for International Development

Minimal

Vector: 54%

Pages: 291-293AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on recognizing alleged genocide in Gaza and does not address USAID gender policies, pro-life initiatives, or any of the themes outlined in the Project 2025 USAID section."

— 259 — Agency for International Development what females are and what femininity is through “gender” policies and practices. For instance, these Administrations have diluted USAID’s focus on assisting vul- nerable women, children, and families around the globe by adding protections for and ideological advocacy on behalf of progressive special-interest groups. USAID now aggressively promotes abortion on demand under the guise of “sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights,” “gender equality,” and “women’s empowerment” and advocates for those who claim minority status or vulnerability. Families are the basic unit of and foundation for a thriving society. Without women, there are no children, and society cannot continue. As evidenced by the confirmation testimony of now-Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the progressive Left has so misused and altered the definition of what a “woman” is that one of our U.S. Supreme Court Justices was unable to delineate clearly the fundamental biological and sexual traits that define the group of which she is a part. USAID cannot advocate for and protect women when they have been erased globally along with the values and traditional structures that have supported them. The next conservative Administration should rename the USAID Office of Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment (GEWE) as the USAID Office of Women, Children, and Families; refocus and realign resources that currently support programs in GEWE to the Office of Women, Children, and Families; redes- ignate the Senior Gender Coordinator as an unapologetically pro-life politically appointed Senior Coordinator of the Office of Women, Children, and Families; and eliminate the “more than 180 gender advisors and points of contact…embedded in Missions and Operating Units throughout the Agency.”9 In addition, the next conservative Administration should rescind President Biden’s 2022 Gender Policy and refocus it on Women, Children, and Families and revise the agency’s regulation on “Integrating Gender Equality and Female Empowerment in USAID’s Program Cycle.”10 It should remove all references, exam- ples, definitions, photos, and language on USAID websites, in agency publications and policies, and in all agency contracts and grants that include the following terms: “gender,” “gender equality,” “gender equity,” “gender diverse individu- als,” “gender aware,” “gender sensitive,” etc. It should also remove references to “abortion,” “reproductive health,” and “sexual and reproductive rights” and con- troversial sexual education materials. In the past, the word “gender” was a polite alternative to the word “sex” or term “biological sex.” The Left has commandeered the term “gender,” which used to mean either “male” or “female,” to include a spectrum of others who are seeking to alter biological and societal sexual norms. The promotion of gender radicalism is anathema to the traditional norms of many societies where USAID works, causes resentment by tying lifesaving assistance to rejecting the aid recipient’s own firmly held fundamental values regarding sexuality, and produces unnecessary conster- nation and confusion among and even outright bias against men. — 260 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise The next Administration should ensure that USAID’s goal in service of its mission is to help protect and propel all members of society—women, children, and men—from conception to natural death. To do so, USAID’s Office of Women, Children, and Families should strive to ensure that communities have their basic human needs, without which they will be unable to thrive, met first and foremost. Basic human needs include equal and safe access to potable water, sanitation, food, education, health care, houses of worship, justice, pregnancy and family resource centers, working capital, electricity, technology, and business opportunities. The Office of Women, Children, and Families should implement the Geneva Consen- sus Declaration on Women’s Health and Protection of the Family and prioritize partnerships with local organizations, including faith-based organizations (FBOs). Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance. Protecting life should be among the core objectives of United States foreign assistance. Shortly after taking office, how- ever, President Biden issued a memorandum that reversed a myriad of pro-life policies and revoked the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance (PLGHA) policy, widely known as the Mexico City Policy. Biden also restored funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which supports and implements China’s coercive abortion and sterilization regimen. PLGHA requires foreign NGOs, as a condition of receiving assistance, to agree not to perform or actively promote abortions as a method of family planning in foreign countries. Previous pro-life Presidents beginning with Ronald Reagan applied these conditions to family planning assistance, but President Trump for the first time expanded the Mexico City Policy to protect “global health assistance furnished by all departments or agencies” (estimated to be $8.8 billion annually). The Biden Administration restored abortion subsidies to pro-abortion NGOs including Planned Parenthood International and MSI Reproductive Choices. In reversing PLGHA, Biden declared a radical assault on the policy of protecting life, choosing instead to promote abortion on demand around the world under the guise of “sexual and reproductive health and rights.” USAID’s priority of funding the global abortion industry negates programs that promote life, women’s health, and the family. Even under PLGHA, several loopholes allowed support for the global abortion industry to continue. International NGOs that perform and promote abortions overseas like Population Services International, Pathfinder, PATH, the Population Council, EngenderHealth, and WomanCare Global International continued to receive funding from USAID under PLGHA and now, under Biden, receive tens of millions more in U.S. taxpayer dollars in foreign assistance annually without any oversight. When the United Nations Secretariat promoted abortion and abor- tion-inducing drugs under the umbrella of “sexual and reproductive health” as an element of its COVID-19 Global Humanitarian Response Plan in May 2020, the exemptions in PLGHA for humanitarian aid and multilateral organizations

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. Tlaib, Rashida

Agent Orange Relief Act of 2025

119/hr/3052

FAIR Credit Act

119/hr/9639

Expanding Health Care Providers for Veterans Act

119/hr/5985

Back to All Bills