Congratulating Korson's Tree Farms in Montcalm County in Sidney Township for being selected to provide the 2025 White House Christmas Tree.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hres/917

Last Updated: December 1, 2025

Congratulating Korson's Tree Farms in Montcalm County in Sidney Township for being selected to provide the 2025 White House Christmas Tree.

HRES. 917, 119th Congress — read as touching Crop Producers.

The sponsor

Rep. Moolenaar, John R. [R-MI-2]

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

The money

$131,950 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Agriculture" section, p. 344-346 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 trivial pursuits of Congress. HRES 917 is a resolution that congratulates Korson's Tree Farms for being selected to provide the 2025 White House Christmas Tree. A feel-good gesture, no doubt, but one that holds little significance in the grand scheme of things.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of this resolution is to offer a symbolic nod of approval to Korson's Tree Farms, a Michigan-based Christmas tree farm. It's a ceremonial gesture, devoid of any meaningful policy implications.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** There are no substantial provisions or changes to existing law in this resolution. It's a non-binding expression of congratulations, lacking any legislative teeth.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The primary stakeholders in this resolution are Korson's Tree Farms and the state of Michigan. The Christmas tree industry as a whole may also take notice, but the impact is likely to be minimal.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** From my perspective, this resolution holds little significance. It does not address any pressing issues or offer meaningful reforms that could impact my business interests or the broader economy. In fact, it's a distraction from more critical policy debates that could have a tangible impact on growth and innovation.

In terms of potential implications, I'd argue that this resolution reinforces the notion that Congress is often more focused on symbolic gestures than substantive policy-making. It's a reminder that the legislative process can be slow and inefficient, bogged down by trivial matters rather than tackling the complex issues that truly matter.

As someone who has invested heavily in think tanks and advocacy groups, I believe it's essential to prioritize policies that promote deregulation, tax reform, and innovation. Resolutions like HRES 917 only serve as a reminder of the need for more effective governance structures – perhaps ones that are more akin to private sector models, where efficiency and results-driven decision-making are paramount.

In conclusion, HRES 917 is a non-event from a policy perspective. It's a ceremonial gesture that fails to address any meaningful issues or offer tangible benefits to stakeholders. As someone who has built a business empire through strategic investments and calculated risk-taking, I expect more from our policymakers.

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 one or both chambers of Congress.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The main purpose of HRES 917 is to congratulate Korson's Tree Farms in Montcalm County, Michigan, for being selected to provide the 2025 White House Christmas tree. The resolution aims to recognize the farm's achievement and acknowledge the significance of the Christmas tree industry in Michigan.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

This resolution doesn't propose any changes to existing law. It's simply a feel-good measure that expresses the sentiments of the House of Representatives. As we covered in middle school, resolutions like this one don't have the force of law and are often used for ceremonial purposes or to express opinions.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The affected parties include Korson's Tree Farms, the state of Michigan, and the Christmas tree industry as a whole. The resolution also mentions the National Christmas Tree Association, which is likely a stakeholder in this matter.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The potential impact of this resolution is minimal, as it doesn't propose any concrete changes to existing law or policy. However, it may have some symbolic significance for Korson's Tree Farms and the state of Michigan, as it recognizes their achievement and promotes the Christmas tree industry.

Now, remember when we learned about the committee system in Congress? This resolution was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. As I explained back then, committees play a crucial role in reviewing and refining legislation before it reaches the full chamber for debate and voting.

In this case, the committee will likely review the resolution and may hold hearings or markups before reporting it out to the full House for consideration. If passed, the resolution would be sent to the Senate for its approval, but as a non-binding resolution, it wouldn't require presidential signature.

It's worth noting that, in practice, resolutions like this one often get bogged down in committee or languish on the legislative calendar. But hey, at least we can say we tried to teach you about the legislative process back in middle school...

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

My fellow truth-seekers, gather 'round and behold the innocent-sounding HRES 917, a bill that congratulates Korson's Tree Farms for providing the 2025 White House Christmas tree. But don't be fooled – this is more than just a feel-good resolution. It's a cleverly veiled attempt to distract us from the real agenda.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** On the surface, HRES 917 appears to be a harmless congratulatory bill. However, I believe its true purpose is to subtly promote Michigan's Christmas tree industry and bolster the state's agricultural sector. But why? What's really at play here?

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The resolution invites Korson's Tree Farms to the United States Capitol Building for a ceremony, which seems like a nice gesture. However, this could be a clever ruse to gather influential figures and further solidify the government's ties with the agricultural industry. The bill also directs the Clerk of the House to provide enrolled copies of the resolution to President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump – but why? Is this just a symbolic gesture or an attempt to curry favor with the Trump administration?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Korson's Tree Farms, Michigan's Christmas tree industry, and the state's agricultural sector are all beneficiaries of this bill. But what about the rest of us? Are we being sold a bill of goods (pun intended)? The government is using our tax dollars to promote a specific industry – is this a case of crony capitalism?

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The real impact of HRES 917 lies in its potential to set a precedent for future bills that favor specific industries or corporations. This could lead to a slippery slope where the government increasingly prioritizes the interests of big business over those of the average citizen. Furthermore, by promoting Michigan's Christmas tree industry, the government may be inadvertently contributing to deforestation and environmental degradation.

Now, I know what you're thinking – "Uncle, this is just a harmless bill about a Christmas tree." But trust me, my friends, there's more to it than meets the eye. Wake up, sheeple! The truth is out there, hidden in plain sight, waiting to be uncovered by vigilant citizens like ourselves.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, I've got a real doozy for you tonight. We're talking about HRES 917, the most pressing issue facing our great nation today: congratulating Korson's Tree Farms in Montcalm County, Michigan, for being selected to provide the 2025 White House Christmas Tree. (Sarcasm dripping) Oh, the suspense is killing me!

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This resolution is a masterclass in patriotism and freedom-loving spirit. Its primary objective is to... wait for it... congratulate Korson's Tree Farms on their achievement! That's right, folks; our brave representatives are taking a bold stance by acknowledging the hard work and dedication of these fine Michiganders.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** Now, I know what you're thinking: "What about the substance? What about the meat?" Well, let me tell you, this resolution is packed with... (dramatic pause) ...congratulatory language! That's right; it's a veritable love letter to Korson's Tree Farms. But don't worry, there are no changes to existing law here, just a healthy dose of feel-goodery.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The real winners here are the fine folks at Korson's Tree Farms, who will undoubtedly bask in the glory of this congressional recognition. And let's not forget the people of Michigan, who can proudly claim their state is home to over 500 Christmas tree farms! (Wink) I'm sure the "elites" in Washington are just thrilled to be acknowledging the hard work of these regular Americans.

**Potential Impact & Implications** Now, I know some of you might be thinking, "But what about the impact on our freedom? What about the deep state?" Fear not, dear viewers! This resolution is a beacon of hope in a world gone mad. By congratulating Korson's Tree Farms, we're sending a powerful message to the forces of oppression: we will not be silenced by the tyranny of... (dramatic pause) ...Christmas tree selection committees!

In all seriousness, folks, this resolution is a harmless exercise in feel-good politics. But hey, who doesn't love a good Christmas tree? So let's raise a glass (of eggnog, naturally) to Korson's Tree Farms and the brave men and women of Congress who dared to take on this critical issue!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

(sigh) Oh joy, another meaningless resolution from the esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this festering boil on the body politic.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** To congratulate Korson's Tree Farms in Michigan for being selected to provide the 2025 White House Christmas Tree. Wow, what a monumental achievement. I'm sure the fate of the nation rests on this momentous decision.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** None. Zilch. Zero. This is a resolution, not a bill, so it doesn't actually change anything. It's just a feel-good exercise in self-aggrandizement for the sponsors and a PR stunt for Korson's Tree Farms.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The only parties affected are the egos of the sponsoring representatives and the owners of Korson's Tree Farms, who will no doubt use this resolution to boost their sales and reputation. Oh, and maybe some Michigan voters who'll be fooled into thinking their representatives are actually doing something meaningful.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** None. This resolution is a placebo, a sugar pill designed to make people feel good without actually accomplishing anything. It won't create jobs, stimulate the economy, or address any pressing national issues. But hey, it's Christmas, so who cares about substance when you can have empty sentiment?

Diagnosis: This bill suffers from a severe case of "Legislative Narcissism," where politicians prioritize self-promotion and trivialities over actual governance. Symptoms include an inflated sense of importance, a lack of meaningful action, and a complete disregard for the well-being of constituents.

Treatment: A healthy dose of skepticism, a strong stomach to withstand the nausea induced by such blatant self-aggrandizement, and a reminder that this is what happens when politicians are more concerned with their own image than with serving the public interest.

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

**HRES 917 Summary**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of HRES 917 is to congratulate Korson's Tree Farms in Montcalm County, Michigan, for being selected to provide the official 2025 White House Christmas tree. The resolution aims to recognize the farm's achievement and highlight the significance of the Christmas tree industry to the state of Michigan and the nation.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The resolution does not propose any changes to existing law. Instead, it is a ceremonial measure that:

1. Congratulates Korson's Tree Farms on their selection as the provider of the 2025 White House Christmas tree. 2. Recognizes the agricultural and economic significance of the Christmas tree industry to Michigan and the nation. 3. Invites Korson's Tree Farms to the United States Capitol Building to be honored. 4. Directs the Clerk of the House of Representatives to make available enrolled copies of this resolution to President Donald J. Trump and First Lady Melania Trump for display.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties and stakeholders include:

1. Korson's Tree Farms, the selected provider of the 2025 White House Christmas tree. 2. The state of Michigan, which is home to over 500 Christmas tree farms and ranks third in the nation in Christmas tree production. 3. The National Christmas Tree Association, which crowns the Grand Champion of the Christmas Tree Contest. 4. The White House, which will display the selected Christmas tree.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The resolution has no significant policy implications or financial impact. However, it may:

1. Boost Michigan's reputation as a major producer of high-quality Christmas trees. 2. Promote the agricultural and economic significance of the Christmas tree industry in Michigan and nationally. 3. Provide recognition and honor to Korson's Tree Farms for their achievement.

Overall, HRES 917 is a ceremonial resolution that aims to recognize and celebrate Korson's Tree Farms' achievement while highlighting the importance of the Christmas tree industry to Michigan and the nation.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this congressional bill, HRES 917, and get the lowdown on what it's all about.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This resolution is like a big ol' high-five to Korson's Tree Farms in Michigan for being selected to provide the 2025 White House Christmas tree. It's a feel-good bill that congratulates the farm on their achievement and recognizes the significance of the Christmas tree industry in Michigan.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** There aren't any major changes to existing law here, bro. This resolution is more like a ceremonial nod to Korson's Tree Farms. The main provisions are:

* Congratulating Korson's Tree Farms on being selected to provide the 2025 White House Christmas tree * Recognizing the agricultural and economic significance of the Christmas tree industry in Michigan and the nation * Inviting Korson's Tree Farms to the US Capitol Building for a special honor * Directing the Clerk of the House to make available enrolled copies of this resolution to President Trump (yeah, I know, it's an old bill) and First Lady Melania Trump

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The main parties here are:

* Korson's Tree Farms: They're the ones getting all the love and recognition for their awesome Christmas trees. * The State of Michigan: This resolution highlights the importance of the Christmas tree industry in Michigan, which is pretty cool for the state's economy and farmers. * The National Christmas Tree Association: They're the ones who crowned Korson's Tree Farms as the Grand Champion of their Christmas Tree Contest.

**Potential Impact & Implications** This bill isn't gonna change the world, bro. It's more like a symbolic gesture to recognize the achievements of Korson's Tree Farms and the Christmas tree industry in Michigan. However, it could have some positive implications for:

* Boosting Michigan's economy: By highlighting the state's Christmas tree industry, this resolution might attract more attention and business to Michigan's farmers. * Promoting agriculture: This bill shows that Congress cares about the agricultural sector and is willing to recognize its importance.

In conclusion, HRES 917 is a chill bill that gives props to Korson's Tree Farms for their awesome Christmas trees. It's not gonna revolutionize anything, but it's a nice gesture that might have some positive effects on Michigan's economy and agriculture.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**Bill Analysis: HRES 917**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** HRES 917 is a congratulatory resolution that aims to recognize Korson's Tree Farms in Montcalm County, Michigan, for being selected to provide the 2025 White House Christmas tree. The bill's primary objective is to honor the farm's achievement and acknowledge the significance of the Christmas tree industry to the state of Michigan and the nation.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The resolution does not propose any changes to existing law or introduce new legislation. Instead, it consists of a series of "whereas" clauses that highlight Korson's Tree Farms' achievements and the importance of the Christmas tree industry in Michigan. The bill's provisions are largely ceremonial, with the main action being the congratulation of Korson's Tree Farms.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The affected parties include:

1. Korson's Tree Farms: The farm is the primary beneficiary of the resolution, receiving recognition for its achievement. 2. Christmas tree industry in Michigan: The bill highlights the significance of the industry to the state and nation. 3. Michigan congressional delegation: The delegation is mentioned as congratulating Korson's Tree Farms on their achievement.

**Potential Impact & Implications** The impact of this bill is largely symbolic, with no significant policy implications. However, it may have some indirect benefits for the Christmas tree industry in Michigan, such as increased visibility and promotion. Additionally, the resolution may serve to strengthen relationships between lawmakers and the agricultural community in Michigan.

In terms of monied interests, there are no apparent PACs or special interest groups directly backing this bill. The bill's sponsors, including Rep. Moolenaar (R-MI) and others from Michigan, likely have a vested interest in promoting their state's industries and recognizing local achievements. However, the lack of any significant policy implications or funding provisions suggests that this bill is more of a ceremonial gesture than a vehicle for special interests.

Overall, HRES 917 appears to be a genuine attempt by lawmakers to recognize a notable achievement by a Michigan business, without any apparent ulterior motives or hidden agendas.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Moolenaar, John R. [R-MI-2]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$131,950

26 donors

PACs

Organizations

$39,550

Committees

Individuals

$92,400

No PAC contributions found

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

3 transactions

$6,600

SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND OF MIWOK INDIANS

2 transactions

$5,800

MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND POTTAWATOMI INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

PECHANGA BAND OF INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

POKAGON BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

SAGINAW CHIPPEWA INDIAN TRIBE TRIBAL OPERATIONS

1 transaction

$3,300

NOTTAWASEPPI HURON BAND OF THE POTAWATOMI

1 transaction

$3,300

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

2 transactions

$3,000

SAULT STE. MARIE TRIBE CHIPPEWA INDIANS

1 transaction

$2,900

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

1 transaction

$2,500

THE CHICKASAW NATION

1 transaction

$2,000

GRANT CONSULTING GROUP LLC

1 transaction

$250

No committee contributions found

HIBMA, DANIEL T.

1 transaction

$6,600

CAMERON, RONALD M.

1 transaction

$6,600

KENNEDY III, JOHN C.

1 transaction

$6,600

LYNCH, JON J.

1 transaction

$6,600

DEVOS, DANIEL G.

1 transaction

$6,600

DEVOS, DOUGLAS L.

1 transaction

$6,600

DEVOS, ELISABETH

1 transaction

$6,600

DEVOS, MARIA P.

1 transaction

$6,600

DEVOS, PAMELLA G.

1 transaction

$6,600

DEVOS, RICHARD M. JR.

1 transaction

$6,600

DEVOS, SUZANNE C.

1 transaction

$6,600

EHMANN, STEPHEN L.

1 transaction

$6,600

MYLER, PAMELA H.

1 transaction

$6,600

KEPLER, DAVID E. II

1 transaction

$6,600

Donor Network - Rep. Moolenaar, John R. [R-MI-2]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 56 nodes and 30 connections (59 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $131,950

Top Donors - Rep. Moolenaar, John R. [R-MI-2]

Showing top 25 donors by contribution amount

12 Orgs14 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

+Crop Producersconfidence 0.90
Resolution recognizes the agricultural and economic significance of the Christmas tree industry to the State of Michigan and the Nation (section (2)). This acknowledges the industry's value, which is a benefit to crop producers involved in Christmas tree farming.

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 Agriculture

Weak

Vector: 59%

Pages: 344-346AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 917 is a ceremonial resolution recognizing a Christmas tree farm and does not propose policy changes, while Project 2025's Department of Agriculture section focuses on systemic reforms like reducing federal spending, eliminating subsidies, and transforming food systems. The bill shares only a tangential connection to agriculture through recognition of the Christmas tree industry."

Key themes:agriculturerural economyfarm recognition

— 311 — Department of Agriculture ENDNOTES 1. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Summary, p.1, https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/ files/documents/2023-usda-budget-summary.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 2. See, for example, U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Transforming the U.S. Food System,” https://www.usda. gov/fst (accessed December 14, 2022). 3. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Summary, p.1. 4. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “USDA Celebrates 150 Years,” https://www.usda.gov/our-agency/about-usda/ history (accessed December 16, 2022). 5. The law stated, “[T]here is hereby established at the seat of government of the United States a Department of Agriculture, the general designs and duties of which shall be to acquire and to diffuse among the people of the United States useful information on subjects connected with agriculture in the most general and comprehensive sense of that word, and to procure, propagate, and distribute among the people new and valuable seeds and plants.” Gladys L. Baker et al., Century of Service: The First 100 Years of the United States Department of Agriculture, (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963) p. 13, https://babel. hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b4254098&view=1up&seq=33 (accessed December 16, 2022). 6. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Summary, p. 2. 7. Ibid., p. 2. 8. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Strategic Plan: Fiscal Years 2022–2026, p. 3, https://www.usda.gov/sites/ default/files/documents/usda-fy-2022-2026-strategic-plan.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 9. News release, “USDA Announces Framework for Shoring Up the Food Supply Chain and Transforming the Food System to Be Fairer, More Competitive, More Resilient,” U.S. Department of Agriculture, June 1, 2022, https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2022/06/01/usda-announces-framework-shoring-food-supply- chain-and-transforming (accessed December 14, 2022). 10. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Transforming the U.S. Food System.” 11. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Strategic Plan: Fiscal Years 2022–2026, pp. 1–2. 12. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Background on the U.S. Approach to the 2021 UN Food Systems Summit,” August 4, 2021, https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Background-on-US-approach-2021-UN- Food-Systems-Summit.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 13. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “UN Food Systems Summit,” https://www.usda.gov/oce/sustainability/un- summit (accessed December 14, 2022). 14. Mark Bittman et al., “How a National Food Policy Could Save Millions of American Lives,” The Washington Post, November 7, 2014, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-a-national-food-policy-could- save-millions-of-american-lives/2014/11/07/89c55e16-637f-11e4-836c-83bc4f26eb67_story.html (accessed December 14, 2022); Daren Bakst and Gabriella Beaumont-Smith, “No, We Don’t Need to Transform the American Food System,” The Daily Signal, February 26, 2021, https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/02/26/ no-we-dont-need-to-transform-the-american-food-system/ (accessed December 14, 2022); and Daren Bakst, “Biden’s Food Conference Should Put People First, Not Environmental Extremism,” The Daily Signal, September 22, 2022, https://www.dailysignal.com/2022/09/22/bidens-food-conference-should-put-people- first-not-environmental-extremism/ (accessed December 14, 2022). 15. News release, “USDA to Invest Up to $300 Million in New Organic Transition Initiative,” U.S. Department of Agriculture, August 22, 2022, https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2022/08/22/usda-invest-300- million-new-organic-transition-initiative (accessed December 14, 2022). 16. Gary Baise, “Sri Lanka’s Green New Deal Was a Disaster,” Farm Futures, November 14, 2022, https://www. farmprogress.com/commentary/sri-lankas-green-new-deal-was-disaster (accessed December 16, 2022). 17. See, for example, Catherine Greene et al., “Growing Organic Demand Provides High-Value Opportunities for Many Types of Producers,” Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, February 6, 2017, https://www. ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2017/januaryfebruary/growing-organic-demand-provides-high-value-opportunities- for-many-types-of-producers/#:~:text=ERS%20research%20shows%20that%20many,flavor%20desired%20 by%20the%20consumer (accessed December 14, 2022), and Andrea Carlson, “Investigating Retail Price Premiums for Organic Foods,” Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, May 24, 2016, https://www.ers. usda.gov/amber-waves/2016/may/investigating-retail-price-premiums-for-organic-foods/ (accessed December 16, 2022). Further, there are many myths, such as those regarding the alleged health benefit of organic food. One — 312 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise meta study found that “[t]he published literature lacks strong evidence that organic foods are significantly more nutritious than conventional foods.” Crystal Smith-Spangler et al., “Are Organic Foods Safer or Healthier Than Conventional Alternatives,” Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 157, No. 5 (September 4, 2012), pp. 348–366, https:// www.acpjournals.org/doi/epdf/10.7326/0003-4819-157-5-201209040-00007 (accessed December 16, 2022). 18. Steve Savage, “USDA Data Confirm Organic Yields Significantly Lower Than With Conventional Farming,” Genetic Literacy Project, February 16, 2018, https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/02/16/usda-data-confirm- organic-yields-dramatically-lower-conventional-farming/ (accessed December 16, 2022). 19. See, for example, U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Notice: Climate-Smart Agriculture and Forestry Partnership Program, Request for Comments,” USDA–2021–0010, October 21, 2021, https://www.regulations. gov/document/USDA-2021-0010-0001 (accessed December 16, 2022). 20. Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Public Law 117–169. 21. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, “Productivity Growth in U.S. Agriculture (1948–2019),” https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/agricultural-productivity-in-the-u-s/productivity- growth-in-u-s-agriculture-1948-2019/ (accessed December 14, 2022). 22. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, “Total Food Budget Share Increased from 9.4 Percent of Disposable Income to 10.3 Percent in 2021,” July 15, 2022, https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ chart-gallery/gallery/chart-detail/?chartId=76967 (accessed December 14, 2022). 23. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Quintiles of Income Before Taxes: Annual Expenditure Means, Shares, and Standard Errors, and Coefficients of Variation, Consumer Expenditure Surveys,” 2021, Table 1101, https://www.bls.gov/cex/tables/calendar-year/mean-item-share-average-standard-error/cu- income-quintiles-before-taxes-2021.pdf (accessed December 16, 2022), and Daren Bakst and Patrick Tyrrell, “Big Government Policies That Hurt the Poor and How to Address Them,” Heritage Foundation Special Report No.176, April 5, 2017, p. 7, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2017-04/SR176.pdf. 24. Daren Bakst and Joshua Sewell, “Congress Should Stop Abrogating Its Spending Power and Rein in the USDA Slush Fund,” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 6052, February 19, 2021, p. 2, https://www.heritage.org/ budget-and-spending/report/congress-should-stop-abrogating-its-spending-power-and-rein-the-usda. 25. Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act of 1948, Public Law 80–806. 26. Bakst and Sewall, “Congress Should Stop Abrogating Its Spending Power.” 27. Ibid., p. 3. 28. Daren Bakst, “Comment from Bakst, Darren” on “Notice: Climate-Smart Agriculture and Forestry Partnership Program, Request for Comments,” USDA–2021–0010, October 21, 2021,” November 1, 2021, https://www. regulations.gov/document/USDA-2021-0010-0001/comment?filter=bakst (accessed December 16, 2022). 29. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Notice: Climate-Smart Agriculture and Forestry Partnership Program.” 30. Megan Stubbs, “The Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC),” Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, updated January 14, 2021, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44606 (accessed December 16, 2022). 31. “Overall, 34 percent of all farms reported receiving some type of Government payment in 2021,” and “[o]verall, 14 percent of U.S. farms participated in Federal crop insurance programs.” Christine Whitt, Noah Miller, and Ryan Olver, “America’s Farms and Ranches at a Glance: 2022 Edition,” U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pp. 24 and 26, https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/105388/eib-247. pdf?v=527.4 (accessed March 18, 2023). This data, which apparently does not cover crop insurance, included payments beyond just commodity payments, such as conservation payments. 32. Randy Schnepf, “Farm Safety-Net Payments Under the 2014 Farm Bill: Comparison by Program Crop,” Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, August 11, 2017, https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44914.pdf (accessed December 14, 2022). 33. Although livestock and specialty crop producers do receive some subsidies, former American Farm Bureau Federation President Bob Stallman captured the subsidy issue well. He “dismisse[d] outright the claim that farmers couldn’t survive without subsidy money. ‘Why does the livestock industry survive without subsidies?’ he ask[ed]. ‘Why does the specialty crop [fruit and vegetable] industry survive?’” Tamar Haspel, “Why Do Taxpayers Subsidize Rich Farmers?” The Washington Post, March 15, 2018, https://www.washingtonpost. com/lifestyle/food/why-do-taxpayers-subsidize-rich-farmers/2018/03/15/50e89906-27b6-11e8-b79d- f3d931db7f68_story.html (accessed March 18, 2023).

Department of Defense

Minimal

Vector: 58%

Pages: 134-136AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 917 is a ceremonial resolution congratulating a Christmas tree farm and contains no provisions related to defense exportability, FMS processes, ITAR reform, defense industrial base collaboration, or military recruiting—the core themes of the Project 2025 DoD policy."

— 101 — Department of Defense 1. Ensure that senior U.S. military leadership emphasizes exportability in the initial development of defense systems that are both available and interoperable with our partners and allies. 2. Create a funding mechanism to incentivize exportability in initial planning, which can be recouped after future FMS transactions. l End informal congressional notification. Informal congressional notification or “tiered review” is a hinderance to ensuring timely sales to our global partners. The tiered review process is not codified in law; it is merely a practice by which the Department of State provides a preview of prospective arms transfers before Congress is formally notified.9 1. End the tiered review process to eliminate at least 20 days from the FMS process. 2. Use the tiered review process only when unanimous congressional support is guaranteed in order to eliminate the “weaponization” by select Members of Congress that has prevented billions of dollars of arms sales from moving into formal congressional notification. l Minimize barriers to collaboration. The high cost of developing advanced defense platforms requires the United States to collaborate with key allies to minimize waste, complement strengths, and supplement our defense industrial base to create a system that is greater than that of the United States alone. 1. Enhance defense industrial base planning with partners to allow them to focus on niche areas where there are cost advantages for the United States. 2. Decrease International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to facilitate trade with such allies as the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. 3. Create opportunities to improve the health of the defense supply chain with added opportunities for partners and allies to contribute. l Reform the FMS contracting process. The contracting timeline for the FMS process is shockingly slow. On average, the DOD contracting timeline takes approximately 18 months because of slow bureaucratic processes and chronic understaffing.10 — 102 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 1. Immediately fund more contracting capacity in all services to decrease the contracting timeline and improve the delivery of defense articles to our global partners. 2. Rationalize and speed arms sales decision-making to preclude our enemies from exploiting bureaucratic slothfulness and allow us to manage the development of indigenous defense industrial bases. DOD PERSONNEL The men and women of America’s armed forces are the most critical component of our national defense strategy, but in recent years, they have been overextended, undervalued, and insufficiently resourced. Their families help them to carry the burden of service, but the assistance they receive is disproportionately less than the sacrifices they make. Young civilians who would thrive in a military environ- ment are disenfranchised when educators and influencers discourage them from learning about military service and preparing for the honor of wearing Ameri- ca’s uniform. The United States military is an extraordinary institution, staffed by exceptional people who have defended our nation and changed the course of history, but the Biden Administration, through word and deed, has treated the armed forces as just another place to work. We must restore our military to a place of honor and respect and recruit and retain the individuals who will meet the rigorous standards of excellence that are required for membership in the world’s greatest fighting force. Needed Reforms l Rescue recruiting and retention. Recruiting was the worst in 2022 that it has been in two generations and is expected to be even worse in 2023. Some of the problems are self-inflicted and ongoing. The recruiting problem is not service-specific: It affects the entire Joint Force. 1. Appoint a Special Assistant to the President who will maintain liaison with Congress, DOD, and all other interested parties on the issue of recruiting and retention. 2. Improve recruiting by suspending the use of the recently introduced MHS Genesis system that uses private medical records of potential recruits at Military Entrance Processing Stations (MEPS), creating unnecessary delays and unwarranted rejections.11 3. Improve military recruiters’ access to secondary schools and require completion of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery

Department of the Interior

Minimal

Vector: 57%

Pages: 572-574AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 917 is a ceremonial resolution congratulating a Christmas tree farm, whereas the Project 2025 DOI excerpt concerns oil and gas leasing, NEPA streamlining, and energy independence; there is no substantive policy overlap."

Key themes:no thematic overlapunrelated topics

— 540 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 24. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3354: Supporting and Improving the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Program and Federal Solid Mineral Leasing Program, July 6, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/ files/uploads/so_-_3354_signed.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 25. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3355: Streamlining National Environmental Policy Reviews and Implementation of Executive Order 13807, “Establishing Discipline and Accountability in the Environmental Review and Permitting Process for Infrastructure Projects,” August 31, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/ files/elips/documents/3355_-_streamlining_national_environmental_policy_reviews_and_implementation_ of_executive_order_13807_establishing_discipline_and_accountability_in_the_environmental_review_ and_permitting_process_for.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 26. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3358: Executive Committee for Expedited Permitting,” October 25, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so_3358_executive_committee_for_ expedited_permitting_0.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 27. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3360: Rescinding Authorities Inconsistent with Secretary’s Order 3349, “American Energy Independence,” December 22, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/ documents/3360_-_rescinding_authorities_inconsistent_with_secretarys_order_3349_american_energy_ independence.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 28. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3380: Public Notice of the Costs Associated with Developing Department of the Interior Publications and Similar Documents,” March 10, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/sites/ doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so-3398-508_0.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 29. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3385: Enforcement Priorities,” September 14, 2020, https:// www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/signed-so-3385-enforcement-priorities.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 30. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order 3389: Coordinating and Clarifying National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 Reviews,” September 14, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/signed- so-3385-enforcement-priorities.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 31. Bureau of Land Management, “Updating Oil and Gas Leasing Reform: Land Use Planning and Lease Parcel Reviews,” IM 2018–034, January 31, 2018, https://www.blm.gov/policy/im-2018-034 (accessed March 16, 2023). 32. Lease Now Act, S. 4228, 117th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2022). 33. ONSHORE Act, S. 218, 116th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2019). https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate- bill/218/text (accessed March 18, 2023). 34. Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 130 (July 8, 2022), pp. 40859–40863. 35. The Biden Administration’s 2023–2028 proposed program is fatally flawed. Katie Tubb, “Comment for the 2023–2028 National OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed Program,” BOEM–2022–0031, October 6, 2022, http:// thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2022/Regulatory_Comments/BOEM%202023-2028%20lease%20plan%20 comment%20KTubb.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 36. See Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117–169, §§ 50261–50263. 37. Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, Public Law No. 115–97, § 20001, and U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3401: Comprehensive Analysis and Temporary Halt on All Activities in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Relating to the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program,” June 1, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/ documents/so-3401-comprehensive-analysis-and-temporary-halt-on-all-activitives-in-the-arctic-national- wildlife-refuge-relating-to-the-coastal-plain-oil-and-gas-leasing-program.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 38. In 2016, Interior Secretary Sally Jewell instituted a moratorium on new coal leases while conducting a programmatic environmental impact statement under NEPA to address concerns about competition and inconsistency with the Obama Administration’s climate policy. In 2017, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke lifted the moratorium and ended development of a programmatic environmental impact statement. In April 2021, Interior Secretary Debra Haaland rescinded Zinke’s order and initiated a new review of the coal-leasing program. See U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3338: Discretionary Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement to Modernize the Federal Coal Program,” January 15, 2016, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi. gov/files/elips/documents/archived-3338_-discretionary_programmatic_environmental_impact_statement_ to_modernize_the_federal_coal_program.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023); U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3348”; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3398”; and Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 159 (August 20, 2021), pp. 46873–46877. — 541 — Department of the Interior 39. Katie Tubb, “No More Standoffs: Protecting Federal Employees and Ending the Culture of Anti-Government Attacks and Abuse,” testimony before the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, Committee on Natural Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, pp. 2–4, October 22, 2019, https://congress. gov/116/meeting/house/110104/witnesses/HHRG-116-II10-Wstate-TubbK-20191022.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 40. News release, “Secretary Haaland Announces Steps to Establish Protections for Culturally Significant Chaco Canyon Landscape,” U.S. Department of the Interior, November 15, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/ secretary-haaland-announces-steps-establish-protections-culturally-significant-chaco (accessed March 16, 2023); News release, “Biden–Harris Administration Proposes Protections for Thompson Divide,” U.S. Department of the Interior, October 12, 2022, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-harris-administration- proposes-protections-thompson-divide (accessed March 16, 2023); News release, “Biden Administration Takes Action to Complete Study of Boundary Waters Area Watershed,” U.S. Department of the Interior, October 20, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-administration-takes-action-complete-study-boundary- waters-area-watershed (accessed March 16, 2023); and News release, “Interior Department Takes Action on Mineral Leases Improperly Renewed in the Watershed of the Boundary Waters Wilderness,” U.S. Department of the Interior, January 26, 2022, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-department-takes-action- mineral-leases-improperly-renewed-watershed-boundary (accessed March 16, 2023). 41. Endangered Species Act, Public Law 91–135, § 4(b)(2), and Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 244 (December 18, 2020), pp. 82376–82389. 42. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “Governing the Take of Migratory Birds Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.” https://www.fws.gov/regulations/mbta (accessed March 16, 2023). 43. Dino Grandoni and Anna Phillips, “Biden Restores Climate Safeguards in Key Environmental Law, Reversing Trump,” Washington Post, April 19, 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate- environment/2022/04/19/biden-nepa-climate-trump/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 44. Donald Trump, “Executive Order on Creating Schedule F in the Accepted Service,” Executive Order 13957, October 21, 2020, https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-creating- schedule-f-excepted-service/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 45. Kathleen Masterson, “Nevada Wild Horse Population Skyrockets To New High,” KUNR Public Radio, July 22, 2019, https://www.kunr.org/energy-and-environment/2019-07-22/nevada-wild-horse-population-skyrockets- to-new-high (accessed March 20, 2023). 46. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, “Report to Congress: An Analysis of Achieving a Sustainable Horse and Burro Program,” Fact sheet, May 8, 2020, https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/ Final%20Fact%20Sheet%20WHB%20Report%20To%20Congress.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 47. Pendley, Sagebrush Rebel, pp. 45–47. 48. James D. Linxwiler, The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act At 35: Delivering on the Promise, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 53, Chap. 12 (2007), § 12.03(1)(a)(iv), https://www.guessrudd.com/wp-content/ uploads/sites/1600422/2020/05/The-Alaska-Native-Claims-Settlement-Act-at-35.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 49. Ibid., § 12.03(1)(a)(vii). See generally Richard S. Jones, Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (Public Law 92–203): History And Analysis Together With Subsequent Amendments, Report No. 81–127 GOV, June 1, 1981, http://www.alaskool.org/PROJECTS/ANCSA/reports/rsjones1981/ANCSA_History71.htm (accessed March 16, 2023). 50. 43 U.S. Code, Ch. 33. ANCSA also created 12 Native-owned regional corporations and authorized $962 million in “seed money.” Linxwiler, The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act At 35, § 12.03(2)(e). 51. ANCSA provided that the withdrawal of the lands would expire in 1978 if Congress had not designated the lands as federal enclaves. John K. Norman Cole and Steven W. Silver, Alaska’s D-2 Lands, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 6B, Ch. 5, September 1978, and Raymond A. Peck, Jr., And Then There Were None: Evolving Federal Restraints on the Availability of Public Lands for Mineral Development, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 25, Ch. 3, 1979. 52. Andrus used purported authority under the FLPMA to withdraw 40 million acres, and Carter used purported authority under the Antiquities Act of to withdraw 56 million acres. James D. Linxwiler, The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act: The First Twenty Years, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 38 Ch. 2, 1992 at 2.04(8)(c), https://ancsa.lbblawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/ANCSA-Paper-with-Table-of-Contents-1992.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023).

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 56%

Pages: 527-529AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 917 is a ceremonial resolution congratulating a Christmas tree farm and contains no provisions related to healthcare, religious freedom, vaccine accommodations, or HHS OCR authority, which are the focus of the cited Project 2025 policy."

— 495 — Department of Health and Human Services l HHS should restore OCR authority to review requests for and render opinions on the application of RFRA to requests for religious accommodation of people, families, and doctors who cannot in good conscience take or administer vaccines, including those made or tested with aborted fetal cell lines. l HHS should restore Section 1557, Section 504, and other OCR regulations and fix guidance documents. In 2020, the Trump Administration’s OCR published regulations under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act that restored the agency’s enforcement of that law to the limits of its statutory text, deferred to the ACA’s widespread use of a binary biological conception of sex discrimination, and specified that the regulation must comply with the religious exemption and abortion neutrality clauses in Title IX from which it is derived as well as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and other laws. Courts blocked core provisions of that rule from going into effect. In 2022, the Biden Administration proposed to reinstate a rule contradicting the scope of the statute and imposing nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. It is expected that this rule will be finalized in 2023 even though several courts have issued rulings against the interpretation on which it is based. l OCR should return its enforcement of sex discrimination to the statutory framework of Section 1557 and Title IX. Specifically, it should: 1. Remove all guidance issued under the Biden Administration concerning sexual orientation and gender identity under Section 1557, particularly the May 2021 announcement of enforcement82 and March 2022 statement threatening states that protect minors from genital mutilation.83 2. Issue a general statement of policy specifying that it will not enforce any prohibition on sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination in the Section 1557 regulation and that it will prioritize compliance with the First Amendment, RFRA, and federal conscience laws in any case implicating those claims. DOJ should commit to defending these actions aggressively against inevitable court challenges, including under cases such as Heckler v. Chaney.84 — 496 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 3. Issue a proposed rule to restore the Trump regulations under Section 1557, explicitly interpreting the law not to include sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination based on the textual approach to male and female biology taken by Congress in the ACA, the need to recognize biological distinctions as part of the sound practice of health care, and the need to ensure protections of medical judgment and conscience. DOJ should agree to defend this rule to the Supreme Court if necessary. 4. Issue a general statement of policy announcing that it plans to enforce Section 1557 discrimination bans by refocusing on serious cases of race, sex, and disability discrimination. In particular, OCR should highlight its 2019 investigation and voluntary resolution agreement with Michigan State University based on the sexual abuse of gymnasts by Larry Nassar. OCR should also coordinate with the Department of Education on a public education and civil rights enforcement campaign to ensure that female college athletes who become pregnant are no longer pressured to obtain abortions; pursue race discrimination claims against entities that adopt or impose racially discriminatory policies such as those based on critical race theory; and announce its intention to enforce disability rights laws to protect children born prematurely, children with disabilities, and children born alive after abortions. 5. Issue and finalize the Trump-era draft disability rights regulations concerning crisis standards of care and use of Quality of Life Adjusted Years (QALYs), and reissue and finalize a disability regulation (withdrawn by the Biden Administration) that prohibited discriminatory application of assisted suicide and denial of life-saving treatments for disabled newborns. l OCR should withdraw its pharmacy abortion mandate guidance. OCR should withdraw its “Obligations Under Federal Civil Rights Laws to Ensure Access to Comprehensive Reproductive Health Care Services” guidance for retail pharmacies,85 which purports to address nondiscrimination obligations of pharmacies under federal civil rights laws and in fact orders them to stock and dispense first-trimester abortion drugs. The guidance invents this so-called requirement and fails to acknowledge that pharmacies and pharmacists have the right not to participate in abortions, including pill-induced abortions, if doing so would violate their sincere moral or religious objections. Moreover, no federal civil rights laws preempt state pro-life statutes.

Department of State

Minimal

Vector: 56%

Pages: 229-231AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 917 is a ceremonial resolution recognizing a Christmas tree farm and has no substantive connection to the Department of State policy objectives in Project 2025, which focus on national interest, foreign policy strategy, and countering China."

— 197 — Department of State The ideas and recommendations herein are premised on the belief that a rigorous adherence to the national interest is the most enduring foundation for U.S. grand strategy in the 21st century. AUTHOR’S NOTE: Thanks to the entire State Department chapter team, the leaders and staff of the 2025 Presidential Transition Project, and my colleagues at The Heritage Foundation’s Davis Center. In particular, I would like to acknowledge the following colleagues: Russell Berman, Sarah Calvis, James Carafano, Spencer Chretien, Wesley Coopersmith, Paul Dans, Steven Groves, Simon Hankinson, Joseph Humire, Michael Pillsbury, Max Primorac, Reed Rubenstein, Brett Schaefer, Jeff Smith, Hillary Tanoff, Erin Walsh, and John Zadrozny. — 198 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise ENDNOTES 1. U.S. Department of State, “About the U.S. Department of State: Our History,” https://www.state.gov/about/ (accessed March 9, 2023). 2. The balance of employment is 2,149 eligible family members and 50,223 locally employed staff. U.S. Department of State, “GTM Fact Sheet: Facts About Our Most Valuable Asset—Our People,” Global Talent Management, December 31, 2022, https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/GTM_Factsheet1222. pdf (accessed March 9, 2023). 3. U.S. Commission on National Security, Road Map for National Security: Imperative for Change, Phase III Report, February 15, 2001, p. x, http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/nssg/PhaseIIIFR.pdf (accessed March 9, 2023). 4. See Brett D. Schaefer, “How to Make the State Department More Effective at Implementing U.S. Foreign Policy,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3115, April 20, 2016, https://www.heritage.org/political- process/report/how-make-the-state-department-more-effective-implementing-us-foreign. 5. Historically, roughly one-third of ambassadorial appointments have been political appointments, although Republican Administrations have generally had a higher ratio of political appointments than Democratic Administrations. 6. U.S. Constitution, art. 2, sec. 2, cl. 2. 7. News release, “Secretary Blinken Launches the Office of China Coordination,” U.S. Department of State, December 16, 2022, https://www.state.gov/secretary-blinken-launches-the-office-of-china-coordination/ (accessed March 9, 2023). 8. Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S. Code § 1101 et seq., § 1253. 9. See Michael Pillsbury, The Hundred Year Marathon: China’s Secret Strategy to Replace the United States as a Global Superpower (NY: St. Martin’s Griffin, 2016). 10. For additional context regarding how countering China fits in a more robust U.S. strategy, see James Jay Carafano et al., “Foreign Policy: Strategy for a Post-Biden Era,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3715, July 21, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/defense/report/foreign-policy-strategy-post-biden-era. 11. The Article X for China would follow George Kennan’s Article X for U.S.–Soviet competition. See George F. Kennan, “The Sources of Soviet Conduct,” Foreign Affairs, July 1947, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ russian-federation/1947-07-01/sources-soviet-conduct (accessed March 22, 2023). 12. Dean Cheng et al., “Assessing Beijing’s Power: A Blueprint for the U.S. Response to China Over the Next Decades,” Heritage Foundation Special Report No. 221, February 20, 2010, https://www.heritage.org/asia/ report/assessing-beijings-power-blueprint-the-us-response-china-over-the-next-decades. 13. Eric W. Orts, “The Rule of Law in China,” Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, Vol. 34, No. 1 (January 2001), https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1686&context=vjtl (accessed March 9, 2023). 14. U.S. Department of Defense, Indo–Pacific Strategy Report: Preparedness, Partnerships, and Promoting a Networked Region, June 1, 2019, https://media.defense.gov/2019/Jul/01/2002152311/-1/-1/1/DEPARTMENT-OF- DEFENSE-INDO-PACIFIC-STRATEGY-REPORT-2019.PDF (accessed July 28, 2022). 15. See Jeff Smith, “South Asia: A New Strategy,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3721, August 29, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/asia/report/south-asia-new-strategy. 16. Emma Bryce, “Why Is There So Much Oil in the Arctic?” Live Science, August 3, 2019, https://www.livescience. com/66008-why-oil-in-arctic.html (accessed February 9, 2023). 17. “Changes in the Arctic: Background and Issues for Congress,” Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, updated January 26, 2021, p. 6, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R41153/177 (accessed March 9, 2023). 18. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Science and Technology, “Snapshot: Overcoming the Tyranny of Distance in the Arctic,” April 20, 2020, https://www.dhs.gov/science-and-technology/news/2020/04/20/ snapshot-overcoming-tyranny-distance-arctic (accessed February 9, 2023). 19. U.S. Department of State, “U.S. Contributions to International Organizations, 2021,” September 20, 2022, https://www.state.gov/u-s-contributions-to-international-organizations-2021/ (accessed March 9, 2023), and U.S. Department of State, “U.S. Contributions to International Organizations, 2015,” November 1, 2016, https:// www.state.gov/u-s-contributions-to-international-organizations-2015/ (accessed March 9, 2023). 20. U.S. Department of State, Report on the Commission of Inalienable Rights, https://www.state.gov/wp-content/ uploads/2020/07/Draft-Report-of-the-Commission-on-Unalienable-Rights.pdf (accessed March 9, 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. Moolenaar, John R.

LOCOMOTIVES Act

119/hr/3194

Medicare Access to Rural Anesthesiology Act

119/hr/9642

GUARD Act of 2026

119/hr/9129

Back to All Bills