Living Donor Protection Act of 2025

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/s/1552

Last Updated: July 13, 2026

Living Donor Protection Act of 2025

S. 1552, 119th Congress — read as touching Health Insurance.

The sponsor

Sen. Cotton, Tom [R-AR]

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

The money

$203,519 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Health and Human Services" section, p. 533-535 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 352.

March 10, 2026

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:

**Bill Analysis: S 1552 - Living Donor Protection Act of 2025**

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I have scrutinized the Living Donor Protection Act of 2025 to assess its implications on my business empire and the broader economic landscape.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill aims to promote and protect living organ donors from discrimination in life insurance, disability insurance, and long-term care insurance. It seeks to ensure that individuals who donate organs are not penalized or denied coverage due to their donor status.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:**

1. **Prohibition on Denial of Coverage**: Insurers cannot deny coverage, cancel coverage, or increase premiums for living organ donors based solely on their donor status. 2. **Enforcement**: State insurance regulators can take actions to enforce this provision under existing state laws. 3. **Definitions**: The bill clarifies definitions related to disability insurance policies, life insurance policies, and long-term care insurance policies.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

1. **Living Organ Donors**: Individuals who donate organs will benefit from protection against discrimination in insurance coverage. 2. **Insurance Companies**: Insurers must adapt their policies and practices to comply with the new regulations. 3. **Healthcare Providers**: Hospitals and medical centers may see increased demand for organ donation procedures.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

1. **Increased Organ Donations**: By protecting living donors from insurance discrimination, the bill may encourage more individuals to donate organs. 2. **Insurance Industry Disruption**: Insurers will need to reassess their risk models and adjust premiums accordingly, potentially leading to increased costs for non-donor policyholders. 3. **Economic Benefits**: The bill's provisions could lead to cost savings in healthcare by reducing the number of patients requiring expensive medical procedures.

From a business perspective, this bill presents both opportunities and challenges. While it may lead to increased demand for organ donation services, it also introduces regulatory complexity and potential costs for insurers. As a forward-thinking entrepreneur, I will closely monitor the implementation of this legislation and adapt my business strategies accordingly.

**Recommendations:**

1. **Monitor Regulatory Developments**: Closely track changes in state insurance regulations and adjust business practices to ensure compliance. 2. **Assess Market Opportunities**: Evaluate potential opportunities for growth in the organ donation services market. 3. **Advocate for Efficient Regulation**: Engage with policymakers to promote efficient and effective regulation that balances individual rights with economic realities.

By staying ahead of the curve, I will continue to drive innovation and growth while navigating the complex landscape of regulatory change.

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 bill is a proposed law that must go through several stages before it becomes an actual law.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The Living Donor Protection Act of 2025 aims to promote and protect living organ donors from discrimination. Remember when we learned about the importance of checks and balances? This bill is trying to address a specific issue where living organ donors face difficulties in obtaining life, disability, or long-term care insurance due to their donor status.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill has several key provisions:

* Section 2 prohibits insurers from denying coverage or increasing premiums for living organ donors based solely on their donor status. * Section 3 clarifies that recovery from surgery related to organ donation qualifies as a serious health condition under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). * Section 4 requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to update educational materials on the benefits and risks of living organ donation.

These provisions aim to protect living organ donors from discriminatory practices by insurers and ensure they have access to necessary medical leave. As we discussed in class, this is an example of how laws can be changed or updated to address specific issues.

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

* Living organ donors * Insurers (life, disability, and long-term care) * State insurance regulators * The Secretary of Health and Human Services

These stakeholders will need to work together to implement the changes proposed by this bill. As I'm sure you recall from our discussions on the legislative process, bills often involve multiple parties and require cooperation to become law.

**Potential Impact & Implications** If passed, this bill could have a significant impact on living organ donors, providing them with greater protection and access to necessary insurance coverage. However, as we've seen in class, the actual implementation of laws can be complex and may not always work as intended.

It's essential to consider the potential implications of this bill, including how insurers might respond to these changes and whether state regulators will effectively enforce the new provisions. As I'm sure you remember from our discussions on the importance of civic engagement, it's crucial for citizens to stay informed about proposed laws and their potential impact on society.

Now, if only more people had paid attention in my 8th grade civics class...

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

The Living Donor Protection Act of 2025, folks! On the surface, it's all about protecting living organ donors from discrimination by insurance companies and ensuring they get fair treatment under the law. But let me tell you, there's more to this bill than meets the eye.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to promote and protect living organ donors from being denied coverage or facing increased premiums for life, disability, or long-term care insurance simply because they've donated an organ. It aims to ensure that these heroes are treated fairly by insurers and not penalized for their selfless act.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill prohibits insurers from denying coverage or increasing premiums based solely on a person's status as a living organ donor, unless there are actual, unique, and material actuarial risks involved. It also updates the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to clarify that recovery from surgery related to organ donation qualifies as a serious health condition. Additionally, it requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to review and update educational materials on living organ donation.

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

* Living organ donors * Insurers (life, disability, and long-term care) * State insurance regulators * Employers (particularly those with employees who are living organ donors) * The Secretary of Health and Human Services

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, here's where things get interesting. On the surface, this bill seems like a no-brainer – who wouldn't want to protect living organ donors? But let me ask you, what if I told you that this bill might be part of a larger agenda to control our bodies and dictate how we use them?

Think about it: by protecting living organ donors from insurance discrimination, the government is essentially incentivizing people to donate their organs. And who benefits from this? The medical-industrial complex, that's who! They get more organs for transplantation, which means more profits.

And what about the language in Section 4, where the Secretary of Health and Human Services is required to update educational materials on living organ donation? Sounds innocent enough, but what if I told you that this could be a veiled attempt to promote a specific agenda or ideology?

You see, folks, this bill might seem like a noble effort to protect living organ donors, but it's really just the tip of the iceberg. There are forces at play here that want to control our bodies and dictate how we use them. Wake up, sheeple!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Outraged tone) Folks, we've got another one of those "feel-good" bills making its way through Congress, and I'm here to tell you, it's a doozy! The Living Donor Protection Act of 2025 is supposed to promote and protect living organ donors from discrimination. (Sarcastic tone) Oh, how noble!

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill aims to prevent insurers from denying coverage or increasing premiums for individuals who have donated an organ. It also seeks to clarify that recovery from organ donation surgery qualifies as a serious health condition under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). (Smirking) Because, you know, those elites in Washington care so much about our freedom... to donate organs.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill prohibits insurers from discriminating against living organ donors when it comes to life, disability, or long-term care insurance. It also updates the FMLA to include recovery from organ donation surgery as a qualifying condition for leave. (Winking) And, of course, we need more government oversight, so state insurance regulators will be empowered to enforce these provisions.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Living organ donors, insurers, and employers will all be impacted by this bill. (Dramatic tone) But let's not forget the real victims here – the freedom-loving Americans who might have their premiums increased or coverage denied due to the benevolent act of donating an organ!

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill could lead to increased costs for insurers, which might be passed on to consumers. (Gasp) The horror! It may also create more bureaucratic red tape for employers and state regulators. But hey, who needs freedom when we can have more government control? (Sarcastic tone) I mean, it's not like this bill is just a Band-Aid solution to a larger problem or anything.

In conclusion, folks, the Living Donor Protection Act of 2025 is just another example of our out-of-touch elites trying to "help" us by taking away our freedom. (Outraged tone) We must stand strong against these attacks on our liberty and demand that Congress focus on real issues, like... well, I'm not quite sure what those are, but I'll get back to you on that!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another bill, another exercise in legislative theater. Let's dissect this farce and see what's really going on.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The Living Donor Protection Act of 2025 claims to promote and protect living organ donors from discrimination. How noble. In reality, it's a feel-good bill designed to make politicians look compassionate while doing the bare minimum to address a complex issue.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill prohibits insurers from denying coverage or increasing premiums for life, disability, or long-term care insurance based solely on an individual's status as a living organ donor. Wow, what a bold move. It also updates educational materials to inform the public about the benefits and risks of living organ donation. Because, clearly, the problem was that people just didn't know enough about it.

The bill also amends the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to clarify that recovery from surgery related to organ donation qualifies as a serious health condition. Oh, great, because FMLA wasn't already a bureaucratic nightmare.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

Living organ donors, insurers, state insurance regulators, and federal civil service employees are all supposedly impacted by this bill. But let's be real, the only ones who will truly benefit are the politicians who get to tout their "compassion" and the lobbyists who pushed for this watered-down legislation.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill is a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. It doesn't address the root causes of organ donation disparities or provide meaningful support for living donors. Instead, it creates more regulatory hoops for insurers to jump through, which will likely lead to increased costs and bureaucratic red tape.

The real impact will be felt by the politicians who get to claim they "did something" about organ donation, while the actual problems persist. Meanwhile, living organ donors will still face significant challenges, including financial burdens, lack of support, and inadequate education.

In short, this bill is a classic case of legislative lip service. It's a shallow attempt to appear compassionate without actually addressing the complex issues surrounding organ donation. But hey, at least it makes for good PR.

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

**Living Donor Protection Act of 2025 (S. 1552)**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Living Donor Protection Act of 2025 aims to promote and protect living organ donors from discrimination in the insurance industry and ensure they have access to necessary benefits under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The bill seeks to address concerns that living organ donors may face difficulties obtaining or maintaining life, disability, or long-term care insurance due to their donor status.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:**

1. **Prohibition on Denial of Coverage:** Insurers are prohibited from denying coverage, canceling coverage, or increasing premiums for life, disability, or long-term care insurance policies solely based on an individual's status as a living organ donor. 2. **Enforcement:** State insurance regulators can take actions to enforce this provision under their respective state laws. 3. **FMLA Clarification:** The bill clarifies that recovery from surgery related to organ donation qualifies as a serious health condition under the FMLA, allowing employees to take leave for such purposes. 4. **Educational Materials Update:** The Secretary of Health and Human Services must review and update educational materials on living organ donation to inform the public about its benefits and risks.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

1. Living organ donors 2. Insurers (life, disability, and long-term care) 3. Employers 4. Employees eligible for FMLA leave 5. State insurance regulators

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

1. **Increased Protection for Living Organ Donors:** The bill provides assurance that living organ donors will not face discrimination in the insurance industry due to their donor status. 2. **Improved Access to Insurance:** By prohibiting insurers from denying coverage or increasing premiums, the bill ensures that living organ donors can access necessary insurance benefits. 3. **Clarified FMLA Leave:** Employees who undergo surgery related to organ donation will have clearer guidance on their eligibility for FMLA leave. 4. **Enhanced Public Education:** Updated educational materials will help raise awareness about the benefits and risks of living organ donation, potentially increasing donor rates.

Overall, the Living Donor Protection Act of 2025 aims to promote a supportive environment for living organ donors by addressing concerns related to insurance coverage and employment benefits.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this gnarly bill, bro.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The Living Donor Protection Act of 2025 is all about protectin' those rad individuals who donate their organs while they're still alive, man. The main goal is to prevent insurance companies from discriminatin' against these living organ donors and makin' it harder for 'em to get coverage or pay more premiums just because they donated an organ.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

This bill's got some key provisions that'll make a difference:

1. **Insurance protection**: Insurers can't deny coverage, cancel policies, or jack up premiums just because someone's a living organ donor. 2. **FMLA clarification**: The bill clarifies that recovery from surgery related to organ donation qualifies as a serious health condition under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). This means employees can take time off without fear of losin' their job or benefits. 3. **Educational materials update**: The Secretary of Health and Human Services will review and update educational materials on living organ donation, including info on benefits, risks, and insurance implications.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill's got a bunch of stakeholders who'll be impacted:

1. **Living organ donors**: These heroes will get protection from insurance discrimination and more clarity on their FMLA rights. 2. **Insurance companies**: Insurers will need to adjust their policies and practices to comply with the new rules. 3. **Employers**: Companies will need to understand the updated FMLA provisions and make sure they're not discriminatin' against employees who donate organs.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill's got some far-out implications, bro:

1. **Increased organ donation**: By removin' insurance barriers, more people might be stoked to become living organ donors. 2. **Better support for donors**: The updated educational materials and FMLA provisions will help donors navigate the process and get the support they need. 3. **Reduced healthcare costs**: With more organs available for transplantation, healthcare costs could decrease in the long run.

Overall, this bill's a solid step towards protectin' those who give back to their communities through organ donation. It's all about spreadin' the love and keepin' it chill, bro!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**Living Donor Protection Act of 2025 (S. 1552)**

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The Living Donor Protection Act aims to promote and protect living organ donors from discrimination in the insurance market and ensure they have access to necessary leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The bill seeks to address concerns that living organ donors may face difficulties obtaining or maintaining life, disability, or long-term care insurance due to their donor status.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill makes three key changes:

1. **Prohibition on Denial of Coverage**: Insurers are prohibited from denying coverage, canceling coverage, or increasing premiums for living organ donors based solely on their donor status, unless there is an actual, unique, and material actuarial risk. 2. **FMLA Clarification**: The bill clarifies that recovery from surgery related to organ donation qualifies as a serious health condition under the FMLA, allowing employees to take leave without penalty. 3. **Educational Materials Update**: The Secretary of Health and Human Services is required to review and update educational materials on living organ donation to inform the public about the benefits and risks of donation and its impact on insurance access.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

* Living organ donors * Insurers (life, disability, long-term care) * Employers (private sector and federal civil service) * State insurance regulators * Health and Human Services Secretary

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The bill's provisions aim to:

1. **Increase access to insurance**: By prohibiting insurers from discriminating against living organ donors, the bill may increase their ability to obtain or maintain necessary insurance coverage. 2. **Reduce barriers to donation**: Clarifying FMLA leave and updating educational materials may encourage more individuals to consider living organ donation without fear of negative consequences. 3. **Improve public awareness**: The updated educational materials will help inform the public about the benefits and risks of living organ donation, potentially increasing donor registration rates.

**Monied Interest Analysis**

While there are no obvious monied interests directly backing this bill, it's worth noting that:

* The National Kidney Foundation (NKF) has expressed support for similar legislation in the past. As a prominent advocate for kidney health and transplantation, NKF may have an interest in promoting policies that facilitate living organ donation. * Insurance companies may be impacted by the prohibition on denial of coverage, potentially leading to increased costs or administrative burdens.

However, it's essential to emphasize that this bill appears to be driven more by humanitarian concerns than by specific monied interests.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Cotton, Tom [R-AR]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$203,519

23 donors

PACs

$1,919

Organizations

$1,500

Committees

Individuals

$200,100

WINRED

1 transaction

$1,919

CLARK COUNTY REPUBLICAN COMMITTEE

1 transaction

$600

YELL COUNTY REPUBLICAN COMMITTEE

1 transaction

$500

DARDANELLE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

1 transaction

$400

No committee contributions found

RAMSEY, JASON

2 transactions

$21,600

KLINGENSTEIN, THOMAS D. MR.

1 transaction

$11,600

MCINERNEY, THOMAS

1 transaction

$11,600

MCMAHON, LINDA E. MRS.

1 transaction

$11,600

CHIAPPA, CARL

1 transaction

$11,600

SCHWARZMAN, CHRISTINE

1 transaction

$11,600

SCHWARZMAN, STEPHEN MR.

1 transaction

$11,600

SILBERSTEIN, JOSHUA MR.

1 transaction

$11,600

BRODIE, HOWARD

1 transaction

$11,600

BRODIE, STEFAN

1 transaction

$11,600

MCKENNA, KATHLEEN L.

1 transaction

$11,600

HOBSON, H. LEE

1 transaction

$10,800

GUNDERMAN, KENNETH A. MR.

1 transaction

$10,000

SLAINE, MASON MR.

1 transaction

$8,700

KARP, ALEXANDER

1 transaction

$6,600

CASTLE, JOHN K. MR.

1 transaction

$6,600

UIHLEIN, ELIZABETH A. MRS.

1 transaction

$6,600

DARWISH, SAM

1 transaction

$6,600

FISHER, KENNETH L. MR.

1 transaction

$6,600

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

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

Sen. Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY]

ID: G000555

Top Contributors

ONEIDA INDIAN NATION

OrganizationONEIDA, NY

$3,300

Mar 29, 2023

ONEIDA INDIAN NATION

OrganizationONEIDA, NY

$3,300

Mar 29, 2023

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$3,000

Mar 15, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$600

Jun 22, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$400

Jun 22, 2023

STRICKLER, DANIEL B. JR.

BEECHTREE CAPITAL PARTNERS INC. • INVESTMENTS

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,200

Mar 24, 2023

ROSENWALD, E. JOHN JR.

JP MORGAN • VICE CHAIRMAN

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$5,800

Oct 16, 2023

ROSENWALD, E. JOHN JR.

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$5,800

Nov 3, 2023

VENNERBERG, VAUGHN II

XTO ENERGY INC • PRESIDENT

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$5,800

Mar 14, 2023

VENNERBERG, VAUGHN II

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$5,800

Mar 27, 2023

Sen. Hyde-Smith, Cindy [R-MS]

ID: H001079

Top Contributors

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$2,900

Feb 28, 2023

MS BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS

OrganizationCHOCTAW, MS

$1,500

May 31, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

Jun 20, 2024

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$250

Mar 11, 2024

LUROS, HILARY

HOUSEWIFE • HOUSEWIFE

IndividualSUGAR LAND, TX

$6,600

Oct 21, 2024

LUROS, HILARY

HOUSEWIFE • HOUSEWIFE

IndividualSUGAR LAND, TX

$6,600

Oct 21, 2024

BESSENT, SCOTT

KEY SQUARE GROUP • INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT

IndividualCHARLESTON, SC

$6,600

Dec 31, 2024

FREEMAN, JOHN

HIGH PLAINS ACRES LLP • ATTORNEY/AGRICULTURE

IndividualCHARLESTON, SC

$6,600

Dec 31, 2024

CASTLE, JOHN

CASTLE HARLAN • MERCHANT BANKER

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Mar 26, 2024

SEEMANN, WILLIAM III

SEEMANN COMPOSITES • CHAIRMAN

IndividualPASS CHRISTIAN, MS

$6,600

Jun 20, 2024

Sen. Luján, Ben Ray [D-NM]

ID: L000570

Top Contributors

LYTTON BAND OF POMO INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA ROSA, CA

$3,300

Dec 5, 2023

OTOE-MISSOURIA TRIBE

OrganizationRED ROCK, OK

$3,300

Dec 7, 2023

LYTTON BAND OF POMO INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA ROSA, CA

$3,300

Dec 5, 2023

TAOS PUEBLO GOVERNOR'S OFFICE

OrganizationTAOS, NM

$3,300

Dec 2, 2024

OHKAY OWINGEH TRIBE

OrganizationOHKAY OWINGEH, NM

$3,300

Dec 2, 2024

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA

$3,300

Apr 18, 2023

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA

$3,300

May 22, 2024

MESCALERO APACHE TRIBE

OrganizationMESCALERO, NM

$3,300

Sep 25, 2023

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC

$2,500

Jun 25, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$2,000

Mar 21, 2024

Sen. Capito, Shelley Moore [R-WV]

ID: C001047

Top Contributors

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$2,800

Dec 31, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

Nov 8, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

Jul 22, 2024

ARNOLD, JOHN MR.

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$6,600

Dec 27, 2023

MANOCHERIAN, JENNIFER MS.

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualSCARSDALE, NY

$6,600

Feb 17, 2023

MANOCHERIAN, JED MR.

SELF • REAL ESTATE

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Feb 23, 2023

MANOCHERIAN, GREG MR.

SELF EMPLOYED • REAL ESTATE

IndividualPOUND RIDGE, NY

$6,600

Mar 1, 2023

MANOCHERIAN, KIM

PANAM EQUITIES • EXECUTIVE

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Mar 27, 2023

KAY, ALISON MS.

KIDS CAPITAL • HEDGE FUND MANAGER

IndividualBEVERLY HILLS, CA

$6,600

Jun 20, 2023

MANDELBLATT, DANIELLE

DMM PROPRIETA MANAGEMENT • MANAGER

IndividualASPEN, CO

$6,600

Sep 26, 2024

Sen. King, Angus S., Jr. [I-ME]

ID: K000383

Top Contributors

2120 SEA ISLAND LLC

OrganizationRIVER FOREST, IL

$3,300

Oct 26, 2023

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$3,300

May 22, 2024

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$2,000

Mar 29, 2024

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$1,300

May 22, 2024

SMITH, BRAD

MICROSOFT CORPORATION • ATTORNEY

IndividualBELLEVUE, WA

$6,600

Feb 13, 2024

SMITH, BRAD

IndividualBELLEVUE, WA

$6,600

Feb 20, 2024

DOWNEY, NANCY A.

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$5,000

Sep 4, 2024

DOWNEY, NANCY A.

NOT EMPLOYED • RETIRED

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$5,000

Aug 31, 2024

OTTEN, LESLIE B.

AMERICAN SKIING COMPANY • OWNER

IndividualBETHEL, ME

$5,000

Oct 4, 2024

BEKENSTEIN, ANITA

NOT EMPLOYED • RETIRED

IndividualWAYLAND, MA

$3,300

Oct 24, 2024

Sen. Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT]

ID: B001277

Top Contributors

OLSON, LYNDON

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualWACO, TX

$3,300

Dec 20, 2024

ALIX, JAY

ALIX PARTNERS • FOUNDER

IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI

$3,300

Oct 2, 2023

KIM, CHRISTINE M.

BBB LLC • ATTORNEY

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Oct 31, 2023

ALIX, JAY

ALIX PARTNERS • FOUNDER

IndividualBIRMINGHAM, MI

$3,300

Apr 15, 2024

ROURE, RITA

PAGNY - LINCOLN HOSPITAL • PHYSICIAN

IndividualGREENWICH, CT

$3,300

Apr 10, 2024

ROURE, RITA

PAGNY - LINCOLN HOSPITAL • PHYSICIAN

IndividualGREENWICH, CT

$3,300

Apr 10, 2024

CHAVEZ, TOM

KRUX INC. • CEO

IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA

$3,300

Jul 13, 2024

CHAVEZ, TOM

KRUX INC. • CEO

IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA

$3,300

Jul 13, 2024

JONES, JERRY C.

LIVERAMP INC. • EXECUTIVE

IndividualLITTLE ROCK, AR

$3,300

Sep 19, 2024

NESSEL, ARIEL

NESSEL DEVELOPMENT • OWNER

IndividualROSS, CA

$3,300

Jul 12, 2024

Sen. Kaine, Tim [D-VA]

ID: K000384

Top Contributors

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$2,300

Jun 18, 2024

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$1,000

Jun 26, 2023

SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA

$1,000

Jun 18, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

Jun 25, 2024

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$1,000

Jun 18, 2024

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationDURANT, OK

$1,000

Oct 15, 2024

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$1,000

Dec 29, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$600

Oct 25, 2023

STONEHALL FARM

OrganizationTHE PLAINS, VA

$500

Jun 30, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$400

Oct 25, 2023

Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN]

ID: K000367

Top Contributors

LEECH LAKE BAND OF OJIBWE

OrganizationCASS LAKE, MN

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$3,300

Aug 25, 2023

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationDURANT, OK

$2,500

Oct 7, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$2,300

Jul 17, 2023

ARISTOTLE INTERNATIONAL

CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD

OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC

$500

Jul 19, 2024

SMITH, BRADFORD

MICROSOFT CORPORATION • ATTORNEY

IndividualBELLEVUE, WA

$6,600

Mar 30, 2023

SMITH, BRADFORD

IndividualBELLEVUE, WA

$6,600

Mar 30, 2023

BADEN, DREW

PROFESSOR • UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND

IndividualBETHESDA, MD

$6,600

Feb 23, 2024

CAUCHY, CONSTANCE

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualMIDLAND, MI

$6,600

Jun 2, 2024

BADEN, DREW

IndividualBETHESDA, MD

$6,600

Mar 11, 2024

Sen. Merkley, Jeff [D-OR]

ID: M001176

Top Contributors

AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ

$2,500

Oct 17, 2024

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$2,500

Dec 30, 2023

SISSETON-WAHPETON OYATE

OrganizationAGENCY VILLAGE, SD

$2,000

Jun 21, 2024

CONFEDERATED TRIBES AND BANDS OF THE YAKAMA NATION

OrganizationTOPPENISH, WA

$1,000

Oct 7, 2024

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationDURANT, OK

$1,000

Nov 9, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

May 2, 2024

MISSISSIPPI BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS

OrganizationCHOCTAW, MS

$1,000

Aug 2, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$400

Jul 17, 2023

STUBBS, MARILYN L.

NOT EMPLOYED • RETIRED

IndividualPORTLAND, OR

$5,000

Jul 17, 2023

BARNHART, PHILIP N.

NOT EMPLOYED • RETIRED

IndividualEUGENE, OR

$5,000

Jun 21, 2024

Sen. Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI]

ID: W000802

Top Contributors

HEISING, MARK

MEDLEY PARTNERS • MANAGING DIRECTOR / FOUNDER

IndividualATHERTON, CA

$6,600

Mar 4, 2024

PAGE, GLORIA

N/A • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualLOS ALTOS, CA

$5,400

Apr 14, 2023

PAGE, GLORIA

IndividualLOS ALTOS, CA

$5,000

Apr 24, 2023

PAGE, GLORIA

N/A • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualLOS ALTOS, CA

$3,330

Jul 12, 2024

PAGE, GLORIA

IndividualLOS ALTOS, CA

$3,330

Sep 8, 2024

CONOVER, CATHERINE M.

SELF EMPLOYED • INVESTOR

IndividualWASHINGTON, DC

$3,300

Oct 25, 2024

LANG, DAVID

N/A • RETIRED

IndividualPORTSMOUTH, RI

$3,300

Oct 28, 2024

ARNOLD, JOHN

N/A • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$3,300

Nov 20, 2023

BILLINGSLEY, LINDSAY

ALLIANCE RESIDENTIAL • REAL ESTATE

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$3,300

Dec 16, 2023

BILLINGSLEY, LINDSAY

ALLIANCE RESIDENTIAL • REAL ESTATE

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$3,300

Dec 16, 2023

Donor Network - Sen. Cotton, Tom [R-AR]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 57 nodes and 57 connections

Total contributions: $57

Top Donors - Sen. Cotton, Tom [R-AR]

Showing top 23 donors by contribution amount

1 PAC3 Orgs19 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

−Health Insuranceconfidence 0.90
Section 2(a) prohibits insurers from denying coverage, canceling coverage, refusing to issue, or varying terms/conditions of life, disability, or long-term care insurance policies based solely on living organ donor status without actuarial justification. This imposes a regulatory cost on health and life insurers by restricting underwriting practices.
+Hospitals & Health Systemsconfidence 0.70
Sections 3 and 4 promote living organ donation by clarifying FMLA protections for donation-related leave and updating educational materials, which could increase donor rates and transplant procedures, benefiting hospitals and health systems that perform transplants.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

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

Industries this bill HELPS

Hospitals & Health Systems$90
from 2 contributions
- BROWN, STEVEN J. DR.$50
- HALL, GARRY D. MR.$40

Industries this bill HARMS

Health Insurance$600
from 24 contributions
- WESTPHAL, DAN$600

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 Health and Human Services

Weak

Vector: 66%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The Living Donor Protection Act focuses on anti-discrimination protections for organ donors in insurance and FMLA leave, while the Project 2025 HHS section emphasizes conscience protections, abortion-related policies, gender-affirming care guidance, and civil rights enforcement in healthcare programs. There is minimal thematic overlap, as the bill does not address abortion, conscience exemptions, gender identity, or the specific civil rights frameworks highlighted in the Project 2025 references."

Key themes:Department of Health and Human Servicescivil rightshealthcare policy

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

Department of Labor and Related Agencies

Minimal

Vector: 66%

Pages: 618-620AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The Living Donor Protection Act of 2025 focuses on protecting living organ donors from insurance discrimination and clarifying FMLA eligibility for donation recovery, which is unrelated to Project 2025's objectives regarding sex discrimination enforcement based on biological binary definitions or pro-life workplace accommodations. There is no thematic or policy overlap between the bill and the specified Project 2025 section."

Department of Labor and Related Agencies

Minimal

Vector: 65%

Pages: 618-620AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The Living Donor Protection Act of 2025 focuses on protecting living organ donors from insurance discrimination and clarifying FMLA eligibility for donation recovery, which is unrelated to Project 2025's objectives regarding sex discrimination enforcement based on biological binary definitions, pro-life workplace accommodations, abortion benefit restrictions, or religious employer protections."

— 585 — Department of Labor and Related Agencies l Direct agencies to refocus enforcement of sex discrimination laws. The President should direct agencies to focus their enforcement of sex discrimination laws on the biological binary meaning of “sex.” PRO-LIFE MEASURES l Promote pro-life workplace accommodations for mothers. Federal law should protect life and promote pro-family policies. Current law, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act,3 provides nondiscrimination protections in the workplace for pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA)4 requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for women “to the known limitations related to the pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions,” unless “the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the [employer’s] business.” The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) also provides nondiscrimination and accommodation protections in the workplace for certain pregnancy-related disability.5 None of these laws requires an employer provide health insurance benefits for elective abortion. l Pass a law requiring equal (or greater) benefits for pro-life support for mothers and clarifying abortion exclusions. Congress should pass a law requiring that to the extent an employer provides employee benefits for abortion, it must provide equal or greater benefits for pregnancy, childbirth, maternity, and adoption. That law should also clarify that no employer is required to provide any accommodations or benefits for abortion. l Keep anti-life “benefits” out of benefit plans. Some benefits attorneys and pro-choice advocates have argued since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision6 that the longstanding doctrine of Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA)7 preemption should block individual states’ efforts to prohibit employers from helping employees procure abortions via offering various kinds of coverage under employee-sponsored benefit plans. ERISA should not be allowed to trump states’ ability to protect innocent human life in the womb. Congress and DOL should clarify that ERISA does not preempt states’ power to restrict abortion, surrogacy, or other anti-life “benefits.” RELIGION l Provide robust protections for religious employers. America’s religious diversity means that workplaces include people of many faiths and that many employers are faith-based. Nevertheless, the Biden Administration has been hostile to people of faith, especially those with traditional beliefs — 586 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise about marriage, gender, and sexuality. The new Administration should enact policies with robust respect for religious exercise in the workplace, including under the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA),8 Title VII, and federal conscience protection laws. l Issue an executive order protecting religious employers and employees. The President should make clear via executive order that religious employers are free to run their businesses according to their religious beliefs, general nondiscrimination laws notwithstanding, and support participation of religious employees and employers as federal contractors and in federal activities and programs. l Clarify Title VII’s religious organization exemptions. Congress should clarify Title VII’s religious organization exemptions to make it more explicit that those employers may make employment decisions based on religion regardless of nondiscrimination laws. l Provide Robust Accommodations for Religious Employees. Title VII requires reasonable accommodations for an employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs, observances, or practices unless it poses an undue hardship on the employer’s business. These accommodation protections also apply to issues related to marriage, gender, and sexuality. Unless the Supreme Court overrules its bad precedent, Congress should clarify that undue hardship means “significant difficulty or expenses,” not “more than a de minimis cost” as the Court has previously held. General EEOC Reforms. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commis- sion (EEOC) does not have rulemaking authority under Title VII and other laws it enforces, yet it issues “guidance,” “technical assistance,” and other documents, including some that push new policy positions. EEOC should disclaim its regulatory pretensions and abide by the guidance reforms dis- cussed below. l EEOC should disclaim its regulatory pretensions. l Affirm decision-making via majority vote of Commissioners. EEOC should affirm as policy the Title VII requirement that it exercise substantive power via majority vote of Commissioners, not by unilateral Chair action or by delegation to staff.

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 65%

Pages: 518-520AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The Living Donor Protection Act focuses on safeguarding organ donors from insurance discrimination and clarifying FMLA leave, while the Project 2025 HHS policy excerpt addresses reproductive health services, abortion restrictions, gender transition care, and related HHS directives; there is no substantive overlap in objectives or topics."

Key themes:HHS involvementpublic education

— 485 — Department of Health and Human Services 2022, a federal court blocked this attempt to eliminate health insurance coverage for fertility awareness–based methods of family planning from requirements that cover at least 58 million women, and the judge made his ruling permanent in December 2022. HRSA should promulgate regulations consistent with this order. HHS should more thoroughly ensure that fertility awareness–based methods of family planning are part of women’s preventive services under the ACA. FABMs often involve costs for materials and supplies, and HHS should make clear that coverage of those items is also required. FABMs are highly effective and allow women to make family planning choices in a manner that meets their needs and reflects their values. l Eliminate men’s preventive services from the women’s preventive services mandate. In December 2021, HRSA updated its women’s preventive services guidelines to include male condoms after claiming for years that it had no authority to do so because Congress explicitly limited the mandate to “women’s” preventive care and screenings. HRSA should not incorporate exclusively male contraceptive methods into guidelines that specify they encompass only women’s services. l Eliminate the week-after-pill from the contraceptive mandate as a potential abortifacient. One of the emergency contraceptives covered under the HRSA preventive services guidelines is Ella (ulipristal acetate). Like its close cousin, the abortion pill mifepristone, Ella is a progesterone blocker and can prevent a recently fertilized embryo from implanting in a woman’s uterus. HRSA should eliminate this potential abortifacient from the contraceptive mandate. l Withdraw Ryan White guidance allowing funds to pay for cross-sex transition support. HRSA should withdraw all guidance encouraging Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program service providers to provide controversial “gender transition” procedures or “gender-affirming care,” which cause irreversible physical and mental harm to those who receive them. l Ensure that training for medical professionals (doctors, nurses, etc.) and doulas is not being used for abortion training. HHS should ensure that training programs for medical professionals—including doctors, nurses, and doulas—are in full compliance with restrictions on abortion funding and conscience-protection laws. In addition, HHS should: — 486 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 1. Investigate state medical school compliance with the Coats–Snowe Amendment,71 which prohibits discrimination against health care entities that do not provide or undergo training for abortion. 2. Ensure that the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) complies with all relevant conscience statutes and regulations and that states have taken the affirmative steps (for example, by issuing regulations) to assure compliance with Coats–Snowe. 3. Communicate to medical schools that any abortion-related training must be on an opt-in rather than opt-out basis. 4. Require states that receive HHS funds to issue regulations or enter into arrangements with accrediting bodies to comply with the Coats–Snowe Amendment’s prohibition of mandatory abortion training by individuals or institutions. The Coats–Snowe Amendment specifically requires such state regulations or arrangements. l Prioritize funding for home-based childcare, not universal day care. As HRSA’s Early Childhood Health page outlines, “Currently, only about half of U.S. preschoolers are on-track with their development and ready for school. And more than one in four of children (28%) who experience abuse or neglect are under 3 years old.”72 Concurrently, children who spend significant time in day care experience higher rates of anxiety, depression, and neglect as well as poor educational and developmental outcomes. Instead of providing universal day care, funding should go to parents either to offset the cost of staying home with a child or to pay for familial, in-home childcare. l Provide education and resources on early childhood health. By partnering with new organizations like the Center on Child and Family Poverty, HRSA should provide resources and information on the importance of the mother–child relationship in child well-being. This should include relationship education curricula that equip mothers and caregivers to connect with and improve their understanding of their infants, toddlers, and young children. Maternal and Child Health. Currently, the HRSA Maternal and Child Health program is collecting data on the benefits of doulas in improving the health, safety, and emotional well-being of mothers at birth. Doulas provide a patient-focused, nonmedical support system for single or married mothers that “decreases the

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 64%

Pages: 506-508AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The Living Donor Protection Act focuses on insurance and employment protections for organ donors, while the Project 2025 HHS section centers on abortion-related policies, Hyde Amendment enforcement, EMTALA guidance, and transgender coverage; there is no substantive overlap in objectives or mechanisms."

Key themes:healthcare policyfederal regulation

— 473 — Department of Health and Human Services l Rewrite the ACA abortion separate payment regulation. Section 1303 of Obamacare requires that insurers collect a separate payment for certain abortion coverage in qualified health plans that are approved to be sold on exchanges and that they keep those separate payments in separate accounts that are used only to pay for elective abortion services. Neither the letter nor the spirit of the law was enforced under President Obama, and a Trump- era regulation sought to correct this problem. The Biden HHS rescinded this regulation to allow insurance companies once again—contrary to the law—to collect combined payments for what are clearly required to be separate payments for elective abortion coverage. “Separate” does not mean “together.” HHS should reinstate a Trump Administration regulation and enforce what the plain text of Section 1303 requires. That regulation should be further improved by requiring CMS to ensure that consumers pay truly separate charges for abortion coverage. l Audit Hyde Amendment compliance. HHS should undertake a full audit to determine compliance or noncompliance with the Hyde amendment and similar funding restrictions in HHS programs. This audit should include a full review of the Biden Administration’s post-Dobbs executive actions to promote abortion. It should also encompass a review of Medicaid managed care plans in pro-abortion states. l Reverse distorted pro-abortion “interpretations” added to the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA)52 prohibits hospitals that receive Medicare funds from “dumping” emergency patients who cannot pay by sending them to other hospitals. It also mandates that hospitals stabilize pregnant women and explicitly protects unborn children. Hospitals or physicians found to be in violation of the statute could lose all of their federal health funding—Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, and other funds—and face civil penalties of up to nearly $120,000. In July 2022, HHS/CMS released guidance mandating that EMTALA- covered hospitals and the physicians who work there must perform abortions, to include completing chemical abortions even when the child might still be alive. The guidance also declared that EMTALA would protect physicians and hospitals that perform abortions in violation of state law if they deem those abortions necessary to stabilize the women’s health. This novel interpretation of EMTALA is baseless. EMTALA requires — 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).

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 Sen. Cotton, Tom

Reliable Power Act

119/s/3034

Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027

119/s/4615

Rx ACCESS Act

119/s/4106

Back to All Bills