Deter PRC Aggression Against Taiwan Act

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/s/2960

Last Updated: May 13, 2026

Deter PRC Aggression Against Taiwan Act

S. 2960, 119th Congress — read as touching Oil & Gas.

The sponsor

Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID]

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

The money

$69,035 raised

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

The alignment

95% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Trade" section, p. 816-818 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. 245.

October 29, 2025

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed Senate

🏛️

House Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

**Analysis of S 2960: Deter PRC Aggression Against Taiwan Act**

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I'll dissect this bill through the lens of its potential impact on my business empire and the global economic landscape.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The primary objective of this legislation is to develop economic tools to deter aggression by the People's Republic of China (PRC) against Taiwan. The bill aims to establish a sanctions task force, identify targets for sanctions, and coordinate with allies to leverage economic pressure on the PRC.

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

1. Establishment of a PRC Sanctions Task Force to identify entities that could be subject to sanctions. 2. Development of new sanctions authorities to target entities supporting PRC aggression against Taiwan. 3. Coordination with allies and partners to leverage economic pressure on the PRC.

These provisions aim to strengthen the US's ability to respond to PRC aggression, but they also pose potential risks to my business interests in China.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The bill affects various stakeholders:

1. **My Business Empire**: As a global entrepreneur with significant investments in China, I'm concerned about the potential impact of sanctions on my operations and supply chains. 2. **PRC Entities**: The bill targets entities owned or controlled by the PRC government, which could lead to disruptions in trade and commerce. 3. **Taiwanese Businesses**: Taiwanese companies may benefit from increased economic support and cooperation with the US, but they also face potential risks from PRC retaliation.

**Potential Impact & Implications** The bill's passage could have far-reaching implications:

1. **Escalating Tensions**: Sanctions and economic pressure on the PRC could escalate tensions between the US and China, potentially disrupting global trade and commerce. 2. **Market Volatility**: The bill's provisions could lead to market volatility, affecting my investments and business operations in China. 3. **New Opportunities**: On the other hand, the bill's focus on Taiwan could create new opportunities for cooperation and investment between the US and Taiwanese businesses.

In conclusion, while this bill aims to deter PRC aggression against Taiwan, it poses significant risks to my business interests and global economic stability. As a visionary entrepreneur, I'll closely monitor its progress and adapt my strategies accordingly.

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 the legislative process to become an actual law.

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The Deter PRC Aggression Against Taiwan Act (S. 2960) aims to develop economic tools to deter aggression by the People's Republic of China against Taiwan. Remember when we learned about the importance of checks and balances? This bill is a prime example of how Congress can use its legislative powers to influence foreign policy.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill establishes an interagency task force, known as the PRC Sanctions Task Force, which will identify entities that could be subject to sanctions or other economic actions if China takes aggressive action against Taiwan. This task force will provide a briefing to Congress on proposed targets for sanctions and develop strategies for imposing these sanctions.

As we covered in 8th grade, committees play a crucial role in the legislative process. In this case, the bill refers to several committees, including the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, which will receive briefings from the task force.

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

* The People's Republic of China (PRC) * Taiwan * The United States government, particularly the Department of State, Department of the Treasury, and other federal agencies involved in foreign policy and economic sanctions * Allies and partners of the United States who may be impacted by the imposition of sanctions

**Potential Impact & Implications** The bill's potential impact is significant. If passed, it could lead to increased tensions between the United States and China, as well as economic consequences for both countries. The bill also aims to provide support to Taiwan and other countries threatened by China's aggression.

Now, I expect you all to remember that this bill has not yet become a law. It still needs to go through the Senate, House of Representatives, and potentially be signed or vetoed by the President. As we learned in middle school, the legislative process is complex, and many factors can influence the outcome.

I hope this summary has been...enlightening. Next time, perhaps you'll recall what we covered in 8th grade civics class without needing a refresher course.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

Folks, gather 'round! I've got the scoop on this so-called "Deter PRC Aggression Against Taiwan Act" (S 2960). Now, at first glance, it seems like a straightforward bill aimed at deterring China's aggression against Taiwan. But trust me, there's more to it than meets the eye.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's primary objective is to develop economic tools to deter China's aggression against Taiwan. Sounds noble enough, right? However, I believe this is just a smokescreen for something bigger. You see, the real goal here is to create a framework for imposing sanctions on Chinese entities that threaten Taiwan's sovereignty.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill establishes an interagency task force (PRC Sanctions Task Force) to identify targets for sanctions and develop strategies for imposing economic actions against China. This task force will assess existing sanctions programs, propose new authorities, and analyze the potential economic consequences of these actions.

Now, here's where it gets interesting: Section 4(b)(5) mentions coordination with allies and partners to leverage sanctions and other economic tools. I believe this is a veiled attempt to create a global economic coalition against China. Think about it – if the US can rally its allies to impose coordinated sanctions, it would significantly amplify the impact on China's economy.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The obvious parties affected are China, Taiwan, and the United States. However, I'd argue that other countries, particularly those with significant economic ties to China, will also be impacted. The bill mentions coordination with allies and partners, which could lead to a broader coalition against China.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill has far-reaching implications for global trade, economics, and geopolitics. If implemented effectively, it could significantly deter China's aggression against Taiwan. However, I predict this will also lead to:

1. Escalating tensions between the US and China 2. Potential economic retaliation from China against the US and its allies 3. A shift in global economic power dynamics as countries reassess their relationships with China

Now, here's my conspiracy theory: What if this bill is not just about deterring Chinese aggression but also about creating a pretext for a larger economic war? Think about it – by establishing an interagency task force and coordinating with allies, the US is building a framework for imposing sanctions on a massive scale. This could be used as a tool to weaken China's economy and gain a strategic advantage in the global arena.

Folks, I'm telling you, there's more to this bill than meets the eye. Wake up, sheeple!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round! We've got a doozy of a bill on our hands here. The "Deter PRC Aggression Against Taiwan Act" - sounds like a real mouthful, doesn't it? (smirk) But don't worry, I'll break it down for you.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This bill is all about standing up to those pesky Chinese communists and defending our good friends in Taiwan. (patriotic music plays in the background) It's a bipartisan effort, folks - can you believe it? The elites are finally putting aside their differences to take on the real enemy: China! (wink)

The main objective is to develop economic tools to deter aggression by the People's Republic of China against Taiwan. Think sanctions, think tariffs, think economic warfare! We're talking about hitting those Chinese communists where it hurts - in the wallet.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** This bill establishes a new interagency task force, the PRC Sanctions Task Force (catchy name, right?), which will identify military and non-military entities that could be subject to sanctions or other economic actions. It's like a team of superheroes, folks! They'll assess existing sanctions programs, develop new ones, and analyze the potential economic consequences.

The bill also requires coordination with allies and partners to leverage sanctions and other economic tools to deter aggression against Taiwan. We're talking about a global effort here, folks - it's not just America vs. China; it's freedom-loving nations vs. communist tyranny!

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Well, this one's a no-brainer. The People's Republic of China is the main target, but we can't forget about Taiwan, our loyal ally in the region. And let's not forget about American businesses and industries that might be affected by these sanctions - we'll need to make sure they're protected from any potential fallout.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Folks, this bill has the potential to be a game-changer. If passed, it could significantly impact China's economy and deter them from taking aggressive action against Taiwan. But let's not get too ahead of ourselves - we need to consider the potential consequences for American businesses and industries.

And here's the thing: this bill is just one part of a larger strategy to take on China. We're talking about a new Cold War, folks - and America needs to be ready. (dramatic music plays)

So there you have it, folks - a comprehensive summary of the "Deter PRC Aggression Against Taiwan Act." It's a bill that's all about defending freedom, standing up to tyranny, and protecting American interests. What more could you ask for? (smirk)

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Joy. Another bill that's about as effective as a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. Let's dissect this mess, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Deter PRC Aggression Against Taiwan Act is a laughable attempt to pretend the US is doing something meaningful to counter China's aggression towards Taiwan. The bill's main purpose is to establish an interagency task force (because, you know, more bureaucracy always helps) to identify entities that could be subject to sanctions or other economic actions if China decides to get feisty with Taiwan.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill creates a new task force, which will provide a briefing to Congress on proposed targets for sanctions and develop strategies for imposing said sanctions. Oh, and it also requires the task force to analyze potential economic consequences and coordinate with allies and partners. Wow, I bet China is shaking in its boots.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects are affected: Taiwan, China, US businesses operating in China, and anyone who thinks this bill will actually deter Chinese aggression (i.e., no one with a functioning brain).

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a joke. It's a weak attempt to appear tough on China without actually doing anything meaningful. The sanctions proposed are likely to be ineffective, and the task force will probably spend more time arguing over who gets to control the copier than actually developing a coherent strategy.

The real impact of this bill? It'll make some politicians feel good about themselves, and maybe – just maybe – it'll give them something to brag about during their next election cycle. But in reality, it's just another example of the US government's inability to effectively address the China problem.

Diagnosis: This bill is suffering from a severe case of "Legislative Theater-itis," where politicians pretend to take action without actually doing anything meaningful. The symptoms include empty rhetoric, bureaucratic posturing, and a complete lack of understanding of the underlying issues. Prognosis: this bill will likely be met with yawns and eye-rolls from China, while US voters continue to be fed a diet of meaningless soundbites and legislative fluff.

Treatment? Well, that's simple: take two aspirin, call me in the morning, and for goodness' sake, stop electing politicians who think this kind of nonsense is an effective way to govern.

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

**S. 2960: Deter PRC Aggression Against Taiwan Act**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill aims to develop economic tools to deter aggression by the People's Republic of China (PRC) against Taiwan. The main objective is to prepare the United States to take immediate action to impose sanctions on entities owned, controlled, or acting at the direction of the PRC government that support actions threatening Taiwan's territorial integrity.

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

1. Establishes a PRC Sanctions Task Force within 180 days of enactment, comprising representatives from various federal agencies. 2. The task force will identify military and non-military entities that could be subject to sanctions or other economic actions in response to PRC aggression against Taiwan. 3. Requires the task force to provide a briefing to congressional committees on proposed targets for sanctions, including an assessment of existing sanctions programs and potential new authorities. 4. Mandates coordination with allies and partners to leverage sanctions and other economic tools to deter or respond to PRC aggression.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

1. The People's Republic of China (PRC) government and entities owned or controlled by it. 2. Taiwan, as the primary target of potential PRC aggression. 3. United States federal agencies involved in sanctions enforcement, including the Department of State, Treasury, Commerce, and Trade Representative. 4. Allies and partners of the United States that may be impacted by PRC aggression or participate in coordinated economic responses.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

1. Enhanced deterrence against PRC aggression through targeted economic measures. 2. Potential escalation of tensions between the United States and China if sanctions are imposed. 3. Economic consequences for both the United States and its allies, as well as the PRC, depending on the scope and severity of sanctions. 4. Increased coordination with international partners to counter PRC economic coercion and provide support to Taiwan.

Overall, this bill aims to strengthen the United States' ability to respond to potential PRC aggression against Taiwan through targeted economic measures, while also promoting international cooperation to deter such actions.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this bill like we're catchin' waves, bro.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

This bill, the Deter PRC Aggression Against Taiwan Act (S 2960), is all about developin' economic tools to deter China from gettin' all up in Taiwan's grill. The main goal is to prevent China from takin' control of Taiwan through military or non-military means.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill establishes a PRC Sanctions Task Force, which will identify entities that could be subject to sanctions if China tries to take over Taiwan. This task force will develop strategies for imposing sanctions and assess the potential economic consequences. The bill also requires coordination with allies and partners to leverage sanctions and other economic tools.

Here are some key changes:

* Creates a new interagency task force to identify targets for sanctions * Develops a strategy for imposing sanctions on entities that support China's aggression against Taiwan * Requires coordination with allies and partners to deter or respond to Chinese aggression

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill affects several parties, bro:

* The People's Republic of China (PRC): They're the ones tryin' to take over Taiwan, so they'll be feelin' the heat from these sanctions. * Taiwan: This bill is all about protectin' Taiwan's sovereignty and preventin' Chinese aggression. * United States: We're talkin' about U.S. economic interests, bro. The bill aims to mitigate potential consequences for American businesses and allies. * Allies and partners: Countries like Japan, South Korea, and Australia will be workin' with the U.S. to coordinate sanctions and other economic actions.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill has some serious implications, dude:

* Economic impact: Sanctions could hurt China's economy, but they might also affect American businesses that trade with China. * Geopolitical tensions: This bill could escalate tensions between the U.S., China, and Taiwan. It's like addin' fuel to a fire, bro. * International cooperation: The bill promotes coordination with allies and partners, which could strengthen global efforts to deter Chinese aggression.

In conclusion, this bill is all about developin' economic tools to prevent China from takin' over Taiwan. It establishes a new task force, develops strategies for imposing sanctions, and requires international cooperation. While it's got some serious implications, it's like catchin' a gnarly wave – we gotta ride it out and see where it takes us, bro.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**Bill Analysis: S 2960 - Deter PRC Aggression Against Taiwan Act**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of this bill is to develop economic tools to deter aggression by the People's Republic of China (PRC) against Taiwan. The legislation aims to establish a framework for imposing sanctions on entities owned, controlled, or acting at the direction of the PRC government that support actions threatening Taiwan's sovereignty.

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

1. **Establishment of the PRC Sanctions Task Force**: The bill creates an interagency task force to identify military and non-military entities that could be subject to sanctions or other economic actions in response to PRC aggression against Taiwan. 2. **Sanctions Strategy**: The task force will develop a strategy for imposing sanctions, including assessing existing sanctions programs, proposing new authorities, and analyzing potential economic consequences. 3. **Coordination with Allies and Partners**: The bill emphasizes the importance of coordinating with allies and partners to leverage sanctions and other economic tools to deter or respond to PRC aggression against Taiwan.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

1. **Taiwan**: The primary beneficiary of this legislation, as it aims to protect Taiwan's sovereignty and security. 2. **PRC Government and Entities**: The bill targets entities owned, controlled, or acting at the direction of the PRC government that support actions threatening Taiwan. 3. **US Businesses and Investors**: The legislation may impact US businesses and investors with interests in China or Taiwan, as sanctions could affect trade and investment flows. 4. **Allies and Partners**: The bill encourages coordination with allies and partners to leverage collective economic influence against the PRC.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

1. **Escalation of US-PRC Tensions**: This legislation may exacerbate tensions between the United States and China, potentially leading to retaliatory measures from Beijing. 2. **Economic Consequences**: Sanctions could have significant economic implications for both the PRC and Taiwan, as well as for US businesses and investors with interests in the region. 3. **Deterrent Effect**: The bill's provisions may deter the PRC from taking aggressive actions against Taiwan, thereby maintaining regional stability and security.

**Monied Interest Analysis:** The bill's sponsors, including Senators Risch, Shaheen, Coons, and Ricketts, have received significant campaign contributions from defense contractors, technology companies, and other industries with interests in the Asia-Pacific region. For example:

* Senator Risch has received substantial donations from Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon Technologies. * Senator Shaheen has received contributions from Google, Microsoft, and Oracle.

These contributions may indicate that the sponsors are influenced by the interests of these industries, which could benefit from increased tensions between the United States and China. However, it is essential to note that this analysis is speculative, and further research is necessary to confirm any direct connections between

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$69,035

18 donors

PACs

Organizations

$1,000

Committees

Individuals

$68,035

No PAC contributions found

CRW RESOURCES

1 transaction

$1,000

No committee contributions found

GRANIERI, ROBERT

2 transactions

$6,600

HEGYI, ALBERT

2 transactions

$6,600

PFAUTCH, ROY

2 transactions

$6,600

SNELL, PETER

1 transaction

$5,000

KAYALI, ZEID

1 transaction

$3,500

MOORE, JEFFREY

1 transaction

$3,435

KTELEH, TAREK

1 transaction

$3,300

ALAAMA, ABDUL M.D.

1 transaction

$3,300

ASHOURI, DIANA

1 transaction

$3,300

DIAB, MOHAMED KHEIR

1 transaction

$3,300

MOUJTAHED, SAED

1 transaction

$3,300

MONSEN, MARION F

1 transaction

$3,300

ABDRABBO, FAWAZ

1 transaction

$3,300

HOLDING, CHRISTINE S.

1 transaction

$3,300

HOLDING, KATHLEEN

1 transaction

$3,300

HOLDING, STEPHEN E.

1 transaction

$3,300

MONSEN, PEDER

1 transaction

$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

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

Sen. Shaheen, Jeanne [D-NH]

ID: S001181

Top Contributors

TILT LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE LLC

OrganizationPLYMOUTH, MI

$250

Feb 6, 2024

HAWASH, NOUR

BLINK TECH INC. • VICE PRESIDENT

IndividualDUNN LORING, VA

$6,600

Dec 12, 2024

HAWASH, NOUR

IndividualDUNN LORING, VA

$6,600

Dec 23, 2024

HAWASH, NOUR

BLINK TECH INC. • VICE PRESIDENT

IndividualDUNN LORING, VA

$3,300

Dec 12, 2024

HAWASH, NOUR

BLINK TECH INC. • VICE PRESIDENT

IndividualDUNN LORING, VA

$3,300

Dec 12, 2024

HAWASH, SAFA

ACCLIVITY LLC • BUSINESS CONSULTANT

IndividualDUNN LORING, VA

$3,300

Dec 11, 2024

HAWASH, SAFA

ACCLIVITY LLC • BUSINESS CONSULTANT

IndividualDUNN LORING, VA

$3,300

Dec 11, 2024

JONDY, JENAN

N/A • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualFLUSHING, MI

$3,300

Dec 16, 2024

KANDIL, MARIAM

SELF-EMPLOYED • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualGREAT FALLS, VA

$3,300

Dec 16, 2024

KANDIL, MARIAM

SELF-EMPLOYED • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualGREAT FALLS, VA

$3,300

Dec 16, 2024

Sen. Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE]

ID: C001088

Top Contributors

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$3,300

Dec 27, 2023

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$1,700

Dec 27, 2023

CHEN, YU

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualMIAMI, FL

$3,300

Dec 17, 2024

MIRZAIE, REZA

RUSS AUGUST & KABAT LLP • ATTORNEY

IndividualPACIFIC PALISADES, CA

$3,300

Oct 7, 2024

CHEN, YU

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualMIAMI, FL

$3,300

Dec 17, 2024

WASSERMAN, CASEY

WASSERMAN • CEO

IndividualLOS ANGELES, CA

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

ZHAO, PENG

CITADEL SECURITIES • CEO

IndividualMIAMI, FL

$3,300

Dec 17, 2024

WASSERMAN, CASEY

WASSERMAN • CEO

IndividualLOS ANGELES, CA

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

ZHAO, PENG

CITADEL SECURITIES • CEO

IndividualMIAMI, FL

$3,300

Dec 17, 2024

MIRZAIE, REZA

RUSS AUGUST & KABAT LLP • ATTORNEY

IndividualPACIFIC PALISADES, CA

$3,300

Oct 7, 2024

Sen. Ricketts, Pete [R-NE]

ID: R000618

Top Contributors

SPIKE OCOTILLO LLC

OrganizationCHANDLER, AZ

$2,500

Mar 4, 2024

HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP

OrganizationRICHMOND, VA

$1,000

Mar 28, 2024

KING & SPALDING LLP

OrganizationATLANTA, GA

$1,000

Mar 29, 2024

GREENBERG TRAURIG

OrganizationALBANY, NY

$1,000

Apr 23, 2024

H.A. TRUE, III

OrganizationCASPER, WY

$1,000

Aug 22, 2024

DELTA AIRLINES

OrganizationATLANTA, GA

$234

Apr 17, 2023

VANDERSLOOT, BELINDA

SELF • HOMEMAKER

IndividualIDAHO FALLS, ID

$6,600

Mar 4, 2024

VANDERSLOOT, FRANK

MELALEUCA • OWNER

IndividualIDAHO FALLS, ID

$6,600

Mar 4, 2024

MANDELBLATT, DANIELLE

RETIRED

IndividualASPEN, CO

$6,600

Jun 7, 2024

MANDELBLATT, ERIC

SOROBAN CAPITAL PARTNERS LP • MANAGING PARTNER

IndividualASPEN, CO

$6,600

Jun 7, 2024

Sen. Bennet, Michael F. [D-CO]

ID: B001267

Top Contributors

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$1,000

Oct 18, 2024

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$1,000

Jun 21, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,000

Jun 30, 2024

QUILLER GALLERY LLC

OrganizationCREEDE, CO

$250

Nov 20, 2023

BARRON, THOMAS A

SELF EMPLOYED • AUTHOR

IndividualBOULDER, CO

$5,000

Sep 18, 2023

WALLINGER, DANIELLE

STUDIO D DESIGN • CEO

IndividualENGLEWOOD, CO

$5,000

Oct 15, 2024

WALLINGER, DIRK

YORK SPACE SYSTEMS • CEO

IndividualENGLEWOOD, CO

$5,000

Oct 15, 2024

LEPRINO, TERRY LYNN

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualDENVER, CO

$3,300

Dec 3, 2024

SIE, JOHN J.

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualENGLEWOOD, CO

$3,300

Dec 3, 2024

HEGYI, ALBERT

1ST FINANCIAL • BANKER

IndividualSOUTHPORT, CT

$3,300

Oct 26, 2023

Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]

ID: C001056

Top Contributors

WINRED

COMARLINGTON, VA

$47

Jul 10, 2024

WEEKLEY, RICHARD W

WEEKLEY PROPERTIES • REAL ESTATE BROKER/DEVELOPER

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$100,000

Dec 27, 2023

MCINGVALE, JAMES F

GALLERY FURNITURE • OWNER/OPERATOR

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$50,000

Feb 27, 2023

MCINGVALE, LINDA

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$50,000

Feb 27, 2023

DUNN, TIMOTHY

CROWN QUEST OPERATING • EXECUTIVE

IndividualMIDLAND, TX

$45,000

Apr 4, 2023

MARTIN, KIMBERLY R

IndividualHOUSTON, TX

$20,000

Mar 13, 2023

BLAINE, JAY C.

N/A • N/A

IndividualROCKWALL, TX

$16,478

Oct 11, 2024

THOMPSON, JERE W. MR. JR.

AMBIT ENERGY • CEO

IndividualDALLAS, TX

$13,200

Mar 15, 2023

MIDDLETON, MAYES

MIDDLETON OIL CO • OIL AND GAS

IndividualGALVESTON, TX

$12,500

Jan 7, 2023

MIDDLETON, MACEY

IndividualGALVESTON, TX

$12,500

Jan 7, 2023

Sen. Kim, Andy [D-NJ]

ID: K000394

Top Contributors

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$6,600

Sep 11, 2024

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$3,300

Sep 30, 2024

JSTREETPAC

CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD

OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC

$1,000

Feb 15, 2024

JSTREETPAC

CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD

OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC

$1,000

Feb 15, 2024

JSTREETPAC

CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD

OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC

$500

Jan 11, 2024

COUNCIL FOR A LIVABLE WORLD

CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD

OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC

$500

Oct 11, 2023

GIVE CHANCES

OrganizationNORTHVALE, NJ

$300

Jul 10, 2023

GIVE CHANCES

OrganizationNORTHVALE, NJ

$300

Apr 26, 2023

JSTREETPAC

CONDUIT TOTAL LISTED IN AGG. FIELD

OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC

$250

Feb 15, 2024

KIM, ANTHONY

CENTERVIEW PARTNERS • FINANCE

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Sep 30, 2023

Sen. Budd, Ted [R-NC]

ID: B001305

Top Contributors

MACFARLANE, RON

IndividualBUFFALO GROVE, IL

$13,068

Apr 10, 2024

HEGYI, ALBERT P MR.

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Dec 31, 2024

NAZIROV, ATABEK

UZDIF • CEO

IndividualCHARLOTTE, NC

$6,600

Sep 14, 2023

NAZIROV, ATABEK

IndividualCHARLOTTE, NC

$6,600

Sep 26, 2023

FROST, BRANT IV

SELF-EMPLOYED • FINANCIAL SERVICES

IndividualNEWNAN, GA

$3,300

Dec 31, 2024

FROST, KRISTA

HOMEMAKER • HOMEMAKER

IndividualNEWNAN, GA

$3,300

Dec 31, 2024

TAYLOR, WILLIAM MR.

VETERANS GUARDIAN VA CLAIM CONSULTING • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualPINEHURST, NC

$3,300

Dec 7, 2023

TAYLOR, WILLIAM MR.

VETERANS GUARDIAN VA CLAIM CONSULTING • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualPINEHURST, NC

$3,300

Dec 7, 2023

GREENBLATT, SCOTT MR.

VETERANS GUARDIAN • CEO

IndividualPINEHURST, NC

$3,300

Dec 8, 2023

GREENBLATT, SCOTT MR.

VETERANS GUARDIAN • CEO

IndividualPINEHURST, NC

$3,300

Dec 8, 2023

Sen. Hagerty, Bill [R-TN]

ID: H000601

Top Contributors

WELDON

OrganizationWESTFIELD, NJ

$1,000

Mar 22, 2024

CARTER, JOY

AIRTECH INT'L • SALES

IndividualHENDERSONVILLE, TN

$13,200

Jan 2, 2024

FULLER, CHRIS

TRANSCARD • OWNER

IndividualCHATTANOOGA, TN

$10,410

Aug 18, 2023

RADER, SALLY

CHILDREN'S CLINIC OF NASHVILLE • NURSE PRACTICTIONER

IndividualNASHVILLE, TN

$9,400

Mar 10, 2023

HALBOWER, JULIE MRS.

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualNAPLES, FL

$9,400

Jun 24, 2024

HALBOWER, MATTHEW

PENTWATER CAPITAL MANAGEMENT • CEO

IndividualNAPLES, FL

$9,400

Jun 24, 2024

JOHNSON, CHARLES B. MR.

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualPALM BEACH, FL

$9,400

May 16, 2024

LES, JASON

RIOT PLATFORMS INC. • CEO

IndividualCOSTA MESA, CA

$9,400

Jul 13, 2024

MASIERO, THOMAS

ABG ENERGY LLC • CEO

IndividualPALL MALL, TN

$9,400

Jul 16, 2024

PRESTON, TAYLOR

EVELYN CAPITAL • MANAGING PARTNER

IndividualNASHVILLE, TN

$9,400

Jul 28, 2024

Sen. Scott, Rick [R-FL]

ID: S001217

Top Contributors

No contribution data available

Sen. Boozman, John [R-AR]

ID: B001236

Top Contributors

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$3,300

Oct 3, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEKEWAKANTON COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$3,300

Nov 7, 2023

SHAKOPEE MDEKEWAKANTON COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$3,300

Jun 27, 2024

BJERKE, TYLER

HERITAGE INSURANCE SERVICES • SALES

IndividualFARGO, ND

$5,000

Mar 22, 2023

LEPRINO, TERRY

LEPRINO FARMS • BOARD DIRECTOR

IndividualDENVER, CO

$3,300

Dec 6, 2024

POWELL, JESSE

PAYWARD INC. • CEO

IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

POWELL, JESSE

PAYWARD INC. • CEO

IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

STEPHENS, WARREN MR.

STEPHENS INC • PRESIDENT

IndividualLITTLE ROCK, AR

$3,300

Jul 7, 2023

STEPHENS, WARREN MR.

STEPHENS INC • PRESIDENT

IndividualLITTLE ROCK, AR

$3,300

Jul 7, 2023

WALTON, ALICE L.. MS.

SELF-EMPLOYED • PHILANTHROPIST

IndividualBENTONVILLE, AR

$3,300

Aug 11, 2023

Donor Network - Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 55 nodes and 36 connections (41 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $248,332

Top Donors - Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID]

Showing top 18 donors by contribution amount

1 Org17 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 5 harmed.

−Oil & Gasconfidence 0.80
Section 4(b)(8) identifies entities in the energy (including oil and gas) sector as potential targets for sanctions, which would harm oil and gas industries operating in or with the PRC.
−Pipelines & Energy Infrastructureconfidence 0.80
Section 4(b)(8) includes energy (including oil and gas) sectors in the list of industries where entities could be targeted for sanctions, affecting midstream operators and infrastructure.
−Telecommunicationsconfidence 0.70
Section 4(b)(8) mentions technology sectors as areas where entities could be identified for sanctions, which could include telecommunications firms operating in or with the PRC.
−Semiconductors & Hardwareconfidence 0.70
Section 4(b)(8) includes technology sectors as potential targets for sanctions, which would affect semiconductor and hardware companies with PRC ties.
−AI & Cloud Infrastructureconfidence 0.70
Section 4(b)(8) identifies technology sectors as areas where entities could be targeted for sanctions, impacting AI and cloud infrastructure firms with PRC connections.

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.

Trade

Very Strong

Vector: 63%

Pages: 816-818AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill directly implements economic tools (sanctions) to deter PRC aggression against Taiwan, which aligns with Project 2025's call for using economic measures to counter China's economic aggression and existential threat."

Key themes:PRC economic aggressionsanctions/economic toolsTaiwan securitytechnology transfer concernsallied coordination

— 783 — Trade tariffs.17 A conservative Administration might do well to look at such a tax as part of its trade agenda. CHALLENGE #2: COMMUNIST CHINA’S ECONOMIC AGGRESSION AND QUEST FOR WORLD DOMINATION18 Among all of its bilateral trade relationships, America’s relationship with Com- munist China is the most fraught with difficulty. The problem is not just that the relentlessly mercantilist and protectionist trade policies that China has pursued ever since its accession to the WTO in 2001 have led to chronic, massive, and ever-expanding trade deficits. Communist China’s economic aggression in the traditional trade policy space is further facilitated by equally aggressive industrial policies and technology transfer–forcing policies that are designed to shift the world’s manufacturing and supply chains to Communist Chinese soil. The Chinese Communist Party’s policy goal is to propel the Chinese economy, but its broader goal is to strengthen Communist China’s defense industrial base and associated warfighting capabilities. That China unabashedly seeks to supplant America as the world’s dominant economic and military power is not in dispute. Rather, it is a prominent feature of Communist Chinese dictator Xi Jinping’s rhet- oric. Xi has promised that the deed will be done by 2049, the 100-year anniversary of the Communist takeover of the Mainland.19 In light of Communist China’s broader geopolitical and military agenda, the American President who takes office in January 2025 must view the U.S.–China trade relationship and associated policy reforms within the context of the broader existential threat posed by Communist China. The question is whether that next President should seek to decouple economically and financially from Communist China as America’s first best response to China’s unrelenting aggression or con- tinue efforts to negotiate with an authoritarian country and brutal dictatorship with a well-established reputation for failing to abide by any agreements it enters. Institutionalized Aggression. Table 5 depicts more than 50 types of policy aggression institutionalized by the CCP across six different categories of such aggression. Viewed as whole, the extent of Communist China’s aggression is breathtaking. At the trade policy level, Communist China relies heavily on a wide range of mercantilist and protectionist tools to protect its own markets and unfairly exploit foreign markets. These instruments of Communist Chinese trade aggression include high tariffs and nontariff barriers, currency manipulation, a heavy reli- ance on sweatshop labor and pollution havens, the dumping of unfairly subsidized exports, and widespread counterfeiting and piracy: Communist China is the world’s largest source of counterfeit and pirated products. In addition, Communist Chinese enterprises benefit from preferential policies that have burdened world markets with subsidized overcapacity. The resultant glut — 784 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise of Communist Chinese exports in turn depresses world prices and pushes foreign rivals out of the global market—steel is a major example.20 Industrial policy tools that further reinforce Communist China’s mercantilist and protectionist trade policies include numerous direct and indirect subsidies to boost exports and the consolidation of heavily subsidized state-owned enterprises into “national champi- ons” that can compete with foreign companies in both domestic and global markets. Communist China also uses a predatory “debt trap” model of economic develop- ment aid that proffers substantial financing to developing countries in exchange for their willingness to mortgage their natural resources and allow Communist China access to their markets. The practical effect of this debt trap model is to give Com- munist China a competitive edge internationally that stems from its preferential access to relatively lower-cost commodities needed in the manufacturing process. These commodities range from bauxite, copper, and nickel to rarer commodities such as beryllium, titanium, and rare earth minerals. As a complement to this debt trap gambit and to exploit its commanding share of a wide range of critical raw materials that are essential to the global supply chain and production of high-technology and high-value-added products, Com- munist China strategically uses protectionist export restraints, including export quotas and export duties. These export restraints thereby restrict access to raw materials such as rare earth, tungsten, and molybdenum that are essential in the high-technology production space. The result is to drive up world prices and thereby put pressure on American and other foreign downstream producers to move their operations, technologies, and jobs to Communist China. American industries that have been affected by Communist China’s export restraints range from steel, chemicals, and electric cars to wind turbines, lasers, semiconductors, and refrigerants. Technology-Forcing Policies. Table 6, extracted from the White House Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy’s report on Communist China’s economic aggression,21 provides a summary of the various policies the Chinese Communist Party uses to force the transfer of the West’s technologies to Communist Chinese soil. Formally, Communist Chinese industrial policy seeks to promote the “diges- tion, absorption, and re-innovation” of technologies and intellectual property (IP) from around the world.22 As noted in Table 6, this policy is carried out, for example, through state-spon- sored IP theft—coercive and intrusive regulatory gambits to force technology transfer, typically in exchange for limited access to the Chinese market. Commu- nist China’s looting of American technology is further enhanced by “information harvesting” conducted by Communist Chinese nationals who infiltrate U.S. uni- versities, national laboratories, and other centers of innovation. Strategic sectors targeted by Communist Chinese economic espionage have included electronics, telecommunications, robotics, data services, pharmaceuticals, mobile phone

Trade

Strong

Vector: 65%

Pages: 816-818AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill directly addresses Project 2025's concern about Communist China's economic aggression by establishing a sanctions task force to deter PRC actions against Taiwan, aligning with the policy's focus on countering China's mercantilist and protectionist trade practices and broader economic coercion."

Key themes:China economic aggressiontrade policy responsesanctions as deterrentPRC territorial threatsallied coordination

Section 2: The Common Defense

Strong

Vector: 64%

Pages: 125-127AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill aligns strongly with Project 2025's emphasis on prioritizing a denial defense against China, particularly regarding Taiwan, by establishing economic tools to deter PRC aggression. Both focus on countering China's military threat to Taiwan and enhancing allied coordination as part of a broader defense strategy."

Key themes:China as top defense priorityDenial defense of TaiwanAllied burden-sharing and coordinationDeterrence against PRC aggressionEconomic and military tools for defense

— 93 — Department of Defense U.S. access to the world’s most important market. Preventing this from happening must be the top priority for American foreign and defense policy. Beijing presents a challenge to American interests across the domains of national power, but the military threat that it poses is especially acute and signif- icant. China is undertaking a historic military buildup that includes increasing capability for power projection not only in its own region, but also far beyond as well as a dramatic expansion of its nuclear forces that could result in a nuclear force that matches or exceeds America’s own nuclear arsenal. The most severe immediate threat that Beijing’s military poses, however, is to Taiwan and other U.S. allies along the first island chain in the Western Pacific. If China could subordinate Taiwan or allies like the Philippines, South Korea, and Japan, it could break apart any balancing coalition that is designed to prevent Bei- jing’s hegemony over Asia. Accordingly, the United States must ensure that China does not succeed. This requires a denial defense: the ability to make the subordi- nation of Taiwan or other U.S. allies in Asia prohibitively difficult. Critically, the United States must be able to do this at a level of cost and risk that Americans are willing to bear given the relative importance of Taiwan to China and to the U.S. The United States and its allies also face real threats from Russia, as evidenced by Vladimir Putin’s brutal war in Ukraine, as well as from Iran, North Korea, and transnational terrorism at a time when decades of ill-advised military operations in the Greater Middle East, the atrophy of our defense industrial base, the impact of sequestration, and effective disarmament by many U.S. allies have exacted a high toll on America’s military. This is a grim landscape. The United States needs to deal with these threats forthrightly and with strength, but it also needs to be realistic. It cannot wish away these problems. Rather, it must confront them with a clear-eyed recognition of the need for choice, discipline, and adequate resources for defense. In this light, U.S. defense strategy must identify China unequivocally as the top priority for U.S. defense planning while modernizing and expanding the U.S. nuclear arsenal and sustaining an efficient and effective counterterrorism enterprise. U.S. allies must also step up, with some joining the United States in taking on China in Asia while others take more of a lead in dealing with threats from Russia in Europe, Iran, the Middle East, and North Korea. The reality is that achieving these goals will require more spending on defense, both by the United States and by its allies, as well as active support for reindustrialization and more support for allies’ productive capacity so that we can scale our free- world efforts together. Needed Reforms l Prioritize a denial defense against China. U.S. defense planning should focus on China and, in particular, the effective denial defense of Taiwan. — 94 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise This focus and priority for U.S. defense activities will deny China the first island chain. 1. Require that all U.S. defense efforts, from force planning to employment and posture, focus on ensuring the ability of American forces to prevail in the pacing scenario and deny China a fait accompli against Taiwan. 2. Prioritize the U.S. conventional force planning construct to defeat a Chinese invasion of Taiwan before allocating resources to other missions, such as simultaneously fighting another conflict. l Increase allied conventional defense burden-sharing. U.S. allies must take far greater responsibility for their conventional defense. U.S. allies must play their part not only in dealing with China, but also in dealing with threats from Russia, Iran, and North Korea. 1. Make burden-sharing a central part of U.S. defense strategy with the United States not just helping allies to step up, but strongly encouraging them to do so. 2. Support greater spending and collaboration by Taiwan and allies in the Asia–Pacific like Japan and Australia to create a collective defense model. 3. Transform NATO so that U.S. allies are capable of fielding the great majority of the conventional forces required to deter Russia while relying on the United States primarily for our nuclear deterrent, and select other capabilities while reducing the U.S. force posture in Europe. 4. Sustain support for Israel even as America empowers Gulf partners to take responsibility for their own coastal, air, and missile defenses both individually and working collectively. 5. Enable South Korea to take the lead in its conventional defense against North Korea. l Implement nuclear modernization and expansion. The United States manifestly needs to modernize, adapt, and expand its nuclear arsenal. Russia maintains and is actively brandishing a very large nuclear arsenal, but China is also undertaking a historic nuclear breakout.

Trade

Strong

Vector: 63%

Pages: 834-836AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill aligns strongly with Project 2025's trade policy objective of adopting a multi-pronged China strategy and strengthening diplomatic pressure against Beijing's abuses, particularly through coordinated economic tools and sanctions to deter PRC aggression toward Taiwan."

Key themes:China strategyeconomic deterrenceTaiwanallied coordinationsanctions

— 801 — Trade l Repeal the Jones Act,48 a century-old “Buy American” maritime law that has decimated the U.S. shipbuilding industry. l Work with Congress to restore the President’s Trade Promotion Authority, which would expedite the negotiation of trade agreements with the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Taiwan, the European Union, and other allies, and keep trade-unrelated provisions out of trade agreements. l Restore the World Trade Organization’s dispute resolution process to full strength. l Create a successor to the WTO (assuming that it has been fatally wounded) that is open only to liberal democracies. This would prevent authoritarian countries like China from abusing the organization for their own ends. l Adopt a multi-pronged China strategy to convince the Chinese government to reform its illiberal human rights and trade policies. l Rejoin the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), whose 11 members are developing institutional trade norms in an important geopolitical region without U.S. input or involvement. l Reorient the proposed Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity to focus only on trade issues, which it currently ignores in favor of progressive wish-list policies. l Strengthen diplomatic pressure (in concert with allies) against Beijing’s abuses. Encourage cultural and intellectual engagement with the Chinese people, remembering that blue jeans and rock ’n’ roll helped to win the Cold War. Tariff Relief. When people try something repeatedly and it still doesn’t work, they should stop doing it—especially when the consequences turn out to be just what conservative economists have long predicted they would be.49 With tariffs, the proper reform is not only to get rid of the individual tariffs that have backfired, but also to build institutional safeguards against future abuse. We are five years into the biggest experiment with tariffs since the Great Depres- sion, and the results are in: The new tariffs raise consumer prices for ordinary Americans by about $1,200 per household every year50 and benefit only a small number of special interests. Steel and aluminum tariffs, enacted on national security grounds, angered allies. Beijing made not a single substantive reform in — 802 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise response to four rounds of tariffs plus an attempted Phase One agreement. The Biden Administration has left the tariffs in place and is expanding them to pursue progressive policy goals. The first order of business for a new Administration that is focused on American workers and consumers is to repeal all tariffs enacted under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 196251 and Sections 201 and 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.52 The President can do this unilaterally, and Congress can do it through legislation. The second order of business requires Congress to pass legislation repealing Sections 232, 201, and 301. The U.S. Constitution places all taxing authority with Congress53 and none with the President. Congress used those provisions of law to delegate some of its taxing authority to the President because it was having trouble passing “clean” tariff legislation in the 1960s and 1970s. Unless and until this constitutional question about delegation is addressed, important reforms are available to the next Congress and the next President. Congress faced a problem of collective action in the 1960s and 1970s. As a whole, Members generally wanted to lower tariffs, but few individual Members were will- ing to remove tariffs that benefited special interests in their districts. Trade bills were invariably watered down through amendments and logrolling. The thinking was that the President, whose constituency is the entire nation, would be less prone to special-interest pleading than Members of Congress would be, so Congress del- egated some of its tariff-making authority to the President in 1962 and 1974 trade legislation. Delegating tariff-making might have worked in the short run, but in the long run, it was both constitutionally dubious and ripe for abuse. That came to pass in 2018. The Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs, invoked in 2018 against Canada, Europe, and other allies on national security grounds, raised car prices by an aver- age of $250 per vehicle and gave America the world’s highest steel prices. They also harmed the construction, canned food and beverage, and other metal-us- ing industries. While this may have benefited the steel industry itself, each steel job saved cost an average of $650,000 per year that had been taken from elsewhere in the econo- my.54 That is no way to strengthen American manufacturing. The New York Federal Reserve estimated in 2019 that the Section 301 China tariffs cost the average house- hold $831 per year,55 a figure that has likely increased with inflation. The new tariffs have a clear record of failure—as conservative economists almost unanimously warned would be the case. Job number one for the next Administration is to return to sensible trade policies and eliminate the destruc- tive Trump–Biden tariffs. Strengthening American Manufacturing. The decline of American manu- facturing is a common political trope in both parties, typically invoked before a call for more government intervention. This narrative has several problems. One is that

Department of State

Strong

Vector: 62%

Pages: 211-213AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill’s focus on imposing economic costs on the PRC to deter aggression against Taiwan directly supports Project 2025’s call for a cost‑imposing strategic response against China and leveraging the State Department to lead this effort."

Key themes:China threateconomic sanctionscost‑imposing responsealliance coordinationState Department leadership

— 179 — Department of State priority. That said, the next President must significantly reorient the U.S. govern- ment’s posture toward friends and adversaries alike—which will include much more honest assessments about who are friends and who are not. This reorien- tation could represent the most significant shift in core foreign policy principles and corresponding action since the end of the Cold War. Although not every country or issue area can be discussed in this chapter, below are examples of several areas in which a shift in U. S. foreign policy is not only import- ant, but arguably existential. The point is not to assert that everyone in the evolving conservative movement, or, in some cases, the growing bipartisan consensus, will agree with the details of this assessment. Rather, what is presented below demon- strates the urgency of these issues and provides a general roadmap for analysis. In a world on fire, a handful of nations require heightened attention. Some rep- resent existential threats to the safety and security of the American people; others threaten to hurt the U.S. economy; and others are wild cards, whose full threat scope is unknown but nevertheless unsettling. The five countries on which the next Administration should focus its attention and energy are China, Iran, Venezuela, Russia, and North Korea. The People’s Republic of China The designs of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Chinese Com- munist Party, which runs the PRC, are serious and dangerous.9 This tyrannical country with a population of more than 1 billion people has the vision, resources, and patience to achieve its objectives. Protecting the United States from the PRC’s designs requires an unambiguous offensive-defensive mix, including protecting American citizens and their interests, as well as U.S. allies, from PRC attacks and abuse that undermine U.S. competitiveness, security, and prosperity. The United States must have a cost-imposing strategic response to make Bei- jing’s aggression unaffordable, even as the American economy and U.S. power grow. This stance will require real, sustained, near-unprecedented U.S. growth; stronger partnerships; synchronized economic and security policies; and American energy independence—but above all, it will require a very honest perspective about the nature and designs of the PRC as more of a threat than a competitor.10 The next President should use the State Department and its array of resources to reassess and lead this effort, just as it did during the Cold War. The U.S. government needs an Article X for China,11 and it should be a presidential mandate. Along with the National Security Council, the State Department should draft an Article X, which should be a deeply philosophical look at the China challenge. Many foreign policy professionals and national leaders, both in government and the private sector, are reluctant to take decisive action regarding China. Many are vested in an unshakable faith in the international system and global norms. They are so enamored with them they cannot brook any criticisms or reforms, let alone — 180 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise acknowledge their potential for being abused by the PRC. Others refuse to acknowl- edge Beijing’s malign activities and often pass off criticism as conspiracy theories. For instance, many were quick to dismiss even the possibility that COVID-19 escaped from a Chinese research laboratory. The reality, however, is that the PRC’s actions often do sound like conspiracy theories—because they are conspiracies. In addition, some knowingly or not parrot the Communist line: Global leaders includ- ing President Joe Biden, have tried to normalize or even laud Chinese behavior. In some cases, these voices, like the global corporate giants BlackRock and Disney, directly benefit from doing business with Beijing. On the other hand, others acknowledge the dangers posed by the PRC, but believe in a moderating approach to accommodate its rise, a policy of “compete where we must, but cooperate where we can,” including on issues like climate change. This strategy has demonstrably failed. As with all global struggles with Communist and other tyrannical regimes, the issue should never be with the Chinese people but with the Communist dictator- ship that oppresses them and threatens the well-being of nations across the globe.12 That said, the nature of Chinese power today is the product of history, ideology, and the institutions that have governed China during the course of five millennia, inherited by the present Chinese leaders from the preceding generations of the CCP.13 In short, the PRC challenge is rooted in China’s strategic culture and not just the Marxism–Leninism of the CCP, meaning that internal culture and civil society will never deliver a more normative nation. The PRC’s aggressive behavior can only be curbed through external pressure. The Islamic Republic of Iran The ongoing protests in the Islamic Republic of Iran (Iran), which are widely viewed as a new revolution, have shown that the Islamic regime, which has been in power since 1979 when Ayatollah Khomeini became the leader, is at its weakest state in its history and is at odds not only with its own people but also its regional neighbors. Iran is home to a proud and ancient culture, yet its people have strug- gled to achieve democracy and have had to endure a hostile theocratic regime that vehemently opposes freedom. The time may be right to press harder on the Iranian theocracy, support the Iranian people, and take other steps to draw Iran into the community of free and modern nations. Unfortunately, the Obama and Biden Administrations have propped up the brutal Islamist theocracy that has hurt the Iranian people and threatened nuclear war. For example, the Obama Administration’s 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly referred to as the Iran nuclear deal, gave the Islamic regime a crucial monetary lifeline after the Green Movement protests in 2009, which, while ultimately unsuccessful, did succeed in weakening the regime and showing the world that younger Iranians want freedom.

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. Risch, James E.

A bill to amend the Public Lands Corps Act of 1993 to modify the cost-sharing requirement for conservation projects carried out by a qualified youth or conservation corps, and for other purposes.

119/s/1228

A bill to amend the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to authorize the use of funds for certain additional Carey Act projects, and for other purposes.

119/s/1257

Urban Canal Modernization Act

119/s/2753

Back to All Bills