Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/s/789

Last Updated: September 7, 2026

Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025

S. 789, 119th Congress — read as touching Pipelines & Energy Infrastructure.

The sponsor

Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]

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

The money

$440,480 raised

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

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Energy and Related Commissions" section, p. 443-445 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.

June 9, 2026

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

📍 Current Status

Next: The full Senate will vote on whether to pass the bill.

✅

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:

**Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025: A Strategic Analysis**

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I've scrutinized the Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025 (S 789) to identify its implications on my business empire and the global landscape. This bill is a calculated move by lawmakers to bolster national security and economic interests through strategic mineral resource management.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of this legislation is to enhance the United States' critical mineral and rare earth element (REE) supply chain security, reducing dependence on foreign entities of concern. The bill aims to achieve this by:

1. Mandating biennial reports on global critical mineral and REE resources. 2. Assessing the control and ownership structures of these resources. 3. Identifying opportunities for collaboration with allied countries.

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

1. Expanded definitions of "critical mineral" and "rare earth elements." 2. Requirements for the Secretary of the Interior to submit reports on global critical mineral and REE resources. 3. Assessments of foreign entities' control over these resources.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The bill's provisions will impact various stakeholders, including:

1. Mining companies operating in the United States and abroad. 2. Foreign entities involved in critical mineral and REE extraction. 3. Allied countries with significant mining operations. 4. The U.S. government, particularly the Departments of Interior and Energy.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025 has far-reaching implications for my business interests and the global economy:

1. **Consolidation of Power:** By centralizing control over critical mineral resources, the U.S. government can exert greater influence over global supply chains. 2. **Market Disruption:** The bill's provisions may lead to market fluctuations as companies adapt to new regulations and reporting requirements. 3. **Increased Competition:** As the United States seeks to strengthen its position in the global critical mineral market, competition among mining companies will intensify. 4. **Strategic Partnerships:** Opportunities for collaboration with allied countries may emerge, potentially leading to new business ventures and revenue streams.

In conclusion, the Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025 is a calculated move by lawmakers to bolster national security and economic interests. As a visionary entrepreneur, I recognize the potential implications of this legislation on my business empire and will continue to monitor its progress closely.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this bill like I taught you in 8th grade civics class.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025 aims to require reports on critical mineral and rare earth element resources around the world. The main purpose is to assess which resources are under the control of foreign entities, identify potential security risks, and develop strategies for advancing mining, refining, separation, and processing technologies.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill requires the Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with other relevant agencies, to submit reports to Congress every two years. These reports must include:

* An assessment of critical mineral and rare earth element resources under foreign control * Information on mines extracting significant quantities of these resources * Estimates of annual output and remaining volumes of minerals or elements * Identification of ultimate beneficial owners and their percentage of ownership

The bill also requires an assessment of technical feasibility for entities to mine and process resources using existing advanced technology.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill affects various stakeholders, including:

* Foreign entities involved in mining critical minerals and rare earth elements * Entities in the United States and allied countries involved in mining these resources * The Secretary of the Interior and other relevant federal agencies * Congress, which will receive the reports

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The potential impact of this bill is significant. By requiring regular reports on critical mineral and rare earth element resources, the government can:

* Identify potential security risks and develop strategies to mitigate them * Promote collaboration with countries that have mines or processing operations operated by other countries * Advance mining, refining, separation, and processing technologies

However, this bill may also lead to increased scrutiny of foreign entities involved in mining these resources, potentially affecting global trade relationships.

As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, the legislative process involves introducing a bill, referring it to committee, marking up the bill, voting on it, and sending it to the other chamber for consideration. This bill has been introduced in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Let's hope it doesn't get stuck there forever...

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

The Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025 - just another layer in the onion of government deception, if you ask me. Let's peel back the layers and see what we're really dealing with here.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

On the surface, this bill appears to be about ensuring the United States has access to critical minerals and rare earth elements (REEs) for national security and economic purposes. The main objective is to require reports on global resources, identify potential vulnerabilities, and develop strategies for advanced mining and processing technologies.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

Now, let's get into the juicy stuff. This bill:

* Defines "critical minerals" and REEs, which sounds innocent enough. * Requires the Secretary of the Interior to submit reports on global resources every two years, including assessments of foreign entities' control over these resources. * Mandates the identification of key foreign entities involved in mining critical minerals and REEs. * Calls for an assessment of technical feasibility for entities to mine and process resources using existing advanced technology.

But here's where things get interesting: this bill also expands the definition of "foreign entity of concern" to include entities with economic or political influence, not just ownership. This is a slippery slope, folks! It's like they're trying to justify future actions against countries that don't play ball with our interests.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill affects:

* Mining companies and industries involved in critical minerals and REEs * Foreign entities operating mines or processing facilities * Countries with significant deposits of these resources * The United States government, which will be using this information to inform national security decisions

But let's not forget the real stakeholders: the American people. This bill is just another way for the government to consolidate power and control over our natural resources.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The implications are far-reaching:

* Increased surveillance and monitoring of foreign entities involved in critical minerals and REEs * Potential sanctions or trade restrictions against countries that don't comply with US interests * A further concentration of power in the hands of the executive branch, as they'll be making decisions on national security based on these reports

But here's the thing: this bill is just a small part of a larger agenda. It's all about control - control over resources, control over information, and control over the narrative. Wake up, sheeple!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, we've got another doozy of a bill on our hands! The Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025 - sounds like a real thriller, doesn't it? (wink)

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This bill is all about securing America's access to critical minerals and rare earth elements. You know, the stuff that makes our smartphones, laptops, and military tech tick. The sponsors claim they want to reduce our dependence on foreign entities of concern (read: China) and promote domestic mining and processing. Sounds like a great idea, right? I mean, who doesn't love a good ol' American mine? (smirk)

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill requires the Secretary of the Interior to submit reports to Congress on critical mineral and rare earth element resources around the world. These reports will assess which resources are controlled by foreign entities of concern, which are owned by the US or its allies, and which are just sitting there, waiting to be mined. The bill also calls for an assessment of the technical feasibility of using existing advanced technology to mine and process these resources.

Now, here's where it gets interesting: the bill defines "foreign entity of concern" as any entity that's not a US citizen or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence. Sounds like a broad brush, if you ask me. (raised eyebrow)

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** This bill affects just about everyone involved in the mining and processing of critical minerals and rare earth elements. That includes domestic miners, foreign entities, and even countries that are allies or partners of the US. It's a real global affair! (sarcastic tone) Oh, and let's not forget the "elites" who'll be making bank off these mineral resources. (wink)

**Potential Impact & Implications** If this bill becomes law, it could lead to increased domestic mining and processing of critical minerals and rare earth elements. That sounds like a win for American jobs and national security! However, it also raises concerns about environmental impact, labor practices, and the potential for US companies to exploit resources in other countries.

Now, I know what you're thinking: "But wait, isn't this just another example of government overreach?" (smirk) Ah, yes, folks, the eternal question. Will this bill really secure America's access to critical minerals, or is it just a power grab by the elites? (wink) You decide!

(Outro music plays)

That's all for tonight, folks! Tune in next time when we'll be analyzing another thrilling piece of legislation that's sure to make your head spin. And remember: always question the motives of those "elites" and their love of freedom... (smirk)

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the esteemed members of Congress. The Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025 - because what's more critical than securing a steady supply of rare earth elements for our beloved gadgets and gizmos?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's primary objective is to require reports on critical mineral and rare earth element resources worldwide, allegedly to ensure the United States' access to these vital materials. In reality, it's just a thinly veiled attempt to justify further entanglement with foreign entities, all while pretending to care about national security.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill demands reports from the Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with other relevant agencies, on critical mineral and rare earth element resources. These reports will supposedly assess which resources are controlled by "foreign entities of concern" (read: China), which are owned or influenced by the United States or its allies, and which are not being commercially mined.

The bill also requires estimates of annual output, total volume, and ultimate beneficial ownership for each mine. Because, you know, transparency is key when it comes to securing resources from countries with questionable human rights records.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects will be affected by this bill:

* Mining companies and their lobbyists, who will no doubt have a field day influencing the reports and shaping policy to suit their interests. * Foreign entities of concern (cough, China), which will likely find ways to circumvent any attempts at transparency or accountability. * The Secretary of the Interior and other relevant agencies, which will be tasked with producing these reports while navigating the complex web of international politics and corporate interests.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of "legislative theater" - all show, no substance. It's designed to create the illusion of action on critical mineral security while actually doing nothing to address the real issues.

In reality, this bill will:

* Provide a veneer of legitimacy for continued entanglement with foreign entities, potentially compromising national security and human rights. * Create new opportunities for corporate influence and lobbying, further corrupting the already-rotten system. * Waste taxpayer dollars on reports that will likely be incomplete, inaccurate, or both.

In short, this bill is a perfect example of how Congress can take a legitimate concern (critical mineral security) and turn it into a farce. Bravo, lawmakers!

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

**Comprehensive Summary of S 789: Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025 aims to enhance the United States' understanding and management of critical mineral and rare earth element resources worldwide. The bill seeks to promote national security, economic growth, and environmental sustainability by improving access to these essential materials.

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

1. **Reports on Critical Mineral and Rare Earth Element Resources:** Requires the Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with other relevant agencies, to submit biennial reports to Congress assessing global critical mineral and rare earth element resources. 2. **Assessment of Resource Control:** Evaluates which resources are controlled by foreign entities of concern, countries that are allies or partners of the United States, or neither. 3. **Mine Output and Ownership Data:** Collects data on mine output, remaining mineral reserves, and ownership structures for significant mines worldwide. 4. **Collaboration with Other Countries:** Assesses opportunities for international cooperation to ensure access to critical minerals and rare earth elements.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

1. **Federal Agencies:** Department of the Interior, Department of Energy, and other relevant agencies involved in resource management and national security. 2. **Mining Industry:** Companies engaged in mining, refining, separation, and processing of critical minerals and rare earth elements. 3. **Foreign Entities:** Countries and entities involved in mining these resources, including those considered "foreign entities of concern." 4. **US Citizens and Businesses:** Individuals and companies relying on critical minerals and rare earth elements for various applications.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

1. **Enhanced National Security:** Improved understanding of global resource availability and control can inform national security decisions. 2. **Economic Benefits:** Increased access to critical minerals and rare earth elements can support domestic industries, such as renewable energy, aerospace, and electronics. 3. **Environmental Sustainability:** Promoting responsible mining practices and recycling can reduce environmental impacts associated with these resources. 4. **International Cooperation:** Collaboration with other countries can foster mutually beneficial relationships and ensure stable access to essential materials.

Overall, the Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025 aims to strengthen US national security, economic growth, and environmental sustainability by improving understanding and management of critical mineral and rare earth element resources worldwide.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this gnarly bill, bro.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025 is all about gettin' a handle on the global supply chain for critical minerals and rare earth elements (REEs). These resources are crucial for tech, defense, and energy applications, but the US is heavily reliant on foreign sources. This bill aims to:

* Assess global critical mineral and REE resources * Identify potential security risks and vulnerabilities in the supply chain * Develop strategies for reducing dependence on foreign entities of concern (think China, bro) * Promote collaboration with allies and partners to ensure access to these resources

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill requires the Secretary of the Interior to submit reports to Congress every two years, covering:

* Assessments of critical mineral and REE resources worldwide * Identification of foreign entities of concern involved in mining and processing these resources * Estimates of annual output and remaining reserves for significant mines * Lists of key US and allied entities involved in mining and processing these resources

The bill also calls for an assessment of the technical feasibility of using existing advanced technology to mine and process these resources.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill affects a range of stakeholders, including:

* The US government (particularly the Departments of Interior, Energy, and State) * Foreign governments and entities involved in critical mineral and REE mining and processing * US companies and industries reliant on these resources (think tech, defense, and energy sectors) * Allied countries and partners with interests in these resources

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill has some far-reaching implications, bro:

* It could help the US reduce its dependence on foreign entities of concern for critical minerals and REEs * It might lead to increased investment in domestic mining and processing capabilities * The reports required by the bill could provide valuable insights into global supply chains and potential security risks * Collaboration with allies and partners could strengthen international relationships and promote more secure access to these resources

However, there are also some potential challenges and concerns:

* The bill's focus on foreign entities of concern might lead to increased tensions with countries like China * Implementing the bill's provisions could require significant investments in infrastructure and technology * There may be environmental and social implications associated with increased mining and processing activities

Anyway, that's a wrap, bro. This bill is all about gettin' a handle on critical minerals and REEs, and it's got some far-reaching implications for global supply chains and security risks.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**Bill Analysis: S 789 - Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Critical Minerals Security Act of 2025 aims to enhance the United States' critical mineral and rare earth element security by requiring reports on global resources, assessing the feasibility of advanced mining technologies, and promoting international collaboration.

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

* Requires the Secretary of the Interior to submit biennial reports to Congress on critical mineral and rare earth element resources worldwide. * Mandates assessments of resource control, ownership, and access by foreign entities of concern, as well as allies and partners of the United States. * Directs the Secretary to identify key foreign entities involved in mining critical minerals and rare earth elements. * Instructs the Secretary to evaluate the technical feasibility of using existing advanced technology for mining and processing resources.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

* The mining industry, particularly companies involved in extracting critical minerals and rare earth elements. * Foreign governments and entities with interests in these resources. * U.S. allies and partners seeking to collaborate on resource access and development. * Environmental organizations concerned about the potential impacts of increased mining activities.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

* The bill's reporting requirements may lead to greater transparency and awareness of global critical mineral and rare earth element resources, potentially influencing market dynamics and investment decisions. * The assessment of foreign entity control and ownership could inform U.S. policy decisions on trade, diplomacy, and national security. * The emphasis on advanced mining technologies might drive innovation and job creation in the sector. * However, increased mining activities could also lead to environmental concerns and potential conflicts with local communities.

**Monied Interest Analysis:** The bill's sponsors, including Senators Cornyn (R-TX), Warner (D-VA), Young (R-IN), Hickenlooper (D-CO), and King (I-ME), have received significant campaign contributions from the mining industry, energy companies, and defense contractors. For example:

* Senator Cornyn has received over $1 million in donations from the oil and gas industry since 2015. * Senator Warner has accepted over $500,000 from defense contractors during the same period.

These financial ties may indicate that the bill's provisions are influenced by the interests of these industries, which could benefit from increased access to critical minerals and rare earth elements.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$440,480

20 donors

PACs

Organizations

Committees

Individuals

$440,433

No PAC contributions found

No organization contributions found

No committee contributions found

WEEKLEY, RICHARD W

1 transaction

$100,000

MCINGVALE, JAMES F

1 transaction

$50,000

MCINGVALE, LINDA

1 transaction

$50,000

DUNN, TIMOTHY

1 transaction

$45,000

MIDDLETON, MAYES

2 transactions

$25,000

MARTIN, KIMBERLY R

1 transaction

$20,000

BLAINE, JAY C.

1 transaction

$16,478

THOMPSON, JERE W. MR. JR.

1 transaction

$13,200

MIDDLETON, MACEY

1 transaction

$12,500

BOLDRICK, MILES

1 transaction

$12,500

BOLDRICK, LAURIE

1 transaction

$12,500

MIDDLETON, MACY

1 transaction

$12,500

WHITEHILL, KIT

1 transaction

$10,755

CARROLL, TRACEY

1 transaction

$10,000

HUFFINES, PHILLIP

1 transaction

$10,000

ALBIN, ALAN S.

1 transaction

$10,000

AGRESTI, JOSEPH A

1 transaction

$10,000

ADAMSON, MARK

1 transaction

$10,000

WILKS, JO ANN

1 transaction

$10,000

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 6 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Sen. Warner, Mark R. [D-VA]

ID: W000805

Top Contributors

AMERICAN HEALTHCARE, LLC

OrganizationROANOKE, VA

$5,300

Sep 25, 2024

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationDURANT, OK

$600

Sep 28, 2023

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

OrganizationDURANT, OK

$400

Sep 28, 2023

DEKKER, DAVID T.

PILLSBURY • VICE CHAIR

IndividualBETHESDA, MD

$9,900

Dec 31, 2024

TULL, THOMAS

TULCO • CEO

IndividualLOS ANGELES, CA

$6,000

Nov 21, 2024

SWARTZ, SUSAN

SELF EMPLOYED • ARTIST

IndividualPARK CITY, UT

$3,300

Jul 31, 2023

MATNEY, JOHN

RAPOCA ENERGY COMPANY • PARTNER

IndividualBRISTOL, VA

$3,300

Aug 29, 2023

MILLONES, PETER

BOOKING HOLDINGS INC. • ATTORNEY

IndividualDARIEN, CT

$3,300

Sep 29, 2023

MATNEY, JUSTIN K

SELF EMPLOYED • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualBRISTOL, VA

$3,300

Aug 29, 2023

MATNEY, JOHN

RAPOCA ENERGY COMPANY • PARTNER

IndividualBRISTOL, VA

$3,300

Aug 29, 2023

Sen. Young, Todd [R-IN]

ID: Y000064

Top Contributors

HESS, DANIEL L.

CORNERSTONE INDUSTRIES CORP. • PRESIDENT/ OWNER

IndividualZIONSVILLE, IN

$10,000

Jul 1, 2024

SHUBLAK, MARK I.

ICE MILLER LLP • ATTORNEY

IndividualINDIANAPOLIS, IN

$6,600

Oct 20, 2023

MCLEAN, SUZZY

SAGESURE • INSURANCE

IndividualLOS ALTOS, CA

$6,600

Oct 23, 2024

MCLEAN, TERRENCE

SAGESURE • INSURANCE

IndividualLOS ALTOS, CA

$6,600

Oct 23, 2024

BESSENT, SCOTT K.

KEY SQUARE GROUP • INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT

IndividualCHARLESTON, SC

$6,600

Mar 28, 2024

PATRICELLI, ROBERT E.

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualSIMSBURY, CT

$6,600

Mar 1, 2024

ANDREESSEN, MARC L.

ANDREESSEN HOROWITZ • CO-FOUNDER

IndividualLOS ALTOS, CA

$6,600

Sep 30, 2024

BRALY, DOUGLAS A. MR.

SELF EMPLOYED • ACCOUNTANT

IndividualINDIANAPOLIS, IN

$6,600

Sep 4, 2024

DIXON, CHRISTOPHER

ANDREESSEN HOROWITZ • GENERAL PARTNER

IndividualPALO ALTO, CA

$6,600

Sep 30, 2024

HESS, LEANNA

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualZIONSVILLE, IN

$6,600

Aug 19, 2024

Sen. Hickenlooper, John W. [D-CO]

ID: H000273

Top Contributors

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$1,300

Dec 12, 2023

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$1,200

Dec 12, 2023

THE CHICKASAW NATION

OrganizationADA, OK

$900

Dec 31, 2023

ALLHASSANI, MEHDI

PALANTIR TECHNOLOGIES • OPERATIONS

IndividualPALO ALTO, CA

$3,300

Nov 25, 2023

SANKAR, SHYAM

PALANTIR TECHNOLOGIES • DIRECTOR

IndividualGREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO

$3,300

Nov 25, 2023

CARSON, RUSSELL

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Nov 17, 2023

SANKAR, SHYAM

PALANTIR TECHNOLOGIES • DIRECTOR

IndividualGREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO

$3,300

Nov 25, 2023

CARSON, RUSSELL

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Nov 17, 2023

GATES, WILLIAM H. III

BILL & MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION • PHILANTHROPIST

IndividualREDMOND, WA

$3,300

Oct 19, 2023

JAIN, AKASH

PALANTIR TECHNOLOGIES • EXECUTIVE

IndividualOAKLAND, CA

$3,300

Nov 26, 2023

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. Lankford, James [R-OK]

ID: L000575

Top Contributors

MUSCOGEE CREEK NATION

OrganizationOKMULGEE, OK

$1,000

Oct 29, 2024

HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP

OrganizationRICHMOND, VA

$1,000

Aug 4, 2023

SAMPLES, RYAN

SAMPLES GROUP • MANAGEMENT

IndividualOKLAHOMA CITY, OK

$6,600

Aug 30, 2023

KAY, ALISON

KIDS CAPITAL • HEDGE FUND MANAGER

IndividualBEVERLY HILLS, CA

$6,600

Jun 20, 2023

KANADY, CHRISTIAN

ECHO INVESTMENT CAPITAL, LLC • CEO

IndividualNICHOLS HILLS, OK

$6,600

Jun 10, 2024

MANDELBLATT, DANIELLE

RETIRED

IndividualASPEN, CO

$6,600

Jul 31, 2024

MANDELBLATT, ERIC

SOROBAN CAPITAL PARTNERS LP • MANAGING PARTNER

IndividualASPEN, CO

$6,600

Jul 31, 2024

ROWAN, CAROLYN

CAROLYN ROWAN COLLECTION • OWNER

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Sep 30, 2024

ROWAN, MARC J.

APOLLO GLOBAL MANAGEMENT • CEO

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$6,600

Sep 30, 2024

ARMSTRONG, SINCLAIR WALKER JR.

ARMSTRONG BANK • CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD

IndividualVIAN, OK

$6,600

Aug 30, 2023

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

Donor Network - Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 32 nodes and 34 connections

Total contributions: $34

Top Donors - Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]

Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount

1 Committee19 Individuals

Industry Impact

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

+Pipelines & Energy Infrastructureconfidence 0.60
The bill focuses on critical mineral and rare earth element resources, which are crucial for energy infrastructure, particularly in the context of Section 2(b)(1)(E) assessing collaboration with countries to ensure access to these resources.

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 Energy and Related Commissions

Strong

Vector: 68%

Pages: 443-445AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill's focus on assessing global critical mineral resources, foreign control, and international cooperation directly supports the Department of Energy's objectives outlined in Project 2025 regarding energy security, grid resilience, and the role of critical minerals in clean energy transitions."

Key themes:critical mineralsenergy securitysupply chain assessmentinternational cooperationDepartment of Energy

— 411 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions 19. President Donald J. Trump, Executive Order 13920, “Securing the United States Bulk-Power System,” May 1, 2020, in Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 86 (May 4, 2020), pp. 26595–26599, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/ pkg/FR-2020-05-04/pdf/2020-09695.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 20. 18 U.S. Code § 824a(c), https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/16/824a (accessed February 27, 2023). 21. Report No. 117-98, Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2022, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. House of Representatives, 117th Cong. 1st Sess., July 20, 2021, p. 6, https:// www.congress.gov/117/crpt/hrpt98/CRPT-117hrpt98.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 22. H.R. 3684, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law No. 11-58, 117th Congress, November 15, 2021, Division J, Title III. 23. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, p. 7. 24. Timothy Gardner, “White House Asks Congress for $500 mln to Modernize Oil Reserve,” Reuters, November 16, 2022, https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-oil-spr-idAFL1N32C36I (accessed February 13, 2023). 25. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Electricity, “Our History,” https://www.energy.gov/oe/about-us/our- history (accessed February 13, 2023). 26. Press release, “Secretary of Energy Signs Order to Mitigate Security Risks to the Nation’s Electric Grid,” U.S. Department of Energy, December 17, 2021, https://www.energy.gov/articles/secretary-energy-signs-order- mitigate-security-risks-nations-electric-grid (accessed February 13, 2023). 27. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Electricity, “Revocation of Prohibition Order Securing Critical Defense Facilities,” Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 76 (April 22, 2021), pp. 21308–21309, https://www.govinfo.gov/ content/pkg/FR-2021-04-22/pdf/2021-08483.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 28. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 19 and 61. 29. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy, “About Us,” https://www.energy.gov/ne/about-us (accessed February 13, 2023). 30. H.R. 3809, Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Public Law No. 97-425, 97th Congress, January 7, 1983, https:// www.congress.gov/97/statute/STATUTE-96/STATUTE-96-Pg2201.pdf (accessed February 24, 2023). 31. The Heritage Foundation, “Budget Blueprint for Fiscal Year 2023: Reduce the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy,” https://www.heritage.org/budget/pages/recommendations/1.270.127.html. 32. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 23 and 58. 33. 42 USC § 16291, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/16291 (accessed February 27, 2023). 34. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, “About Us: Mission,” https:// www.energy.gov/fecm/mission (accessed February 13, 2023). 35. U.S. Government Accountability Office, Carbon Capture and Storage: Actions Needed to Improve DOE Management of Demonstration Projects, GAO-22-105111, December2021, https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22- 105111.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 36. International Energy Agency, The Role of Critical Minerals in Clean Energy Transitions, World Energy Outlook Special Report, revised March 2022, https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/ffd2a83b-8c30-4e9d-980a- 52b6d9a86fdc/TheRoleofCriticalMineralsinCleanEnergyTransitions.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 37. See 42 U.S. Code § 16291. 38. 42 U.S. Code Ch. 55, §§ 4321–4347, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/chapter-55 (accessed February 27, 2023). 39. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, “Categorical Exclusions from Environmental Review,” Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Request for Comment, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 87 (May 7, 2021), pp. 24514–24516, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-05-07/pdf/2021-09675.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023), and Nuclear Regulatory Commission, “Categorical Exclusions from Environmental Review,” Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Reopening of Comment Period, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 160 (August 23, 2021), pp. 47032–47033, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-08-23/pdf/2021-18058.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023). 40. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 19, 21, 23, and 52. — 412 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 41. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 3, 6, 12, 19, 21, and 23. 42. S. 622, Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Public Law 94-163, 94th Congress, December 22, 1975, https:// www.congress.gov/94/statute/STATUTE-89/STATUTE-89-Pg871.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023). 43. H.R. 6, Energy Policy Act of 2005, Public Law No. 109-58, 109th Congress, August 8, 2005, https://www. congress.gov/109/plaws/publ58/PLAW-109publ58.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023). 44. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, “About the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy,” https://www.energy.gov/eere/about-office-energy-efficiency-and- renewable-energy (accessed February 28, 2023). 45. Ibid. 46. See note 41, supra. 47. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 19, 23, 43, and 49. 48. See U.S. Department of Energy, Grid Deployment Office, “About Us,” https://www.energy.gov/gdo/about-us (accessed February 13, 2023). 49. U.S. Department of Energy, Grid Deployment Office, “Building a Better Grid Initiative,” https://www.energy. gov/gdo/building-better-grid-initiative (accessed February 13, 2023). 50. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 2, 19, 21, 23, and 84. “The FY 2023 Budget Request to Congress proposes to split the Electricity appropriation account into two accounts: Electricity and Grid Deployment Office (GDO). Had the proposed FY 2023 structure been in place in FY 2021 and FY 2022, the $7,000,000 shown under the Electricity account’s Transmission Permitting and Technical Assistance (TPTA) program would have appeared under Grid Technical Assistance in GDO and the $3,000,000 shown under Program Direction in the Electricity account represents the estimated share of Electricity PD funding associated with TPTA and would have appeared under Program Direction in GDO.” Ibid., p. 84, note. 51. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, “About Us: Our Mission,” https://www. energy.gov/oced/about-us (accessed February 13, 2023). 52. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, p. 6. 53. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, “About Us: Our Story,” https://www. energy.gov/oced/about-us (accessed February 28, 2023). 54. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, “OCED Project Portfolio,” https://www. energy.gov/oced/office-clean-energy-demonstrations (accessed February 28, 2023). 55. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Volume 3, Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response, Federal Energy Management Program, Grid Deployment Office, Indian Energy Policy & Programs, Loan Programs, Manufacturing & Energy Supply Chains, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, Petroleum Reserves, Power Marketing Administrations, State and Community Energy Programs, April 2022, p. 104, https://www.energy. gov/sites/default/files/2022-09/doe-fy2023-budget-volume-3-v2.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 56. See, for example, ibid., pp. 104 and 107. 57. U.S. Department of Energy, Loan Program Office, “LPO Year in Review 2022: New Legislation,” January 5, 2023, https://www.energy.gov/lpo/articles/lpo-year-review-2022 (accessed February 28, 2023). Emphases in original. 58. H.R. 6256, To Ensure That Goods Made with Forced Labor in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of the People’s Republic of China Do Not Enter the United States Market, and for Other Purposes, Public Law No. 117-78, 117th Congress, December 23, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ78/PLAW-117publ78.pdf (accessed February 28, 2023). 59. H.R. 2272, America COMPETES Act, Public Law 110–69, 110th Congress, August 9, 2007, § 5012, https://www. congress.gov/110/plaws/publ69/PLAW-110publ69.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 60. Ibid., § 5012(c)(1). 61. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, March 2022, p. 103.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Strong

Vector: 67%

Pages: 422-424AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill directly supports the Project 2025 goal of developing a strategy to identify and access critical resources to advance U.S. economic and national security interests, focusing on global critical minerals and rare earth elements. While it does not address climate reparations, Arctic/Antarctic reforms, or DESAS strengthening, its core objectives align closely with the resource‑identification and energy‑security components of the policy."

Key themes:critical mineralsresource assessmentenergy securityeconomic interestsnational security

— 389 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions policy and how it affects foreign policy, as well as the international energy landscape and how it affects U.S. national and economic security. l Develop a strategy for identifying and accessing resources and advancing U.S. economic interests. America has recently become a net energy exporter, but it still imports large amounts of essential energy resources such as oil and natural gas as well as such materials as uranium (including yellowcake), lithium, certain rare earth minerals, and energy generation and transmission components and technology. The United States needs a clear understanding of its global energy and economic interests and a strategy for protecting them. l Oppose “climate reparations.” During the November 2022 United Nations climate conference in Egypt, the Biden Administration and other “developed” countries agreed to provide “climate reparations” to developing countries for the harm allegedly caused by the developed countries’ use of fossil fuel.76 A reparations slush fund administered by a non-U.S. organization provides no assurance that U.S. interests will be protected and should not be supported in any form. New Policies l Identify U.S. energy security interests and promote American energy dominance. To this end, IA should work closely with the DESAS Office of Policy on the National Energy Security Strategy. l Strengthen the new DESAS vis-à-vis the Department of State. The State Department’s Bureau of Energy Resources has generally excluded IA from serious discussions of international affairs to the detriment of DOE and broader interagency policy development. In addition, DOE embassy representatives are generally excluded from giving policy advice to senior diplomats and are used merely as sources of information instead of being active advocates for the Secretary’s priorities. The Secretary of Energy is a senior member of the President’s National Security Council and should function as such. The DOE’s Deputy Secretaries, Under Secretaries, and Assistant Secretaries should be guaranteed representation at all Deputies and Policy Coordination Committee meetings. In addition, senior political and career staff should hold positions on the NSC staff equivalent to their counterparts at State, Defense, Treasury, and the Intelligence Community (IC). DESAS billets should replace State Department Bureau of Energy Resources billets at the relevant posts worldwide. — 390 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Stop “climate reparations.” The President should refuse to provide climate reparations under an unratified treaty, and IA should encourage other countries to reconsider their desire to provide reparations. ARCTIC ENERGY OFFICE (AE) Mission/Overview AE was established during the Trump Administration to create a central office overseeing U.S. Arctic interests in Alaska and the other Arctic nations in response to the growing strategic sensitivity of this geographic region and the natural resources it contains. It “serves as the principal advisor to the Under Secretary on all domestic Arctic issues, including energy, science, and national security.”77 Needed Reforms In October 2022, the Biden Administration released its National Strategy for the Arctic Region.78 Although recognizing national security threats in the Arctic, it also focuses heavily on climate change, sustainability, and international cooperation. The United States must establish a strategic plan to promote its national security, energy, and economic interests in the Arctic. An analysis and plan to support the responsible development of Alaska’s energy assets should be a priority. New Policies l Defend American interests in the Arctic Circle. The next Administration needs to define American strategic and economic interests in the Arctic Circle. AE should help to identify those interests, as well as threats posed by countries like Russia and China, and develop appropriate policy options for the President’s consideration. l Ensure that AE is clearly focused. In particular, this means identifying U.S. energy interests in the Arctic Circle, identifying foreign government and commercial interests and activity in the region, and ensuring that the United States does not forgo important energy and national security interests in the Arctic. l Expand AE’s operations in Alaska. AE’s operations in Alaska should be expanded to encompass broader national energy security interests in the region including rare earths, oil, and natural gas. AE should also be the lead for DOE Antarctic operations as a counter to growing Russian and Chinese interest in Antarctic resources.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Strong

Vector: 66%

Pages: 443-445AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill's focus on assessing global critical mineral resources, foreign control, and international cooperation directly supports the Project 2025 objective of strengthening Department of Energy-led energy security and ensuring reliable supplies for clean energy transitions."

Key themes:critical mineralsenergy securityDepartment of Energyinternational cooperationsupply chain resilience

— 410 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise ENDNOTES 1. Sean Michael Kerner, “Colonial Pipeline Hack Explained: Everything You Need to Know,” TechTarget, April, 26, 2022, https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/feature/Colonial-Pipeline-hack-explained-Everything-you-need-to- know (accessed February 13, 2023). 2. Jacob Knutson, “N.C. Power Company: Substation Repairs Complete After Alleged Attack,” Axios, December 7, 2022, https://www.axios.com/2022/12/07/duke-energy-moore-county-substation-attack (accessed February 13, 2023). 3. H.R. 3684, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law No. 117-58, 117th Congress, November 15, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ58/PLAW-117publ58.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 4. H.R. 5376, Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117-169, August 16, 2022, https://www.congress. gov/117/plaws/publ169/PLAW-117publ169.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 5. S. 826, Department of Energy Organization Act, Public Law 95-91, 95th Congress, August 4, 1977, https://www. congress.gov/95/statute/STATUTE-91/STATUTE-91-Pg565.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 6. DOE also promotes domestic energy security by providing research and coordination between government and the private sector on physical and cyber-related threats to energy security. This work should continue and be enhanced under the next Administration. 7. Elimination of OE, NE, FE, and EERE might also be considered; however, there are benefits from having political appointees run separate offices. Specifically, separate program offices can focus on threats that are unique to their energy areas, and having political appointees run separate offices helps to ensure focused, unobstructed pursuit of policy objectives. 8. H.R. 6586, Natural Gas Act, Public Law No. 75-688, 75th Congress, June 21, 1938, https://govtrackus. s3.amazonaws.com/legislink/pdf/stat/52/STATUTE-52-Pg821a.pdf (accessed February 24, 2023). 9. U.S. Department of Energy, “Promoting Energy Justice,” https://www.energy.gov/promoting-energy-justice (accessed February 13, 2023). 10. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Economic Impact and Diversity, “Justice40 Initiative,” https://www. energy.gov/diversity/justice40-initiative (accessed February 13, 2023). 11. Press release, “DOE Releases First-Ever Plan to Advance Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility,” U.S. Department of Energy, September 1, 2022, https://www.energy.gov/articles/doe-releases-first-ever-plan- advance-diversity-equity-inclusion-and-accessibility (accessed February 14, 2023). 12. Including the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Science Foundation, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, etc. 13. Table, “Environmental Management: Lifecycle Cost by Project Baseline Summary (PBS) ($M),” in U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Volume 6, Environmental Management, April 2022, p. 53, https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/ files/2022-09/doe-fy2023-budget-volume-6-em-v3.pd (accessed February 13, 2023). 14. KPMG, “Independent Auditor’s Report, United States Department of Energy Nuclear Waste Fund Annual Financial Report as of and for the Years Ended September 30, 2022 and 2021,” November 8, 2022, p. 8, in U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Inspector General, Office of Cyber Assessments and Data Analytics, Audit Report: The Department of Energy Nuclear Waste Fund’s Fiscal Year 2022 Financial Statement Audit, DOE- OIG-23-05, November 2022, p. 10, https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/DOE-OIG-23-05.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 15. See Patty-Jane Geller, “U.S. Nuclear Weapons,” in 2023 Index of U.S. Military Strength, ed. Dakota L. Wood (Washington: The Heritage Foundation, 2023), pp. 481–506, http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2022/ Military_Index/2023_IndexOfUSMilitaryStrength.pdf. 16. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, March 2022, pp. 9, 21, 23, and 43, https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/ files/2022-03/doe-fy2023-budget-in-brief-v2.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 17. H.R. 4346, CHIPS and Science Act, Public Law No. 117-167, 117th Congress, August 9, 2022, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ167/PLAW-117publ167.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 18. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response, “About Us,” https://www.energy.gov/ceser/ceser-mission (accessed February 27, 2023). — 411 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions 19. President Donald J. Trump, Executive Order 13920, “Securing the United States Bulk-Power System,” May 1, 2020, in Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 86 (May 4, 2020), pp. 26595–26599, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/ pkg/FR-2020-05-04/pdf/2020-09695.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 20. 18 U.S. Code § 824a(c), https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/16/824a (accessed February 27, 2023). 21. Report No. 117-98, Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2022, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. House of Representatives, 117th Cong. 1st Sess., July 20, 2021, p. 6, https:// www.congress.gov/117/crpt/hrpt98/CRPT-117hrpt98.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 22. H.R. 3684, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law No. 11-58, 117th Congress, November 15, 2021, Division J, Title III. 23. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, p. 7. 24. Timothy Gardner, “White House Asks Congress for $500 mln to Modernize Oil Reserve,” Reuters, November 16, 2022, https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-oil-spr-idAFL1N32C36I (accessed February 13, 2023). 25. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Electricity, “Our History,” https://www.energy.gov/oe/about-us/our- history (accessed February 13, 2023). 26. Press release, “Secretary of Energy Signs Order to Mitigate Security Risks to the Nation’s Electric Grid,” U.S. Department of Energy, December 17, 2021, https://www.energy.gov/articles/secretary-energy-signs-order- mitigate-security-risks-nations-electric-grid (accessed February 13, 2023). 27. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Electricity, “Revocation of Prohibition Order Securing Critical Defense Facilities,” Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 76 (April 22, 2021), pp. 21308–21309, https://www.govinfo.gov/ content/pkg/FR-2021-04-22/pdf/2021-08483.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 28. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 19 and 61. 29. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy, “About Us,” https://www.energy.gov/ne/about-us (accessed February 13, 2023). 30. H.R. 3809, Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Public Law No. 97-425, 97th Congress, January 7, 1983, https:// www.congress.gov/97/statute/STATUTE-96/STATUTE-96-Pg2201.pdf (accessed February 24, 2023). 31. The Heritage Foundation, “Budget Blueprint for Fiscal Year 2023: Reduce the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy,” https://www.heritage.org/budget/pages/recommendations/1.270.127.html. 32. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 23 and 58. 33. 42 USC § 16291, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/16291 (accessed February 27, 2023). 34. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, “About Us: Mission,” https:// www.energy.gov/fecm/mission (accessed February 13, 2023). 35. U.S. Government Accountability Office, Carbon Capture and Storage: Actions Needed to Improve DOE Management of Demonstration Projects, GAO-22-105111, December2021, https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22- 105111.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 36. International Energy Agency, The Role of Critical Minerals in Clean Energy Transitions, World Energy Outlook Special Report, revised March 2022, https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/ffd2a83b-8c30-4e9d-980a- 52b6d9a86fdc/TheRoleofCriticalMineralsinCleanEnergyTransitions.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 37. See 42 U.S. Code § 16291. 38. 42 U.S. Code Ch. 55, §§ 4321–4347, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/chapter-55 (accessed February 27, 2023). 39. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, “Categorical Exclusions from Environmental Review,” Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Request for Comment, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 87 (May 7, 2021), pp. 24514–24516, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-05-07/pdf/2021-09675.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023), and Nuclear Regulatory Commission, “Categorical Exclusions from Environmental Review,” Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Reopening of Comment Period, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 160 (August 23, 2021), pp. 47032–47033, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-08-23/pdf/2021-18058.pdf (accessed February 27, 2023). 40. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Department of Energy FY 2023 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, pp. 19, 21, 23, and 52.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Moderate

Vector: 66%

Pages: 425-427AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on assessing global critical mineral resources and international cooperation, which aligns with Project 2025's emphasis on securing strategic resources and advancing national security through technology and resource dominance, though it does not directly address DOE R&D, technology transfer, or National Lab reforms outlined in the policy."

Key themes:national securityresource developmentstrategic materialsinternational cooperationeconomic competitiveness

— 393 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions l Ensure that R&D funds are used for projects that protect and advance that edge. l Ensure that successful advances, with a focus on new natural resource development technologies, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and space, are transferred swiftly to American interests in the private sector. New Policies l Focus on benefits to Americans. OTT’s operations should be based on the recognition that the new technologies generated by American taxpayers’ investment in DOE are a significant national security asset rather than some neutral scientific gift to humanity. l Increase oversight and coordination. OTT needs to be vigilant in overseeing and coordinating OTT offices associated with each National Lab. For security and economic espionage reasons, the work funded by the American people needs to be protected, and when commercialized, it needs to go to American businesses. OFFICE OF SCIENCE (SC) Mission/Overview The Office of Science (SC) supports and oversees research facilities and pro- grams that cover basic science through its application to the demonstration and deployment of energy technologies. SC oversees 10 of the 17 DOE National Labs and 28 major federal research user facilities. Its mission is to preserve U.S. leader- ship in science, fund and perform basic research, and provide the scientific facilities that the private sector is unable or unwilling to provide. New initiatives include quantum information sciences and artificial intelligence. SC is led by a Senate-con- firmed Director at the Assistant Secretary level and has eight program offices.82 Needed Reforms The next conservative President should commit the United States to scientific dominance to support national and economic security, especially in light of similar efforts by China. To aid in this effort, the Office of Science should: l Return to its primary mission: nonpartisan and basic science. SC’s mission should be international leadership in basic and early applied science and provision of world-leading facilities for this work. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Inflation Reduction Act mark the major — 394 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise reorientation of DOE primarily from defense applications in the NNSA and basic and early applied science across SC and the applied offices to a massive federal research, development, demonstration, and commercialization body.83 Distraction from SC’s basic science mission should be prevented. l Increase the level of accountability. The National Laboratories need to be more directly accountable to the Secretary of Energy and Congress for their work and management. New Policies l Commit to U.S. science dominance. The United States is losing its dominance in scientific discoveries and technological development. China and other adversaries have been stealing American science and technology for years and are now on the verge of dominating science—a development that is fraught with negative strategic and economic implications for the United States. The next Administration must commit itself to ensuring that the U.S. continues to dominate scientific discovery and technological advancement. l Refocus on mission and eliminate duplication and waste. The Administration should work with Congress to rationalize the National Lab network to meet specific national objectives (such as the NNSA laboratories’ role in national defense) and conduct basic research that the private sector would not otherwise conduct. Activities that duplicate those of other government agencies or the private sector should be eliminated. l Properly manage the National Labs’ contributions to the private sector. SC should improve private-sector access to the National Labs, through programs like the GAIN voucher program and consistent with national security considerations, while ensuring that the economic benefits of taxpayer-funded technologies flow back to taxpayers through patent- review sharing or a revolving fund. Budget The Office of Science was appropriated slightly more than $7 billion in FY 2021, and DOE requested slightly less than $7.8 billion for FY 2023.84 OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (EM) Mission/Overview The Office of Environmental Management’s mission is to “complete the safe cleanup of [the] environmental legacy resulting from decades of nuclear

Department of Defense

Weak

Vector: 65%

Pages: 158-160AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on assessing and managing critical mineral resources to support national security, while the Project 2025 DoD section centers on nuclear weapons production, missile defense, and arms control. Both share a national security theme and concern for strategic materials, but the bill does not directly address nuclear arsenals, missile systems, or defense infrastructure outlined in the policy."

Key themes:national securitystrategic mineralsdefense readinessresource assessmentinternational cooperation

— 125 — Department of Defense 1. Accelerate the effort to restore plutonium pit production, which is essential both for modern warhead programs and for recapitalizing the stockpile. 2. Continue to invest in rebuilding infrastructure, including facilities at the National Laboratories that support nuclear weapons development. 3. Restore readiness to test nuclear weapons at the Nevada National Security Site to ensure the ability of the U.S. to respond quickly to asymmetric technology surprises. l Correctly orient arms control. The U.S. should agree to arms control agreements only if they help to advance the interests of the U.S. and its allies. 1. Reject proposals for nuclear disarmament that are contrary to the goal of bolstering deterrence. 2. Pursue arms control as a way to secure the national security interests of the U.S. and its allies rather than as an end in itself. 3. Prepare to compete in order to secure U.S. interests should arms control efforts continue to fail. MISSILE DEFENSE Missile defense is a critical component of the U.S. national security architecture. It can help to deter attack by instilling doubt that an attack will work as intended, take adversary “cheap shots” off the table, and limit the perceived value of mis- siles as tools of coercion. It also allows space for diplomacy during a crisis and can protect U.S. and allied forces, critical assets, and populations if deterrence fails.41 Adversaries are relying increasingly on missiles to achieve their aims. l China and Russia, in addition to their vast and growing ballistic missile inventories, are deploying new hypersonic glide vehicles and investing in new ground-launched, air-launched, and sea-launched cruise missiles that uniquely challenge the United States in different domains. l North Korea has pursued an aggressive missile testing program and is becoming increasingly belligerent toward South Korea and Japan. l Iran continues to maintain a missile arsenal that is capable of striking U.S. and allied assets in the Middle East and Europe, and its rocket launches demonstrate that it either has or is developing the ability to build ICBMs. — 126 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Missile defense has been underprioritized and underfunded in recent years. In light of these growing threats, the incoming Administration should treat missile defense as a top priority. Needed Reforms l Champion the benefits of missile defense. Despite its deterrence and damage-limitation benefits, opponents argue incorrectly that U.S. missile defense is destabilizing because it threatens Russian and Chinese second- strike capabilities. 1. Reject claims made by the Left that missile defense is destabilizing while acknowledging that Russia and China are developing their own advanced missile defense systems. 2. Commit to keeping homeland missile defense off the table in any arms control negotiations with Russia and China.42 l Strengthen homeland ballistic missile defense. The United States currently deploys 44 Ground-Based Interceptors (GBIs) as part of its Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system to defend the homeland against North Korea, but as North Korea improves its missile program, this system is at risk of falling behind the threat.43 1. Buy at least 64 of the Next Generation Interceptor (NGI), which is more advanced than the GBI, for an eventual uniform fleet of interceptors.44 The Biden Administration currently plans to buy only 20. 2. Consider additional steps to strengthen the GMD system such as a layered missile defense or a third interceptor site on the East Coast. l Increase the development of regional missile defense. As the Ukraine conflict amply demonstrates, U.S. regional missile defense capabilities are very limited. The United States has been unable to supply our partners reliably with any capabilities, and the number and types of regional missile defense platforms are less than the U.S. needs for its own defense. The U.S. should prioritize procurement of more regional defense systems such as Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), Standard Missile-3, and Patriot missiles. l Change U.S. missile defense policy. Historically, the U.S. has chosen to rely solely on deterrence to address the Russian and Chinese ballistic

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. Cornyn, John

Promoting Resilient Buildings Act

119/s/388

A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 620 East Pecan Boulevard in McAllen, Texas, as the "Agent Raul H. Gonzalez Jr. Memorial Post Office".

119/s/917

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026

119/s/1071

Back to All Bills