Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/s/821

Last Updated: July 28, 2026

Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act

S. 821, 119th Congress.

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

70% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of State" section, p. 208-210 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. 52.

April 27, 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:

**Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act (S 821): A Regulatory Burden with Limited Upside**

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I'll dissect the Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act, a bill that exemplifies the inefficiencies of democratic governance.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill aims to increase reporting requirements for the Department of State's guidelines on relations with Taiwan. This added bureaucracy will supposedly enhance transparency and accountability in U.S.-Taiwan relations.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends Section 315 of the Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020, mandating:

1. Periodic reviews (every five years) of Department of State guidance on Taiwan relations. 2. Updated reports to Congress within 90 days after each review.

These changes will create a new layer of regulatory oversight, increasing the administrative burden on the Department of State and potentially stifling innovation in U.S.-Taiwan diplomacy.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

1. The Department of State: Will face increased reporting requirements and bureaucratic hurdles. 2. Taiwan: May benefit from enhanced transparency and accountability in U.S.-Taiwan relations, but this is uncertain. 3. Private sector entities (like mine): Will be indirectly affected by the bill's regulatory implications, potentially leading to increased compliance costs and reduced competitiveness.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

1. **Regulatory burden:** The bill will add to the already cumbersome regulatory environment, hindering efficient decision-making and innovation in U.S.-Taiwan relations. 2. **Limited upside:** The benefits of increased transparency and accountability are uncertain and may not outweigh the costs of added bureaucracy. 3. **Opportunity cost:** Resources devoted to compliance with this bill could be better spent on more pressing issues or innovative initiatives.

In conclusion, the Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act is a prime example of how democratic governance can lead to inefficient and burdensome regulations. As a visionary entrepreneur, I would advise policymakers to focus on deregulation and streamlining processes to foster innovation and growth.

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 Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act (S. 821) aims to increase transparency and reporting regarding the Department of State's guidelines on relations with Taiwan. Remember when we learned about the importance of checks and balances? This bill is trying to ensure that the executive branch is held accountable for its actions.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill amends Section 315 of the Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020, which was passed during the previous administration. The changes include:

* Requiring the Secretary of State to review and update guidance on relations with Taiwan every five years * Mandating that the updated reports be submitted to Congress within 90 days after completing a review * Expanding the scope of information required in these reports

These provisions are meant to increase transparency and ensure that the Department of State is meeting its goals and objectives regarding Taiwan.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The main parties affected by this bill are:

* The Department of State, which will be responsible for conducting reviews and submitting updated reports * Congress, specifically the Committee on Foreign Relations in the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs in the House of Representatives, which will receive these reports * Taiwan, as the subject of the guidelines and reports

**Potential Impact & Implications** If passed, this bill could lead to increased transparency and accountability in the executive branch's dealings with Taiwan. However, it may also create additional bureaucratic hurdles for the Department of State.

Now, I know some of you might be thinking, "Why is this necessary?" Well, as we discussed in class, the system of checks and balances is designed to prevent any one branch of government from becoming too powerful. This bill is an attempt to ensure that the executive branch is not overstepping its authority.

I hope this summary has been helpful. It's unfortunate that I have to explain these basic concepts to adults who should have learned them in middle school...

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

Folks, gather 'round! I've got the inside scoop on this so-called "Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act" (S 821). Now, at first glance, it seems like a harmless bill about increasing reporting requirements for the Department of State's Taiwan guidelines. But trust me, there's more to it than meets the eye.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The stated purpose is to provide increased transparency and accountability regarding the Department of State's guidance on relations with Taiwan. Sounds good, right? But what they're really trying to do is create a framework for the US government to exert more control over its interactions with Taiwan, all under the guise of "assurance" and "guidance."

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends Section 315 of the Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020 by requiring the Secretary of State to conduct periodic reviews (every five years) of the Department's guidance on relations with Taiwan. This includes reissuing updated guidelines to executive branch departments and agencies, as well as submitting reports to Congress. Now, here's where it gets interesting: these reports must include information on how the updated guidance meets certain "goals and objectives" described in subsection (b). What are those goals and objectives, you ask? Ah, that's the million-dollar question!

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The main players here are the Department of State, Congress, and Taiwan itself. But let's not forget about China – they're watching this closely, folks! This bill is a clear attempt to strengthen US-Taiwan relations, which will undoubtedly ruffle some feathers in Beijing.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, I know what you're thinking: "What's the big deal? It's just more reporting requirements." Ah, but that's where you're wrong! This bill is a Trojan horse for increased US involvement in Taiwan's affairs. Think about it: with these new guidelines and reports, the US government will have even more leverage to influence Taiwan's policies and decisions. And what about China's response? You can bet they'll be watching this closely, waiting for an opportunity to pounce.

But here's the thing: there's something fishy going on here. Why are they pushing so hard for increased reporting requirements all of a sudden? What are they trying to hide? I've got my eyes on this one, folks – mark my words, this bill is just the tip of the iceberg.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(With a healthy dose of sarcasm and performative outrage)

Folks, gather 'round! We've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here. The Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act - sounds like a real page-turner, doesn't it? (wink) But don't be fooled, this bill is all about one thing: freedom. That's right, the freedom to... report more stuff to Congress! (dramatic music plays)

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The main purpose of this bill is to increase reporting requirements for the Department of State regarding their guidelines on relations with Taiwan. Because, you know, we need more bureaucracy and red tape in our lives. The objective here is to ensure that the Secretary of State reviews and updates these guidelines every five years, and then reports back to Congress on how they're doing. Wow, I can barely contain my excitement.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill amends Section 315 of the Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020 (because who doesn't love a good amendment?) to include new requirements for periodic reviews and updated reports. It's like a never-ending cycle of reporting and reviewing - it's enough to make your head spin! The Secretary of State will now have to review their guidelines every five years, reissue them to executive branch departments and agencies, and then submit an updated report to Congress within 90 days. Talk about a paperwork nightmare!

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

Well, this bill affects the Department of State, obviously. But also, it's going to impact all those poor souls who have to deal with the increased reporting requirements - I'm talking about you, congressional staffers! And let's not forget about Taiwan itself - they're probably just thrilled to be at the center of this bureaucratic storm.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

Now, here's where things get really interesting. This bill could potentially... (dramatic pause) ...increase transparency and accountability in our relations with Taiwan! But let's be real, folks, it's probably just going to lead to more bureaucratic red tape and inefficiency. I mean, who needs actual policy changes when you can just report on the same old guidelines every five years? It's a masterclass in doing nothing while looking busy.

And there you have it, folks - the Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act: because freedom isn't free, but reporting sure is! (wink)

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this farce and get to the real diagnosis.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act (S 821) claims to provide "increased reporting" regarding Department of State guidelines on relations with Taiwan. How quaint. In reality, this bill is a thinly veiled attempt to appease the Taiwanese lobby and pander to the China-hawks in Congress.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends Section 315 of the Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020 by requiring the Secretary of State to review and update guidance on relations with Taiwan every five years. Oh, wow. A whole new layer of bureaucratic red tape to ensure that our diplomats are sufficiently micromanaged.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: the Taiwanese government, the Chinese Communist Party (which will undoubtedly view this as a provocation), and various defense contractors who'll benefit from increased tensions in the region.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of "legislative placebo." It creates the illusion of action while accomplishing nothing meaningful. The real impact will be to further entangle our foreign policy in a web of bureaucratic inefficiency and partisan posturing.

Let's not forget the underlying disease driving this legislation: the insatiable hunger for campaign contributions from defense contractors and the Taiwanese lobby. This bill is a symptom of a larger problem – the corrupting influence of money in politics and the perpetual need for politicians to grandstand on foreign policy issues they barely understand.

In short, S 821 is a masterclass in legislative obfuscation, designed to impress the gullible while serving the interests of the powerful. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have better things to do than waste my time on this farce.

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

**Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act (S. 821)**

**Main Purpose and Objectives:** The Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act aims to increase transparency and accountability in the Department of State's guidance on relations with Taiwan. The bill seeks to ensure that the Secretary of State regularly reviews and updates its guidelines, providing Congress with timely reports on these efforts.

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

* Amends Section 315 of the Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020 to require the Secretary of State to conduct periodic reviews (at least every five years) of the Department's guidance on relations with Taiwan. * Mandates the reissuance of updated guidance to executive branch departments and agencies after each review. * Requires the submission of an updated report to Congress within 90 days of completing a review, which must include: + Information required under existing law (subsection c). + A description of how the updated guidance meets the goals and objectives described in subsection b.

**Affected Parties and Stakeholders:**

* The Department of State * Executive branch departments and agencies * Congress (specifically, the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs) * Taiwan government and stakeholders

**Potential Impact and Implications:** The bill's provisions are likely to:

* Enhance transparency and accountability in the Department of State's guidance on relations with Taiwan. * Provide Congress with more regular and detailed information on the Department's efforts to implement its guidelines. * Support the development of a more consistent and coherent US policy towards Taiwan. * Potentially influence the dynamics of US-Taiwan relations, as well as regional security and diplomatic arrangements.

Overall, the Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act seeks to promote greater transparency and accountability in the Department of State's guidance on relations with Taiwan, ultimately contributing to a more informed and effective US foreign policy.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

I'm gonna break down this bill for ya, bro. The Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act (S 821) is all about keepin' it real with our relations with Taiwan, man.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The main goal of this bill is to increase transparency and accountability in the Department of State's guidelines on relations with Taiwan. It's like, we wanna make sure everyone's on the same page, bro. The bill aims to ensure that the Secretary of State regularly reviews and updates these guidelines, and reports back to Congress on how they're doin' it.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill amends Section 315 of the Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020 by adding some new requirements, dude. Now, the Secretary of State has to:

* Review and update the Department's guidelines on relations with Taiwan every five years * Reissue these guidelines to executive branch departments and agencies * Submit an updated report to Congress within 90 days after completing a review

These reports gotta include all the necessary info, bro, like how the updated guidance meets the goals and objectives described in the law.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill affects the Department of State, executive branch departments and agencies, and Congress, man. It's also relevant to Taiwan, since it's about our relations with them. Other stakeholders might include human rights groups, trade organizations, and anyone interested in US-Taiwan relations.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The potential impact is that this bill could lead to more transparency and accountability in our relations with Taiwan, bro. It could also help ensure that our policies are consistent with our values and goals. However, some might argue that it's just a bunch of bureaucratic red tape, man. Others might be concerned about how China will react to this, since they're always keepin' an eye on Taiwan.

Anyway, dude, that's the lowdown on S 821. It's all about keepin' it real with our relations with Taiwan and makin' sure everyone's on the same page. Catch you on the flip side!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**The Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act (S 821): A Bill Shaped by Special Interests**

The Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act, introduced by Senators Cornyn and Coons, is a bill that appears to be driven by the interests of defense contractors and pro-Taiwan lobby groups. On the surface, the bill aims to increase transparency and reporting requirements for the Department of State's guidelines on relations with Taiwan. However, a closer examination reveals that the legislation may serve to further entrench the influence of special interest groups in U.S.-Taiwan policy.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The bill's primary objective is to amend Section 315 of the Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020, which requires the Secretary of State to submit reports on the Department's guidelines for relations with Taiwan. The proposed changes aim to increase the frequency and scope of these reports, mandating periodic reviews and updated guidance every five years.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill introduces two key provisions:

1. **Expanded reporting requirements**: The Secretary of State must submit updated reports to Congress within 90 days of completing a review of the Department's guidelines on relations with Taiwan. 2. **Periodic reviews and reissuance of guidance**: The Secretary of State must conduct reviews of the Department's guidance every five years, reissuing updated guidance to executive branch departments and agencies.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The bill's provisions will primarily affect:

1. **Defense contractors**: Companies like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon Technologies, which have significant interests in Taiwan's defense industry, may benefit from increased transparency and reporting requirements. 2. **Pro-Taiwan lobby groups**: Organizations like the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA) and the Taiwanese American Community (TAC), which advocate for stronger U.S.-Taiwan ties, may see their influence expanded through this legislation.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The bill's passage could lead to:

1. **Increased U.S. military involvement in Taiwan**: By mandating more frequent reviews of guidelines on relations with Taiwan, the bill may create opportunities for defense contractors to lobby for increased military cooperation and arms sales. 2. **Further entrenchment of special interest groups**: The legislation may solidify the influence of pro-Taiwan lobby groups in shaping U.S.-Taiwan policy, potentially leading to a more hawkish approach towards China.

**Follow the Money**

Senators Cornyn and Coons have received significant campaign contributions from defense contractors and pro-Taiwan lobby groups. For example:

* Senator Cornyn has received over $100,000 from Lockheed Martin's PAC since 2015. * Senator Coons has received over $50,000 from the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA) since 2013.

These contributions suggest that special interest groups may have played a role in shaping this legislation.

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 3 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

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

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

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of State

Moderate

Vector: 63%

Pages: 208-210AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill shares Project 2025's focus on congressional oversight and transparency in State Department actions, particularly regarding Taiwan/China policy, but it does not address the core Project 2025 objectives of treaty review, C-175 authority revocation, or freezing negotiations."

Key themes:congressional oversightTaiwan/China policytransparency and accountability

— 175 — Department of State numerous logistical challenges in negotiating, approving, and implementing trea- ties and agreements. This is particularly true under the Biden Administration. For example, under the Biden Administration, the State Department was considered sufficiently unreliable in terms of alignment and effectiveness such that its political leadership invoked its Circular 175 (C-175) authority to delegate its diplomatic capacity to other agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security. At time of publication, the State Department is negotiating (or seeking to nego- tiate) large-scale, sovereignty-eroding agreements that could come at considerable economic and other costs to the American people. Although such agreements should be evaluated and approved as are treaties, the Biden Administration is likely to simply call them “agreements.” The Biden State Department not only approves but also enforces treaties that have not been ratified by the U.S. Senate. This practice must be thoroughly reviewed—and most likely jettisoned. The next President should recalibrate how the State Department handles trea- ties and agreements, primarily by restoring constitutionality to these processes. He or she should direct the Secretary of State to freeze any ongoing treaty or inter- national agreement negotiations and assess whether those efforts align with the new President’s foreign policy direction. The next Administration should also direct the secretary to order an immediate stand-down on enforcement of any treaties that have not been ratified by the Senate, and order a thorough review of the degree to which such enforcement has impacted the department’s functions, policies, and use of resources. The Secretary of State, in cooperation with the Office of the Attorney General and the White House Counsel’s Office, should also conduct a review to identify “agreements” that are really treaty commitments within the ordinary public mean- ing of the Constitution,6 and suspend compliance pending presidential transmittal of those agreements to the Senate for advice and consent. The next Administration should also move to withdraw from treaties that have been under Senate consider- ation for 20 years or more, with the understanding that those treaties are unlikely to be ratified. Under circumstances in which ratification of a stale treaty before the Senate still serves national interests, the treaty letter of transmittal and sub- mission should be updated for current circumstances. The Secretary of State must revoke most outstanding C-175 authorities that have been granted to other agen- cies during previous Administrations, although such revocations should be closely coordinated with the White House for logistical reasons. Coordinate with Other Agencies. Interagency engagement in this new environment must be similarly adjusted to mirror presidential direction. Indeed, coordination among federal agencies is challenging even in the most well-oiled Administrations. Although such coordination is inescapable and sometimes produc- tive, agencies tend to leverage each other’s resources in ways that occasionally have off-mission consequences for the agency or agencies with the resources. Ideally, the — 176 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Secretary of State should work as part of an agile foreign policy team along with the National Security Advisor, the Secretary of Defense, and other agency heads to flesh out and advance the President’s foreign policy. Bureaucratic stovepipes of the past should be less important than commitment to, and achievement of, the President’s foreign policy agenda. The State Department’s role in these interagency discussions must reflect the President’s clear direction and disallow resources and tools to be used in any way that detracts from the presidentially directed mission. Coordinate with Congress. Congress has both the statutory and appropri- ations authority to impact the State Department’s operations and has a strong interest in key aspects of American foreign policy. The department must therefore take particular care in its interaction with Congress, since poor interactions with Congress, regardless of intentions, could trigger congressional pushback or have other negative impacts on the President’s agenda. This will require particularly strong leadership of the Department of State’s Bureau of Legislative Affairs. The Secretary of State and political leadership should ensure full coordination with the White House regarding congressional engage- ment on any State Department responsibility. This may lead to, for example, the President authorizing the State Department to engage with Members of Congress and relevant committees on certain issues (including statutorily designated con- gressional consultations), but to remain “radio silent” on volatile or designated issues on which the White House wants to be the primary or only voice. All such authorized department engagements with Congress must be driven and handled by political appointees in conjunction with career officials who have the relevant expertise and are willing to work in concert with the President’s political appoin- tees on particularly sensitive matters. Respond Vigorously to the Chinese Threat. The State Department recently opened the Office of China Coordination, or “China House.” This office is intended to bring together experts inside and outside the State Department to coordinate U.S. government relations with China “and advance our vision for an open, inclu- sive international system.”7 Whether China House will streamline U.S. government communication, consensus, and action on China policy—given the presence of other agencies with strong competing or adverse interests—remains to be seen. The unit is dependent on adequate and competent staff being assigned by other bureaus within the State Department. Nonetheless, the concept is one a Republican Administration should support mutatis mutandis. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has been “at war” with the U.S. for decades. Now that this reality has been accepted throughout the gov- ernment, the State Department must be prepared to lead the U.S. diplomatic effort accordingly. The centralization of efforts in one place is critical to this end. Review Immigration and Domestic Security Requirements. Arguably, the department’s most noteworthy challenge on the global stage has been its handling

Agency for International Development

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 312-314AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on increasing transparency and accountability in the State Department's Taiwan-related guidance, while the Project 2025 USAID section concerns internal agency reforms, training, hiring, and ideological priorities. Both touch on foreign policy oversight and accountability, but they address different agencies and substantive areas, resulting only a weak thematic connection."

Key themes:foreign policyaccountabilitytransparencycongressional oversight

— 279 — Agency for International Development clearances, and other components of the hiring process that are necessary for immediate onboarding while coordinating with the White House to bring in new appointees and make internal career employee changes. On Day One, USAID should halt all agencywide training and replace it with training modules to advance the President’s agenda. The Administration should appoint a Senior Accountable Official (SAO) to report on the agency’s adherence to Administration policy priorities, including on Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance, critical race theory, climate change, gender, and diversity and inclusion. It should also create a program to staff hard-to-fill positions overseas. Finally, the Administration should create a recruiting program for veterans and other groups to participate in career job opportunities at USAID. Former mis- sionaries, veterans, members of diasporas, and faith community stakeholders with overseas experience should be recruited to work at USAID on Schedule A appoint- ments, as Institutional Services Contractors, as Personal Services Contractors, and as Foreign Service Officers. CONCLUSION The next conservative Administration will have a unique opportunity to realign U.S. foreign assistance with American national interests and the principles of good governance and more accurately reflect the U.S. taxpayer’s unmatched charita- ble desire to help those in need. It can build on a strong baseline of conservative reforms undertaken by the Trump Administration to counter Communist China’s strategy of world domination. However, this will require that bold steps are taken on Day One to undo the gross misuse of foreign aid by the current Administration to promote a radical ideology that is politically divisive at home and harms our global standing. AUTHOR’S NOTE: The preparation of this chapter was a collective enterprise of individuals involved in the 2025 Presidential Transition Project. All contributors to this chapter are listed at the front of this volume, but Dr. William Steiger, Bethany Kozma, and Dr. Alma Golden deserve special mention. The author assumes full responsibility for the content of this chapter, and no views expressed therein should be attributed to any other individual. — 280 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise ENDNOTES 1. S. 1983, Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, Public Law No. 87-195, 87th Congress, September 4, 1961, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-75/pdf/STATUTE-75-Pg424-2.pdf (accessed January 19, 2023). 2. U.S. Agency or International Development, “Journey to Self-Reliance Fact Sheet,” June 3, 2020, https://2017-2020.usaid.gov/documents/1870/journey-self-reliance-fact-sheet#:~:text=WHAT%20 IS%20THE%20JOURNEY%20TO%20SELF-RELIANCE%3F%20USAID%20is,greater%20 developmentoutcomesandworktowardatimewhenforeignassistanceisnolongernecessary.%20 It%E2%80%99s%20called%20the%20Journey%20to%20Self-Reliance (accessed March 17, 2023). 3. News release, “U.S. Agency for International Development Administrator Mark Green’s Interview with C-Span’s ‘Newsmakers’ Host Susan Swain and Washington Post’s Carl Morello and Wall Street Journal’s Ben Kesling,” U.S. Agency for International Development, November 26, 2018, https://2017-2020.usaid.gov/news- information/press-releases/nov-26-2018-administrator-mark-green-interview-cspan-newsmakers (accessed March 17, 2023). 4. U.S. Agency for International Development, Digital Strategy 2020–2024, https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/ files/2022-05/USAID_Digital_Strategy.pdf.pdf://www.usaid.gov/digital-development/usaid-digital-strategy (accessed March 17, 2023). 5. “U.S. Strategic Framework for the Indo-Pacific,” declassified in part by Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Robert C. O’Brien, January 5, 2021, https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp- content/uploads/2021/01/IPS-Final-Declass.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023), and Robert C. O’Brien, Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, “A Free and Open Indo-Pacific,” January 5, 2021, https:// trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/OBrien-Expanded-Statement.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 6. News Release, “Fact Sheet: Prioritizing Climate in Foreign Policy and National Security,” The White House, October 21, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/10/21/fact-sheet- prioritizing-climate-in-foreign-policy-and-national-security/ (accessed January 28, 2023). 7. U.S. Agency for International Development, Climate Strategy 2020–2030, April 2022, https://www.usaid.gov/ sites/default/files/2022-11/USAID-Climate-Strategy-2022-2030.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 8. Adva Saldinger, “USAID Steps Up ‘Languishing’ Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Effort,” Devex.com, December 15, 2021, http://www.devex.com/news/usaid-steps-up-languishing-diversity-equity-and-inclusion- effort-102316 (accessed January 28, 2021). 9. U.S. Agency for International Development, “Gender Equity and Women Empowerment,” https://www.usaid. gov/gender-equality-and-womens-empowerment (accessed January 30, 2023). 10. U.S. Agency for International Development, “Integrating Gender Equality and Female Empowerment in USAID’s Program Cycle,” ADS Chapter 25, partial revision date January 22, 2021, https://www.usaid.gov/sites/ default/files/2022-12/205.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 11. S. 137, Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance Act, 117th Congress, introduced January 28, 2021, https:// www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/137#:~:text=Protecting%20Life%20in%20Foreign%20 Assistance%20Act.%20This%20bill,support%20for%20an%20entity%20that%20conducts%20 such%20activities (accessed January 20, 2023), and H.R. 534, Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance Act, 117th Congress, introduced January 28, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house- bill/534?s=1&r=450 (accessed January 20, 2023). 12. President Joseph R. Biden Jr., “Memorandum on Protecting Women’s Health at Home and Abroad,” Memorandum for the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development, The White House, January 28, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/28/memorandum- on-protecting-womens-health-at-home-and-abroad/ (accessed March 18, 2023). 13. President Donald J. Trump, Executive Order 13926, “Advancing International Religious Freedom,” June 2, 2020, in Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 109 (June 5, 2020), pp. 34951–34953, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/ FR-2020-06-05/pdf/2020-12430.pdf (accessed January 20, 2023). 14. 22 Code of Federal Regulations § 205.1, https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-22/chapter-II/part-205 (accessed March 18, 2023). 15. Contributor’s notes from internal USAID meetings.

22

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 724-726AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on increasing transparency of State Department guidance on Taiwan relations, which tangentially relates to the Project 2025 Treasury goal of addressing the economic and financial aspects of the geopolitical threat from China, but it does not involve Treasury regulatory, fiscal, or competitiveness measures."

Key themes:China geopolitical threatTransparency and accountabilityUS foreign policy coordination

— 691 — 22 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY William L. Walton, Stephen Moore, and David R. Burton INTRODUCTION The U.S. Treasury Department has a broad regulatory and policy reach. The next Administration should make major policy changes to: (1) reduce regulatory impediments to economic growth that reduce living standards and endanger pros- perity; (2) reduce regulatory compliance costs that increase prices and cost jobs; (3) promote fiscal responsibility; (4) promote the international competitiveness of U.S. businesses; and (5) better respect the American people’s due process and privacy rights. These goals should be accomplished through: executive action (primar- ily treasury orders and treasury directives) and departmental reorganization; rulemakings; promoting constructive policies in Congress; actions in international organizations; and treaties. The primary subject matter focus of the incoming Administration’s Treasury Department should be: l Tax policy and tax administration; l Fiscal responsibility; l Improved financial regulation; l Addressing the economic and financial aspects of the geopolitical threat posed by China and other hostile countries;

Department of State

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 208-210AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill seeks to increase transparency and accountability in State Department guidance on Taiwan relations through periodic reviews and reporting, whereas Project 2025’s State Department section focuses on treaty constitutionality, freezing negotiations, and revoking C-175 authorities. Both share a theme of enhancing State Department oversight, but their substantive objectives differ significantly."

Key themes:Department of Statepolicy reviewtransparencyaccountabilityforeign policy

Department of the Treasury

Minimal

Vector: 62%

Pages: 733-735AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act focuses on enhancing transparency in U.S. State Department guidance regarding Taiwan relations, while the Project 2025 Treasury Department section addresses IT modernization, taxpayer rights, international tax agreements, and IRS budget reforms—there is no substantive thematic or policy overlap between the two."

— 700 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Deputy Commissioner should be replaced. A thorough review of IT contracts should be conducted. The Integrated Modernization Business Plan41 should be systematically reviewed and a version of it cost-effectively implemented. An over- sight board composed of private sector IT experts should be established and given the authority to conduct meaningful, contemporaneous oversight. TAXPAYER RIGHTS AND PRIVACY Legal protections for taxpayer rights and privacy have improved during the past three decades, but they remain inadequate.42 Congress should do more. For exam- ple, interest on overpayments should be the same as interest on underpayments rather than the government receiving a higher rate, the time limit for taxpayers to sue for damages for improper collection actions should be extended, the juris- diction of the Tax Court should be expanded, and the tax penalty system should be reformed by rationalizing the penalty structure and reducing some of the most punitive penalties.43 The Office of the Taxpayer Advocate was created by Congress to assist taxpay- ers when the IRS bureaucracy is unresponsive or negligent. About 1.7 percent of the IRS budget goes to this function.44 Each year, the Office handles more than 250,000 cases, helping taxpayers to deal with the IRS. Each year, it issues nearly 2000 taxpayer assistance orders, a form of administrative injunction, forcing the rest of the IRS to stop taking unwarranted actions.45 Congress should provide the Office of the Taxpayer Advocate with greater resources so that it may better assist taxpayers suffering from wrongful IRS actions. The office should also be strengthened by, among other things: l Ensuring that the National Taxpayer Advocate can make his or her own personnel decisions to protect its independence; l Ensuring NTA access to files, meetings, and other information needed to assist taxpayers or investigate IRS administrative practices; l Requiring the IRS to address the NTA’s comments in final rules and including the NTA in deliberations prior to the release of a proposed rule; and l Authorizing the NTA to file amicus briefs independently. Administrative Burden. In 2021, Americans filed 261 million tax returns and an astounding 4.7 billion information returns (such as Form W-2s, Form 1098s and Form 1099s).46 Complying with tax law costs Americans more than $400 bil- lion annually, or about 2 percent of gross domestic product.47 Although the IRS — 701 — Department of the Treasury administers these reporting programs, most of this expense is mandated by Con- gress, not the IRS. One of the primary reasons that Congress mandates ever-increasing infor- mation reporting is that the Treasury Department and the Joint Committee on Taxation staff almost always overestimate how much revenue will be gained from still more burdensome information reporting, and they do not estimate or report private compliance costs. Congress and the Treasury Department must undertake a serious review of the information reporting regime and reduce the burden on the public—especially small businesses. Small businesses suffer disproportionately from complexity and administrative burdens. Costs do not increase linearly with size, so elevated administrative costs have an adverse effect on the competitiveness of small firms. Budget. The operating budget of the IRS should be held constant in real terms. The resources allocated to the Office of the Taxpayer Advocate should be increased by at least 20 percent (about $44 million). The Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion should be closed. Provided that IT management is changed; an effective, well-considered implementation plan is adopted; and serious oversight is put in place, additional resources dedicated solely to IT modernization may be warranted. INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS The Treasury Department should withdraw from Senate consideration the Protocol Amending the Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters.48 The protocol will lead to substantially more transnational identity theft, crime, industrial espionage, financial fraud, and suppression of political oppo- nents and religious or ethnic minorities by authoritarian and corrupt governments, including China, Colombia, Nigeria, and Russia. Unlike the original multilateral convention, the amended convention is open to all governments—including many that are either hostile to the United States, have serious corruption problems, or have inadequate privacy protections. The new Administration should also oppose the multilateral Competent Authority Agreement on Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information.49 International organizations such as the OECD, the World Bank, and the Inter- national Monetary Fund espouse economic theories and policies that are inimical to American free market and limited government principles. The global elites who operate the IMF regularly advance higher taxes and big centralized government. The IMF has intervened in American policy debates—and has even recommended that the U.S. raise taxes. The IMF’s record of advancing global financial stability has been mixed at best. Its development assistance and lending programs in third- world countries have more often than not retarded growth rather than advancing it. The Treasury Department plays an important role in these international institutions and should force reforms and new policies. The U.S., however, should

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