A resolution congratulating the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team for winning the 2024 NCAA Division III Women's Soccer Championship.

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/sres/34

Last Updated: June 3, 2025

A resolution congratulating the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team for winning the 2024 NCAA Division III Women's Soccer Championship.

SRES. 34, 119th Congress.

The sponsor

Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO]

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

The money

$158,400 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Education" section, p. 365-367 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S329; text: CR S341)

January 22, 2025

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:

The inconsequential SRES 34. A feel-good resolution that serves no purpose other than to waste taxpayer dollars on frivolous congratulations. Let's dissect this meaningless exercise in bureaucratic inefficiency.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This resolution aims to congratulate the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team for winning the 2024 NCAA Division III Women's Soccer Championship. A hollow gesture, devoid of any tangible impact or policy significance.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** There are no provisions or changes to existing law. This resolution is a mere expression of sentiment, lacking any legislative teeth. It's a symbolic pat on the back for the team, with no actual consequences or benefits.

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

* The Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team (the recipients of this empty praise) * The university's administration and staff * The NCAA (which will likely use this resolution as a marketing tool)

However, the true stakeholders are the taxpayers who foot the bill for this pointless exercise.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The impact is negligible. This resolution will not create jobs, stimulate economic growth, or improve the lives of Americans. It's a waste of congressional time and resources. The only implication is that it reinforces the notion that government is often more focused on symbolic gestures than actual problem-solving.

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I must emphasize that this type of resolution is an affront to efficiency and innovation. In a world where technology and markets are rapidly evolving, our government should be focused on creating an environment conducive to growth and progress, not indulging in trivialities.

In conclusion, SRES 34 is a quintessential example of bureaucratic waste. It's a reminder that our system often prioritizes style over substance, and that true leaders must be willing to challenge the status quo to drive meaningful change.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this congressional resolution, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a bill like SRES 34 is a type of legislation that expresses the opinion or sentiment of Congress on a particular matter. In this case, it's a congratulatory resolution honoring the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team for winning the 2024 NCAA Division III Women's Soccer Championship.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of SRES 34 is to commend and congratulate the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team on their championship win. The resolution aims to recognize the achievements, contributions, and dedication of the players, coaches, management, and support staff of the team.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** There are no changes to existing law proposed in this resolution. It's simply a ceremonial gesture, as I'm sure you recall from our discussions on the different types of bills in Congress. Remember when we learned about joint resolutions, concurrent resolutions, and simple resolutions? This is an example of a simple resolution, which only requires approval by one chamber (in this case, the Senate).

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

* The Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team * The university's alumni, students, and faculty * The coaching staff and support staff of the team * The Secretary of the Senate (who is tasked with transmitting an enrolled copy of the resolution to the specified individuals)

**Potential Impact & Implications:** As a congratulatory resolution, SRES 34 has no binding effect or significant policy implications. It's merely a symbolic gesture to acknowledge the achievements of the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team. However, it may have some indirect benefits, such as boosting morale and recognition for the team and the university.

Now, I hope this summary was clear and concise enough for you. As we covered in 8th grade civics class, congressional resolutions like SRES 34 are an important part of the legislative process, even if they don't always have a direct impact on policy.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

Folks, gather 'round! I've got the scoop on SRES 34, and it's not just about congratulating some soccer team. No, no, no! This bill is a Trojan horse, hiding in plain sight.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

On the surface, this resolution appears to be a feel-good gesture, acknowledging the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team for winning the 2024 NCAA Division III Women's Soccer Championship. But, my friends, don't be fooled! The real purpose is to create a distraction while they sneak in some shady provisions.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

Now, let's decode the bill:

* Section (1) commends the team, but what about the language used? "Commends" sounds innocent enough, but it's actually a clever way of establishing a precedent for future government involvement in sports. Think about it: if they can commend a soccer team, why not control them? * Section (2) recognizes the achievements of players, coaches, and staff. This is where things get interesting. By acknowledging their contributions, the government is essentially setting up a framework for future "recognition" programs – aka surveillance and monitoring. * Sections (3) to (5) are just window dressing, congratulating everyone involved. But what about the request to transmit an enrolled copy of this resolution to specific individuals? That's right; they're creating a paper trail, establishing connections between government officials and university administrators.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

Who benefits from this bill?

* The Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team: They get a pat on the back, but also become unwitting pawns in the government's game. * University administrators: They receive recognition and potentially gain influence through their connections with government officials. * Government agencies: By inserting themselves into sports, they expand their reach and create new avenues for control.

**Potential Impact & Implications**

This bill might seem harmless, but it sets a precedent for government overreach in the world of sports. Think about it:

* What's next? Will they start regulating athletic programs, dictating who can participate, and what teams can compete? * This could be the beginning of a slippery slope, where the government uses sports as a Trojan horse to exert control over our lives. * The implications are far-reaching: if they can manipulate sports, what other areas will they infiltrate?

Wake up, folks! SRES 34 is not just about congratulating a soccer team; it's about expanding government power and control. Keep your eyes open, and don't let them fool you with their innocent-sounding resolutions.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, because we've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here. SRES 34, a resolution that's so vital to the fabric of our great nation, it'll make your head spin. (Sarcasm dripping from every word)

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This earth-shattering legislation congratulates – yes, you heard me right, congratulates – the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team for winning the 2024 NCAA Division III Women's Soccer Championship. I mean, who doesn't love a good underdog story? (Wink) The bill's main objective is to pat these young ladies on the back and say, "Good job, girls!" (Air quotes)

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** Now, you might be thinking, "What exactly does this bill do?" Well, let me tell you, it's a real game-changer. The resolution:

* Commends the team for their championship win * Recognizes the achievements of the players, coaches, and staff * Congratulates the university's alumni, students, and faculty (because, why not?) * Requests that the Secretary of the Senate send a copy of this resolution to the university's chancellor, athletic director, and head coach

Wow, I can barely contain my excitement. (Rolls eyes)

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The real victims here are the taxpayers who have to foot the bill for this...this...(dramatic pause) ...resolution. But seriously, folks, the affected parties include:

* The Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team * The university's administration and staff * The NCAA (because, apparently, they need a pat on the back too)

**Potential Impact & Implications:** Now, I know what you're thinking: "How will this bill impact my life?" Well, let me tell you, it won't. But if you're a fan of women's soccer or just love a good feel-good story, then this bill is for you! (Sarcastic tone) It's not like there are more pressing issues in our country that need attention.

In all seriousness, folks, this bill is a perfect example of how our government loves to waste time and resources on trivial matters. But hey, who doesn't love a good distraction from the real issues? (Wink)

So, there you have it – SRES 34: the most important bill of our time. (Sarcasm alert) Stay vigilant, America!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, brought to you by the esteemed members of the United States Senate. SRES 34 is a resolution that congratulates the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team for winning the 2024 NCAA Division III Women's Soccer Championship. Because, clearly, this is the most pressing issue facing our nation.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to provide a feel-good moment for the Senators from Missouri (Schmitt and Hawley) to pat themselves on the back and pretend they're doing something meaningful. The objective? To waste taxpayer time and resources on a meaningless resolution that will have zero impact on the lives of Americans.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** There are no key provisions or changes to existing law, because this is just a resolution – a pointless exercise in self-congratulation. It's like a participation trophy for grown adults who can't seem to get anything done.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team (who will likely be thrilled to receive this meaningless recognition), the Senators from Missouri (who will get to pretend they're doing something important), and the taxpayers (who will foot the bill for this nonsense).

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this resolution is precisely zero. It won't create jobs, improve healthcare, or address any pressing national issue. But hey, it might give some Senators a nice photo op to tweet about.

Diagnosis: This bill is suffering from a severe case of "Legislative Ennui" – a disease characterized by a complete lack of purpose, direction, or impact. The symptoms include pointless resolutions, self-congratulatory language, and a general waste of taxpayer resources. Treatment? A healthy dose of skepticism, a strong stomach for ridicule, and a willingness to call out the obvious idiocy on display.

In short, SRES 34 is a perfect example of why Americans have lost faith in their government. It's a meaningless exercise in self-aggrandizement, designed to distract from the real issues facing our nation. So, let's all take a moment to congratulate the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team... and then get back to the business of actually governing this country.

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

Let me break down this congressional bill for ya, bro. SRES 34 is all about giving a major shoutout to the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team for crushing it and winning the 2024 NCAA Division III Women's Soccer Championship.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main goal of this resolution is to congratulate the team on their epic win, recognize their hard work and dedication, and give props to the players, coaches, management, and support staff. It's like a big ol' high-five from Congress, dude.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** There aren't any major changes to existing law here, bro. This is just a resolution, which means it's more of a symbolic gesture than actual legislation. The Senate is basically saying, "Hey, good job, Bears! You're awesome!" and requesting that the Secretary of the Senate sends a copy of this resolution to the university's chancellor, athletic director, and head coach.

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

* The Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team (obviously) * The university's administration, including the chancellor and athletic director * The coaching staff and support staff * Fans of the team

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This resolution is pretty chill, bro. It's not gonna change the world or anything, but it's still a cool way for Congress to acknowledge the team's achievement. It might give the team a boost in morale and recognition, which could be rad for recruitment and school spirit. Plus, it's always dope to see women's sports getting some love.

On a deeper level, this resolution highlights the importance of recognizing achievements in education and athletics. It shows that Congress is paying attention to the hard work and dedication of students and athletes, even if it's just a symbolic gesture.

Anyway, dude, that's SRES 34 in a nutshell. Not exactly earth-shattering policy, but still a cool way for Congress to give props where props are due.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**SRES 34: A Resolution Congratulating the Washington University in St. Louis Bears Women's Soccer Team**

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This resolution aims to congratulate and recognize the achievements of the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team for winning the 2024 NCAA Division III Women's Soccer Championship.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The resolution does not propose any changes to existing law or policy. It is a ceremonial resolution, intended to honor the achievements of the team and its members.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

* Washington University in St. Louis * The Bears women's soccer team, including players, coaches, management, and support staff * Alumni, students, and faculty of Washington University in St. Louis * Staff of the Francis Olympic Field and Peter Johann Memorial Field

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This resolution has no significant policy implications or financial impact. It is a symbolic gesture to recognize the achievements of the team and its members.

**Monied Interest Analysis:**

While there are no apparent monied interests directly influencing this resolution, it's worth noting that Washington University in St. Louis is a private research university with significant resources and connections. The university has a strong athletic program, and its alumni and donors may have an interest in promoting the team's achievements.

**PAC Analysis:**

No relevant PACs or industry lobby groups appear to be directly involved in this resolution. However, it's possible that some educational institutions or sports-related organizations may take notice of this resolution as a way to promote their own interests or agendas.

**Committee Capture and Conflicts of Interest:**

There is no apparent committee capture or conflict of interest related to this resolution. The sponsors of the bill, Senators Schmitt and Hawley, both represent Missouri, where Washington University in St. Louis is located. While it's possible that they may have received campaign contributions from university donors or alumni, there is no clear evidence of a quid pro quo arrangement.

In summary, SRES 34 is a ceremonial resolution with no significant policy implications or financial impact. While there may be some indirect interests at play, the resolution appears to be a genuine attempt to recognize and congratulate the achievements of the Washington University in St. Louis Bears women's soccer team.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$158,400

23 donors

PACs

Organizations

$13,000

Committees

Individuals

$145,400

No PAC contributions found

ELEVATE MISSOURI

2 transactions

$6,700

TURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND OF CHIPPEWA TRIBE

1 transaction

$2,900

PETER J SPALITTO DDS PC

1 transaction

$2,900

KIRKWOOD PLUMBING INC

1 transaction

$500

No committee contributions found

POPOLO, JOE

2 transactions

$13,200

WALTON, TROY

1 transaction

$11,600

PFAUTCH, ROY

1 transaction

$11,600

ROSS, DONALD

1 transaction

$10,000

TAYLOR, ANDREW

1 transaction

$6,600

TAYLOR, BARBARA

1 transaction

$6,600

KELSEY, J DAVID

1 transaction

$6,600

FOGEL, DAVID

1 transaction

$6,600

PALOMO, OSWALDO

1 transaction

$6,600

TAMASI, DAVID

1 transaction

$6,600

MCKNIGHT, ANDREW

1 transaction

$6,600

POPOLO, CHRIS

1 transaction

$6,600

ASHWORTH, CAROL

1 transaction

$6,600

ASHWORTH, JIMMY

1 transaction

$6,600

GIBBS, HALLIE H.

1 transaction

$6,600

GIDWITZ, RONALD J.

1 transaction

$6,600

STEWARD, DAVE

1 transaction

$6,600

MANDELBLATT, DANIELLE

1 transaction

$6,600

MANDELBLATT, ERIC

1 transaction

$6,600

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 1 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Sen. Hawley, Josh [R-MO]

ID: H001089

Top Contributors

R&W TOWING & RECOVERY

OrganizationST JOSEPH, MO

$3,300

Sep 18, 2024

SOUTHERN MISSOURI REAL ESTATE LLC

OrganizationAURORA, MO

$1,000

Jun 28, 2023

ST LOUIS CONSERVATIVE LEADERSHIP PAC

OrganizationCHESTERFIELD, MO

$914

Oct 31, 2024

MARK FAUGHN CONSTRUCTION LLC

OrganizationPOPLAR BLUFF, MO

$250

May 22, 2023

SCHELL, MARK CHRISTOPHER

DIAMOND PET FOOD • MANAGER

IndividualLOHMAN, MO

$13,200

Apr 13, 2023

CARR, GEORGE T.

THE DURHAM CO • MANAGEMENT

IndividualSPRINGFIELD, MO

$12,200

Apr 21, 2023

RUSSELL, DOUG MR.

DURHAM COMPANY • PRESIDENT

IndividualLEBANON, MO

$7,400

Apr 21, 2023

SHELTON, GREGORY P. MR.

SHELTON WHOLESALE • OWNER

IndividualEAGLEVILLE, MO

$6,600

Mar 11, 2024

WALDEN, MICHAEL

SHOOK HARDY BACON • ATTORNEY

IndividualMISSION HILLS, KS

$6,600

Mar 31, 2023

WILLARD, BRADLEY

WILLARD ASPHALT PAVING • PRESIDENT

IndividualLEBANON, MO

$6,600

Mar 31, 2023

Donor Network - Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 57 nodes and 28 connections (52 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $163,614

Top Donors - Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO]

Showing top 23 donors by contribution amount

4 Orgs19 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 Education

Weak

Vector: 55%

Pages: 365-367AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill congratulates a women's soccer team, which tangentially relates to the Project 2025 goal of protecting women's athletic opportunities under Title IX, but it does not address any of the policy's specific actions regarding data collection, sex definition, or rescinding regulations."

Key themes:women's athleticsTitle IXsports recognition

— 332 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise to create and collect data on a new “nonbinary” sex category (in addition to the current “male” or “female” sex categories) and to retire data collection that indi- cates the number of (1) high school–level interscholastic athletics sports in which only male and female students participate, (2) high school–level athletics teams in which only male or female students participate, and (3) participants on high school–level interscholastic athletics sports teams in which only male or only female students participate. These poorly conceived changes are contrary to law, fail to take account of student privacy interests and statutory protections favoring parental rights under the Protection of Pupils Rights Amendment, and jettison longstanding data collections that assist in the enforcement of Title IX. l The new Administration must quickly move to rescind these changes, which add a new “nonbinary” sex category to OCR’S data collection and issue a new CRDC that will collect data directly relevant to OCR’s statutory enforcement authority. Student Assistance General Provisions, Federal Perkins Loan Program, and William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program Final Regulations Effective July 1, 2023, the department promulgated final regulations addressing loan forgiveness under the HEA’s provisions for borrower defense to repayment (“BDR”), closed school loan discharge (“CSLD”), and public service loan forgive- ness (“PSLF”). The regulations also included prohibitions against pre-dispute arbitration agreements and class action waivers for students enrolling in institu- tions participating in Title IV student loan programs. Acting outside of statutory authority, the current Administration has drastically expanded BDR, CSLD, and PSLF loan forgiveness without clear congressional authorization at a tremendous cost to the taxpayers, with estimates ranging from $85.1 to $120 billion. l The new Administration must quickly commence negotiated rulemaking and propose that the department rescind these regulations. l The next Administration should also rescind Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) GEN 22-11 and DCL GEN 22-10 and its letters to accreditation agencies dated July 19, 2022, which are attempts to undercut Florida’s SB 7044, providing universities more flexibility on accreditation. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance (Title IX) With its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published on July 12, 2022, the Biden Education Department seeks to gut the hard-earned rights of women with its changes to the department’s regulations implementing Title IX, which prohibits — 333 — Department of Education discrimination on the basis of sex in educational programs and activities. Instead, the Biden Administration has sought to trample women’s and girls’ athletic oppor- tunities and due process on campus, threaten free speech and religious liberty, and erode parental rights in elementary and secondary education regarding sensitive issues of sex. The new Administration should take the following steps: l Work with Congress to use the earliest available legislative vehicle to prohibit the department from using any appropriations or from otherwise enforcing any final regulations under Title IX promulgated by the department during the prior Administration. l Commence a new agency rulemaking process to rescind the current Administration’s Title IX regulations; restore the Title IX regulations promulgated by then-Secretary Betsy DeVos on May 19, 2020; and define “sex” under Title IX to mean only biological sex recognized at birth. l Work with Congress to amend Title IX to include due process requirements; define “sex” under Title IX to mean only biological sex recognized at birth; and strengthen protections for faith-based educational institutions, programs, and activities. The Trump Administration’s 2020 Title IX regulation protected the founda- tional right to due process for those who are accused of sexual misconduct. The Biden Administration’s proposed change to the interpretation of Title IX disposes of these rights. l The next Administration should move quickly to restore the rights of women and girls and restore due process protections for accused individuals. At the same time, there is no scientific or legal basis for redefining “sex” to “sexual orientation and gender identity” in Title IX. Such a change misrepresents the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Bostock, threatens the American system of federalism, removes important due process protections for students in higher education, and puts girls and women in danger of physical harm. Facilitating social gender transition without parental consent increases the likelihood that children will seek hormone treatments, such as puberty blockers, which are experimental medical interventions. Research has not demonstrated positive effects and long- term outcomes of these treatments, and the unintended side effects are still not fully understood.

Department of Agriculture

Minimal

Vector: 55%

Pages: 344-346AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill is a ceremonial resolution congratulating a women's soccer team and contains no reference to agriculture, USDA programs, or any of the policy objectives outlined in the Project 2025 Department of Agriculture section."

Key themes:nonenot applicable

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

Environmental Protection Agency

Minimal

Vector: 55%

Pages: 461-463AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill is a ceremonial resolution congratulating a sports team and contains no environmental or EPA-related provisions, while the Project 2025 EPA section focuses on water regulation reforms."

— 429 — Environmental Protection Agency As a matter of broad practice, OW should be complying with statutorily estab- lished deadlines in all situations with only minimal exceptions. In cases where statutory deadlines will not be met, senior management should be made aware of the delay and should have an opportunity to determine whether alternative courses should be taken. Depending on the outcome of regulations from the Biden Administration as well as intervention by the Supreme Court on both waters of the United States (WOTUS) and CWA Section 401,29 the repeal and reissuance of new regulations should be pursued. New Policies New regulations should include the following: l A WOTUS rule that makes clear what is and is not a “navigable water” and respects private property rights. Coordinate with Congress to develop legislation, if necessary, to codify the definition in Rapanos v. United States that “waters of the United States” can refer only to “relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water…as opposed to ordinarily dry channels through which water occasionally or intermittently flows.”30 l A rule that provides clarity and regulatory certainty regarding the CWA Section 401 water quality certification process to limit unnecessary delay for needed projects, including by establishing a discharge-only approach with a limited scope (from point sources into navigable waters), assessing only water quality factors that are consistent with specific CWA sections, and excluding speculative analysis regarding future potential harm. l A rule to ensure that CWA Section 30831 has a clear and enforced time limit. l A rule to clarify the standard for criminal negligence under CWA Sections 40232 and 404.33 l A rule to prohibit retroactive or preemptive permits under CWA Section 404. l A rule to promote and shape nutrient trading that utilizes a carrot-versus- stick approach when dealing with nutrient compliance. l A rule to update compensatory mitigation that imposes no new or additional requirements beyond current law. l A rule on updates necessary for the effective use of the CWA needs survey. — 430 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l An executive order requiring EPA to find avenues and expedite the process for states obtaining primacy in available CWA and SDWA programs. This order would require coordination with the Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of the Interior. l Implementation of additional policies to address challenges in water workforce, issues surrounding timely actions on primacy applications, and cybersecurity. Budget While the overall goal is certainly to reduce government spending, there is one very targeted area where increased spending would be in the nation’s interest. The Clean Water Act needs survey is the entire basis for how congressionally appro- priated funds directed to state revolving funds—standard annual appropriations that are the true underpinning of all infrastructure funding for drinking water and clean water—are distributed by EPA across the country. Because this program is currently underfunded, money is being thrown at untargeted locations while water infrastructure is crumbling at other locations. Increased targeted funding would greatly benefit water systems across the country at a time when intervention is crucial, leaving fewer communities with significant water service challenges. Personnel OW would benefit greatly from the reshifting of SES employees to different programs and from headquarters out to regional offices. OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT (OLEM) OLEM’s mission is to partner with other federal agencies, states, tribes, local governments, and communities to clean up legacy pollution and revitalize land for reuse. OLEM executes this mission by protecting human health and the envi- ronment while leveraging economic opportunities and creating jobs. OLEM also oversees the agency’s emergency response. The main statutes that OLEM exe- cutes are the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)34 to regulate waste management; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)35 to clean up Superfund sites and provide resources for cleaning up brownfields sites; and Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act36 to reduce the likelihood of accidental chemical releases. Needed Reforms OLEM’s main function is to oversee the execution of cleanups under CERCLA and RCRA; therefore, it is critical that OLEM staff focus on project management more than policy creation. Emphasizing productivity more than process and policies

Small Business Administration

Minimal

Vector: 55%

Pages: 795-797AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"SRES 34 is a ceremonial resolution honoring a women's soccer team and contains no provisions related to the Small Business Administration, its loan programs, regulatory reforms, or any of the topics covered in the Project 2025 SBA policy section."

— 763 — Small Business Administration 40. U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Inspector General, Top Management and Performance Challenges Facing the Small Business Administration in Fiscal Year 2023, p. iv. 41. H.R. 748, CARES (Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security) Act, Public Law No. 116-136, 116th Congress, March 27, 2020, https://www.congress.gov/116/plaws/publ136/PLAW-116publ136.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). 42. Sarah McCammon, “Planned Parenthood Asked to Return Funds from Paycheck Protection Program,” NPR, May 21, 2020, https://www.npr.org/2020/05/21/859991359/planned-parenthood-asked-to-return-funds- from-paycheck-protection-program (accessed February 18, 2023). 43. Letter from William Manger, Associate Administrator, U.S. Small Business Administration, to Laura Meyers, Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington, “Re: Notice of Investigation and Request for Records,” May 19, 2020, https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/6922122/SBA-Letter-Planned-Parenthood-DC.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 44. Press release, “Lankford, HSGAC Republicans Demand Details on Illegal PPP Loans to Planned Parenthood Affiliates,” Office of U.S. Senator James Lankford, April 28, 2022, https://www.lankford.senate.gov/news/press- releases/lankford-hsgac-republicans-demand-details-on-illegal-ppp-loans-to-planned-parenthood-affiliates (accessed February 18, 2023). 45. Press release, “Romney, Colleagues Request Information from SBA Administrator Guzman on Illegal PPP Loans Given to Planned Parenthood Affiliates,” Office of U.S. Senator Mitt Romney, April 28, 2022, https:// www.romney.senate.gov/romney-colleagues-request-information-from-sba-administrator-guzman-on- illegal-ppp-loans-given-to-planned-parenthood-affiliates/ (accessed February 18, 2023). 46. 13 C.F.R. §§ 109.400(b)(11), https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/13/109.400; 123.301(g), https://www.law. cornell.edu/cfr/text/13/123.301; 123.502(n), https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/13/123.502; and 123.702(b)(6), https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/13/123.702 (all accessed February 19, 2023). 47. U.S. Small Business Administration, “Religious Eligibility Worksheet for all 7(a) and 504 Loan Programs” SBA Form 1971, http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2020-11/sba-form-1971.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 48. U.S. Small Business Administration, “Ensuring Equal Treatment for Faith-Based Organizations in SBA’s Loan and Disaster Assistance Program.” 49. See, for example, Carson v. Makin, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), https://www.supremecourt.gov/ opinions/21pdf/20-1088_dbfi.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). 50. 28 U.S. Code § 530d, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/530D (accessed February 19, 2023). 51. U.S. Small Business Administration, “Ensuring Equal Treatment for Faith-Based Organizations in SBA’s Loan and Disaster Assistance Program.” 52. 13 CFR 120.110(k), https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/13/120.110 (accessed February 19, 2023). 53. U.S. Small Business Administration, “Regulatory Reform Initiative: Streamlining and Modernizing the 7(a), Microloan, and 504 Loan Programs to Reduce Regulatory Burden,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 125 (June 30, 2022), pp. 38900–38910, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/06/30/2022-13483/ regulatory-reform-initiative-streamlining-and-modernizing-the-7a-microloan-and-504-loan-programs-to (accessed February 18, 2023). 54. Ibid. 55. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel “Religious Restrictions on Capital Financing for Historically Black Colleges and Universities,” Memorandum Opinion for the Acting General Counsel, Department of Education, August 15, 2019, https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/ attachments/2021/01/01/2019-08-15-hbcu-capfin-2.pdf. (accessed February 18, 2023). 56. U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Investment and Innovation, SBIR and STTR Annual Report, Fiscal Year 2019, p. 8, https://www.sbir.gov/sites/default/files/SBA_Final_FY19_SBIR_STTR_Annual_Report.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 57. S. 4900, SBIR and STTR Extension Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117–183, 117th Congress, September 30, 2022, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ183/PLAW-117publ183.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 58. U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Investment and Innovation, SBIR and STTR Annual Report, Fiscal Year 2019, pp. 6, 40, and 108. — 764 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 59. Peter L. Singer, “Federally Supported Innovations: 22 Examples of Major Technology Advances that Stem from Federal Support,” Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, February 2014, https://wrnjradio.com/ bipartisan-call-to-crack-down-on-covid-19-ppp-eidl-fraud-prosecute-fraudsters-to-the-fullest-extent-of-the- law/ (accessed March 21, 2023). 60. Wells King, “Uncle Sam’s Top-Performing Venture Fund,” American Compass Case Study, November 2022, https://americancompass.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/AC-Case-Study_SBIR_final2.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 61. Elisabeth B. Reynolds, Hiram M. Samel, and Joyce Lawrence, “Learning by Building: Complementary Assets and the Migration of Capabilities in U.S. Innovative Firms,” MIT Industrial Performance Center Working Paper No. MIT-IPC-13-001, March 2013, https://ipc.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2019-01/13-001.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 62. American Compass, “Where’s The Growth? Assessing the Results of the Globalization Experiment,” March 2022, pp. 3–5, https://americancompass.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/AC-Atlas-Wheres-the-Growth.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 63. Sridhar Kota and Tom Mahoney, “Innovation Should Be Made in the U.S.A.,” The Wall Street Journal, November 15, 2019, https://www.wsj.com/articles/innovation-should-be-made-in-the-u-s-a-11573833987 (accessed February 18, 2023). 64. S. ___, SBA Reauthorization and Improvement Act of 2019, 116th Congress, 1st Session, Title III, § 303, https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/80533629-2905-433f-a588-7c4e032f7347/ C096ED9C1EBA68E041CFDA143E01C66C.mir19891.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 65. David Adler, “Financing Advanced Manufacturing: Why VCs Aren’t the Answer,” American Affairs, Vol. III, No. 2 (Summer 2019), https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2019/05/financing-advanced-manufacturing-why-vcs- arent-the-answer/ (accessed February 18, 2023). 66. National Association of Manufacturers, “Overview of the Senate HEALS Act,” July 28, 2020, https://documents. nam.org/comm/HEALSActInfo.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). See also remarks by Senator Mitch McConnell, “HEALS Act,” Congressional Record, Vol. 166, No. 132 (July 27, 2020), pp. S4491–S4492, https:// www.congress.gov/116/crec/2020/07/27/CREC-2020-07-27-pt1-PgS4491-7.pdf (accessed February 20, 2023). 67. S. 1059, American Innovation and Manufacturing Act, 117th Congress, introduced March 25, 2021, https:// www.crfb.org/blogs/whats-11-trillion-heals-act https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/s1059/BILLS-117s1059is.pdf (accessed February 18, 2023). 68. H.R. 7628, IMPROVE (Improve Management, Programs, Resources, and Oversight for Vital Entrepreneurs) the SBA Act, 117th Congress, introduced April 28, 2022, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr7628/BILLS- 117hr7628ih.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). 69. S. 1120, Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act, 116th Congress, introduced April 10, 2019, https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/s1120/BILLS-116s1120is.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). 70. H.R. 3136, Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996, Public Law No. 104-121, 104th Congress, March 29, 1996, Title II, https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ121/PLAW-104publ121.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). 71. S. 403, Fair and Open Competition Act, 117th Congress, introduced February 24, 2021, https://www. congress.gov/117/bills/s403/BILLS-117s403is.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023), and H.R. 1284, Fair and Open Competition Act, 117th Congress, introduced February 24, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1284/ BILLS-117hr1284ih.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023. 72. President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 14063, “Use of Project Labor Agreements for Federal Construction Projects,” February 4, 2022, in Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 27 (February 9, 2022), pp. 7363–7366, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-02-09/pdf/2022-02869.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). 73. “The JOBS Act 4.0: Section-by-Section,” Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, https://www.banking.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/the_jobs_act_4.0sectionbysection.pdf (accessed February 19, 2023). 74. Press release, “Luetkeymeyer: SBA Lacks Infrastructure and Expertise to Expand Number of Small Business Lending Companies,” Committee on Small Business, U.S. House of Representatives, November 7, 2022, https:// smallbusiness.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=404376 (accessed February 18, 2023).

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 54%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill is a ceremonial sports recognition with no policy substance, while the Project 2025 HHS section concerns healthcare regulations, abortion, conscience protections, and nondiscrimination; there is no thematic overlap."

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

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. Schmitt, Eric

A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 203 North Clay Street in Marshfield, Missouri, shall be known and designated as the "Edwin P. Hubble Post Office".

119/s/4052

TICKET Act

119/s/281

Gateway Partnership Act

119/s/2767

Back to All Bills