A resolution expressing the thanks of the Senate to the Honorable Patty Murray for her service as President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate and to designate Senator Murray as President Pro Tempore Emerita of the United States Senate.
Download PDFSponsored by
Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY]
ID: S000148
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 by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6-7; text: CR S6-7)
January 3, 2025
Introduced
Committee Review
Floor Action
đ Current Status
Next: The full Senate will vote on whether to pass the bill.
Passed Senate
House Review
Passed Congress
Presidential Action
Became Law
đ 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
(sigh) Oh joy, another meaningless resolution from the esteemed members of the United States Senate. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of SRES 6 is to stroke the ego of Senator Patty Murray and provide a feel-good moment for her colleagues. The objective? To express "deepest gratitude" for her service as President Pro Tempore. How touching.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** There are no actual provisions or changes to existing law in this resolution. It's a ceremonial pat on the back, a participation trophy for Senator Murray's time served. The only "change" is the designation of Senator Murray as President Pro Tempore Emerita, which is about as meaningful as a certificate from a online course.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties are Senator Murray and her fragile ego, which apparently requires constant validation. The stakeholders? Well, that would be the taxpayers who fund this pointless exercise in self-aggrandizement.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** Zero. Zilch. Nada. This resolution has all the impact of a feather on a hurricane. It's a waste of time, paper, and oxygen. But hey, it gives Senator Murray something to put on her mantle, next to her "World's Okayest Senator" mug.
Diagnosis: This bill is suffering from a severe case of "Ego-Inflation Syndrome," where the patient (Senator Murray) requires constant praise and adoration to feel relevant. The symptoms are obvious: meaningless resolutions, empty platitudes, and a complete lack of substance. Treatment? A healthy dose of reality and a reminder that this isn't high school, where everyone gets a trophy just for showing up.
Prognosis: This bill will pass with flying colors, because who doesn't love a good ego-stroking session? But let's be real, folks, this is just another example of the Senate's chronic case of "Do-Nothing Disease," where they prioritize feel-good gestures over actual governance. (eyeroll)
Related Topics
đ° Campaign Finance Network
Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY]
Congress 119 ⢠2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
Donor Network - Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY]
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 17 nodes and 24 connections
Total contributions: $72,050
Top Donors - Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY]
Showing top 16 donors by contribution amount
Project 2025 Policy Matches
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. Higher similarity scores indicate stronger thematic connections.
Introduction
â 866 â Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise an advisory opinion, or issue regulations, ensures that there is bipartisan agreement before any action is taken and protects against the FEC being used as a political weapon. With only five commissioners, three members of the same political party could control the enforcement process of the agency, raising the potential of a powerful federal agency enforcing the law on a partisan basis against the members of the opposition political party. Efforts to impose a ânonpartisanâ or so-called âinde- pendentâ chair are impractical; the chair will inevitably be aligned with his or her appointing party, at least as a matter of perception. There are numerous other changes that should be considered in FECA and the FECâs regulations. The overly restrictive limits on the ability of party com- mittees to coordinate with their candidates, for example, violates associational rights and unjustifiably interferes with the very purpose of political parties: to elect their candidates. l Raise contribution limits and index reporting requirements to inflation. Contribution limits should generally be much higher, as they hamstring candidates and parties while serving no practical anticorruption purpose. And a wide range of reporting requirements have not been indexed to inflation, clogging the public record and the FECâs internal processes with small-dollar information of little use to the public. CONCLUSION When taking any action related to the FEC, the President should keep in mind that, as former FEC Chairman Bradley Smith says, the âgreater problem at the FEC has been overenforcement,â not underenforcement as some critics falsely allege.15 As he correctly concludes, the FECâs enforcement efforts âplace a substan- tial burden on small committees and campaigns, and are having a chilling effect on some political speechâŚsqueezing the life out of low level, volunteer politi- cal activity.â16 Commissioners have a duty to enforce FECA in a fair, nonpartisan, objective manner. But they must do so in a way that protects the First Amendment rights of the public, political parties, and candidates to fully participate in the political process. The President has the same duty to ensure that the Department of Justice enforces the law in a similar manner. â 867 â Federal Election Commission ENDNOTES 1. 52 U.S.C. § 30101 et seq. 2. 52 U.S.C. § 30106(b)(1). 3. 52 U.S.C. § 30109(c) and (d). 4. Bradley A. Smith and Stephen M. Hoersting, âA Toothless Anaconda: Innovation, Impotence and Overenforcement at the Federal Election Commission,â 1 Election Law Journal 2 (2002), p. 162. 5. 52 U.S.C. § 30106(a)(2). 6. 52 U.S.C. § 30106(a)(1). 7. Former Commissioner Steven Walther (2006â2022) was listed nominally as an independent but he was recommended to President George W. Bush for nomination by former Nevada Sen. Harry Reid (D) and almost always voted in line with the Democrat commissioners on the FEC. 8. Hans von Spakovsky served as a commissioner from 2006 to 2007 in a recess appointment. While no other nominee has been rejected by the Senate, the tradition of bipartisan voice vote confirmation has largely ended. Two Republican nomineesâAllen Dickerson and Sean Cookseyâwere confirmed on party-line votes in 2020. And one DemocratâDara Lindenbaumâwas confirmed with the support of only six Republican senators in 2022. 9. The term of the 6th Commissioner, Dara Lindenbaum (D), will expire on April 30, 2027. 10. 52 U.S.C. § 30107(a)(6). 11. âStatement of Chairman Allen J. Dickerson and Commissioners Sean J. Cooksey and James E. âTreyâ Trainor, III Regarding Concluded Enforcement Matters,â Federal Election Commission (May 13, 2022), https://www. fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/Redacted_Statement_Regarding_Concluded_Matters_13_ May_2022_Redacted.pdf. 12. See, e.g., McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, 572 U.S. 185 (2014). 13. It should be noted, however, that the constitutional authority of a President to, among other things, remove appointees and direct the actions of independent agencies is a hotly contested and increasingly litigated issue. See Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, 561 U.S. 477 (2010); Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 140 S. Ct. 2183 (2020); and Collins v. Yellen, 141 S. Ct. 1761 (2021). 14. H.R. 1, 117th Cong. (2021â2022). 15. Bradley A. Smith and Stephen M. Hoersting, âA Toothless Anaconda: Innovation, Impotence and Overenforcement at the Federal Election Commission,â 1 Election Law Journal 2 (2002), p. 171. 16. Id.
Introduction
â ix â Acknowledgments This work, Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, is a col- lective effort of hundreds of volunteers who have banded together in the spirit of advancing positive change for America. Our work is by no means the comprehensive compendium of conservative policies, nor is our group the exclusive cadre of conservative thinkers. The ideas expressed in this volume are not necessarily shared by all. What unites us is the drive to make our country better. First and foremost, we thank the chapter authors and contributors who gave so freely of their time in service of their country. We were particularly grateful to have the help of dedicated members of The Heritage Foundationâs management and policy teams. Executive Vice President Derrick Morgan, Chief of Staff Wesley Coopersmith, Associate Director of Project 2025 Spencer Chretien, and Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies Director Paul Ray devoted a significant amount of their valuable time to reviewing and editing the lengthy manuscript and provided expert advice and insight. The job of transforming the work of dozens of authors and hundreds of contributors into a cohesive manuscript fell upon Heritageâs formidable team of editors led by Director of Research Editors Therese Pennefather, Senior Editor William T. Poole, Marla Hess, Jessica Lowther, Karina Rollins, and Kathleen Scaturro, without whose tireless efforts you would not be reading these words. The talented work of Data Graphics Services Manager John Fleming, Manager of Web Development and Print Projects Jay Simon, Director of Marketing Elizabeth Fender, Senior Graphic Designer Grace Desandro, and Senior Designer Melissa Bluey came together to bring the volume to life. We also thank the dedicated junior staff who provided immeasurable assistance, especially Jordan Embree, Sarah Calvis, and Jonathan Moy. Most important, we are grateful to the leadership, supporters, and donors of each of the Project 2025 advisory board member organizations and those of The Heritage Foundation, without whom Project 2025 would not be possible. Thank you. Paul Dans & Steven Groves
Introduction
â ix â Acknowledgments This work, Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise, is a col- lective effort of hundreds of volunteers who have banded together in the spirit of advancing positive change for America. Our work is by no means the comprehensive compendium of conservative policies, nor is our group the exclusive cadre of conservative thinkers. The ideas expressed in this volume are not necessarily shared by all. What unites us is the drive to make our country better. First and foremost, we thank the chapter authors and contributors who gave so freely of their time in service of their country. We were particularly grateful to have the help of dedicated members of The Heritage Foundationâs management and policy teams. Executive Vice President Derrick Morgan, Chief of Staff Wesley Coopersmith, Associate Director of Project 2025 Spencer Chretien, and Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies Director Paul Ray devoted a significant amount of their valuable time to reviewing and editing the lengthy manuscript and provided expert advice and insight. The job of transforming the work of dozens of authors and hundreds of contributors into a cohesive manuscript fell upon Heritageâs formidable team of editors led by Director of Research Editors Therese Pennefather, Senior Editor William T. Poole, Marla Hess, Jessica Lowther, Karina Rollins, and Kathleen Scaturro, without whose tireless efforts you would not be reading these words. The talented work of Data Graphics Services Manager John Fleming, Manager of Web Development and Print Projects Jay Simon, Director of Marketing Elizabeth Fender, Senior Graphic Designer Grace Desandro, and Senior Designer Melissa Bluey came together to bring the volume to life. We also thank the dedicated junior staff who provided immeasurable assistance, especially Jordan Embree, Sarah Calvis, and Jonathan Moy. Most important, we are grateful to the leadership, supporters, and donors of each of the Project 2025 advisory board member organizations and those of The Heritage Foundation, without whom Project 2025 would not be possible. Thank you. Paul Dans & Steven Groves â xi â The Project 2025 Advisory Board Alabama Policy Institute Alliance Defending Freedom American Compass The American Conservative America First Legal Foundation American Accountability Foundation American Center for Law and Justice American Cornerstone Institute American Council of Trustees and Alumni American Legislative Exchange Council The American Main Street Initiative American Moment American Principles Project Center for Equal Opportunity Center for Family and Human Rights Center for Immigration Studies Center for Renewing America Claremont Institute Coalition for a Prosperous America Competitive Enterprise Institute Conservative Partnership Institute Concerned Women for America Defense of Freedom Institute Ethics and Public Policy Center Family Policy Alliance Family Research Council First Liberty Institute Forge Leadership Network Foundation for Defense of Democracies Foundation for Government Accountability FreedomWorks The Heritage Foundation Hillsdale College Honest Elections Project
Showing 3 of 5 policy matches
About These Correlations
Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.