For the People 2028
"Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth."
— Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
No greater words have been spoken to a nation. Lincoln delivered this charge on the precipice of a war from within—a moment when the survival of the American experiment hung in the balance. That experiment survived because Americans chose union over division, shared sacrifice over narrow interest.
"All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Bonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years."
— Abraham Lincoln, Lyceum Address
Lincoln's warning was not about foreign armies—it was about us. When workers are displaced without support, when family farms cannot compete, when money drowns out the voice of ordinary citizens, when communities built on American manufacturing hollow out, and when neighbors view each other as enemies rather than fellow citizens, we do the work of our adversaries for them. A house divided against itself cannot stand, and a nation that no longer serves its people cannot long demand their allegiance.
The challenges before us are not partisan—they are American. This platform offers legislation drawn from across the political spectrum, united by a single principle: that American policy should be measured by whether it strengthens the citizens it is meant to serve. Not corporations, not special interests, not the loudest voices or the deepest pockets—but the people. Government of, by, and for the people is not guaranteed. It must be chosen, defended, and renewed.
The world is watching. Our adversaries are waiting for us to fail from within. Let us deny them that victory—not through empty words, but through policies that prove government can still serve its highest purpose. For the people.
Economy & Affordability
- American Dream and Affordability
- American Farm and Right to Repair
- Social Security Guarantee
- Fair Share Minimum Tax
- Immigration Reform and Guest Worker
Government & Democracy
- Government Accountability
- One Person, One Vote
National Security & Defense
- America Works and National Security
- United States Cyber Force
- Defense Modernization and Financial Accountability
Education & Innovation
- Education Affordability and National Service
- Artificial Intelligence Employment and Intellectual Property Protection
Public Safety
- Firearms Rights and Safety
Healthcare
- Affordable Care Improvement
American Dream and Affordability Bill
At a Glance
- Caps institutional investors at 20 single-family homes with anti-shell-company rules
- Prohibits foreign buyers from purchasing U.S. residential property
- 4 years interest-free for first-time buyers, 6 years for veterans
- Regulates short-term rentals and incentivizes housing-friendly zoning
- 2 years interest-free builder loans with 2-year completion incentive

The American Dream has long been anchored in the promise that hard work leads to stability and the opportunity to own a home. Today, that promise is breaking. The national median existing home price has risen from approximately $224,000 in 2015 to over $407,000 in 2024[1]—an increase of more than 80% that has far outpaced wage growth. In many metropolitan areas, a family now needs an income exceeding $100,000 annually to afford a median-priced home[2].
The current crisis stands in stark contrast to the housing market that built the American middle class after World War II. In 1950, the median home price was $7,354 while median household income was about $3,300 per year[3]—meaning the typical home cost roughly 2.2 times annual income. Housing was affordable everywhere, with mortgage payments consuming only 11 to 16 percent of median incomes in most markets[4]. A single wage-earner could support a family and purchase a home. Today, that price-to-income ratio exceeds 9.0 in Hawaii and in major California metro areas[5], and in expensive coastal markets families pay six to ten times their annual income for a median-priced home.
This postwar affordability resulted from deliberate policy choices. The GI Bill authorized low-interest loans to returning veterans[6], granting millions access to homeownership. The average family income doubled during this period, growing as much in the 10 years after the war as it had in the previous 50 years combined[7]. Mortgage rates averaged 4.5% to 5%[8], and FHA and VA loans reduced barriers to entry[9]. The homeownership rate rose from 44% in 1940 to 62% by 1960[10]. Home ownership became the foundation upon which millions built financial security.
The current crisis represents a fundamental break from this model. Over the past decade, institutional investors and foreign buyers have altered the American housing market. Private equity firms, hedge funds, and foreign corporations have acquired hundreds of thousands of single-family homes, converting owner-occupied neighborhoods into rental portfolios. Between 2021 and 2023, investors purchased approximately one in four single-family homes sold in some markets[11].
The homeownership rate, which peaked at nearly 70% in 2004, has declined as rising prices have locked out working families[10]. The price-to-income ratio that once made ownership the expected outcome of steady work has more than tripled. This is not natural market evolution—it is the consequence of policy choices favoring capital over families.
This legislation addresses the crisis through multiple reinforcing mechanisms: requiring divestiture of institutionally and foreign-owned residential properties to restore inventory to family buyers; creating loan programs with initial interest-free periods for first-time buyers (four years) and veterans (six years); incentivizing new construction—including manufactured and alternative housing—through builder loans that reward on-time completion; providing refinancing assistance for existing homeowners trapped in high-rate mortgages; regulating the conversion of residential housing to short-term rentals; and conditioning federal housing benefits on local adoption of housing-friendly zoning practices. Funding is provided through a dedicated American Dream Housing Trust Fund capitalized by penalty revenues, divestiture surcharges, and direct appropriations. The goal is to restore the basic bargain that made the American middle class possible: that a family willing to work should be able to own a home.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
Institutional Investors Have Distorted the Housing Market. Private equity firms, hedge funds, and REITs have acquired vast portfolios of single-family homes. When institutional buyers with unlimited capital compete against young families, families cannot win—institutions pay cash, waive inspections, and close in days. This has priced working families out of entire market segments, particularly affordable starter homes.
Foreign Investment Reduces Housing Available to American Families. Foreign corporations and investors purchase American homes as investment vehicles, often leaving them vacant or converting them to short-term rentals. This removes housing stock without adding residents who participate in community life. American residential real estate should serve American families first.
First-Time Buyers Face Insurmountable Entry Barriers. High prices, elevated interest rates, and stagnant wages prevent creditworthy families from purchasing homes. Down payment requirements of 10-20% mean families must save $35,000-$70,000 while paying rent that consumes their income. Without intervention, an entire generation risks permanent exclusion from ownership.
Veterans Deserve Enhanced Pathways to Ownership. Service members sacrifice years of earning potential and face unique challenges building savings due to relocations and deployments. While VA loans provide benefits, veterans still bear market-rate interest adding hundreds of thousands to lifetime costs. The nation owes those who served more than standard market terms.
Housing Supply Has Failed to Keep Pace with Demand. The U.S. faces a structural shortage of 3-7 million units[12]. High construction loan interest rates—8-10%—are passed directly to buyers. Stimulating new construction of homes meeting FHA guidelines is essential to resolving the crisis through increased supply.
The Wealth Gap Widens as Ownership Declines. Home equity is the primary wealth-building vehicle for most families. As ownership concentrates among older and wealthier Americans while working families rent permanently, the wealth gap widens. When large segments see no pathway to ownership regardless of effort, faith in the system erodes.
Institutional Ownership Harms Renters and Destabilizes Communities. Institutional landlords use algorithmic pricing to coordinate rent increases and replace local management with distant call centers, harming the tenants who live in their properties. At the neighborhood level, the conversion of owner-occupied homes to corporate rentals produces higher turnover, reduced property investment, and declining civic participation—homeowners maintain properties and engage in community life at higher rates than renters, and when institutions replace them, the fabric of the community frays.
Market Conditions Create a Self-Reinforcing Cycle. High prices reduce ownership, increasing rental demand, allowing institutional profits, encouraging further acquisitions, reducing supply, and raising prices further. This cycle will not self-correct—institutional investors with patient capital can sustain portfolios indefinitely.
Short-Term Rentals Remove Housing from Communities. The rapid growth of short-term rental platforms has converted tens of thousands of residential properties into de facto hotels, removing them from the housing market available to families. In popular tourist and urban markets, entire apartment buildings and neighborhoods have been converted to short-term rentals, reducing available inventory, driving up rents and purchase prices, and hollowing out the permanent communities that give neighborhoods their character.
Restrictive Local Zoning Limits Housing Supply. Local zoning ordinances in many communities prohibit multi-family housing, mandate large minimum lot sizes, restrict accessory dwelling units, and impose other barriers that artificially constrain supply. These restrictions—often adopted decades ago—are among the most significant drivers of housing unaffordability, yet because zoning is a local function, federal policy has historically been unable to address it directly.
Existing Homeowners Are Trapped by High Interest Rates. Millions of homeowners who purchased or refinanced during periods of high interest rates are locked into mortgages with payments far exceeding what current market conditions would justify. These families cannot build equity at a reasonable pace, and the burden of high monthly payments reduces their ability to invest in their homes and communities. While first-time buyers face barriers to entry, existing owners face barriers to stability.
No Dedicated Funding Mechanism for Housing Programs. Federal housing assistance programs compete for general appropriations without a dedicated funding source, leaving them vulnerable to annual budget politics and inconsistent funding. A sustainable, self-reinforcing funding mechanism is needed to ensure that housing programs can operate at the scale required to address the crisis. When working families cannot afford homes regardless of effort, the American Dream becomes a slogan—Congress must decide whether America remains a nation where citizens achieve ownership through work, or one where housing is controlled by institutional capital.
American Dream and Affordability Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "American Dream and Affordability Act."
Sec. 2. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act—
- (1) INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR.—The term "institutional investor" means any entity that is not a natural person, including any corporation, limited liability company, partnership, real estate investment trust, hedge fund, private equity fund, or any affiliate or subsidiary thereof, that acquires or holds title to single-family residential property.
- (2) SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.—The term "single-family residential property" means any residential dwelling designed for occupancy by one to four families, including detached houses, townhomes, and condominiums, but excluding multi-family apartment buildings containing five or more units.
- (3) FOREIGN PERSON.—The term "foreign person" means—
- (a) any individual who is not a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States;
- (b) any entity organized under the laws of a foreign country; or
- (c) any entity in which a foreign government, foreign entity, or foreign individual described in subparagraph (a) holds a twenty-five percent or greater ownership interest.
- (4) FIRST-TIME HOMEBUYER.—The term "first-time homebuyer" means an individual who has not held an ownership interest in a principal residence during the three-year period ending on the date of purchase.
- (5) QUALIFYING VETERAN.—The term "qualifying veteran" means any individual who served in the active military, naval, air, or space service and who was discharged or released therefrom under conditions other than dishonorable.
- (6) SECRETARY.—The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, unless otherwise specified.
- (7) SHORT-TERM RENTAL.—The term "short-term rental" means the rental of a residential dwelling unit, or any portion thereof, for a period of fewer than thirty consecutive days through a transactional platform or direct advertisement.
- (8) TRANSACTIONAL PLATFORM.—The term "transactional platform" means any online marketplace, application, or service that facilitates the listing, booking, or payment of short-term rental transactions, including but not limited to vacation rental websites and home-sharing platforms.
- (9) HOUSING-FRIENDLY ZONING PRACTICE.—The term "housing-friendly zoning practice" means a local land use regulation or policy that increases the supply of housing available to families, including but not limited to permitting accessory dwelling units by right in residential zones, allowing multi-family housing of not fewer than four units within one-half mile of public transit stations, reducing minimum lot size requirements to not more than five thousand square feet for single-family residential zones, eliminating mandatory parking minimums for residential development within one-half mile of public transit, and permitting manufactured housing on any lot zoned for single-family residential use.
- (10) MANUFACTURED HOUSING.—The term "manufactured housing" means a dwelling unit constructed in a manufacturing facility in accordance with the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq.), and includes modular homes constructed to State or local building codes in an off-site facility.
- (11) BENEFICIAL OWNER.—The term "beneficial owner" means any natural person who, directly or indirectly, through any contract, arrangement, understanding, relationship, or otherwise, exercises substantial control over an entity or owns or controls not less than a ten percent equity interest in an entity, as determined in accordance with the Corporate Transparency Act (31 U.S.C. 5336).
Sec. 3. MANDATORY DIVESTITURE OF INSTITUTIONAL HOLDINGS.
- (1) DIVESTITURE REQUIREMENT.—Not later than three years after the date of enactment of this Act, each institutional investor shall divest all single-family residential properties held in excess of the ownership cap established under paragraph (2).
- (2) OWNERSHIP CAP.—No institutional investor may own, directly or indirectly through any affiliate, subsidiary, or shell entity, more than twenty single-family residential properties within the United States.
- (3) DIVESTITURE SCHEDULE.—The Secretary shall promulgate regulations requiring—
- (a) divestiture of not less than one-third of excess holdings within twelve months of enactment;
- (b) divestiture of not less than two-thirds of excess holdings within twenty-four months of enactment; and
- (c) complete divestiture of all excess holdings within thirty-six months of enactment.
- (4) RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL.—Properties subject to divestiture shall be offered first to—
- (a) existing tenants occupying the property, at fair market value;
- (b) first-time homebuyers, as defined in Section 2; and
- (c) the general public.
- (5) ANTI-EVASION.—
- (a) No institutional investor may circumvent the requirements of this section through the use of shell companies, nominee arrangements, land trusts, or any other device designed to obscure beneficial ownership.
- (b) AGGREGATION RULE.—For purposes of the ownership cap under paragraph (2), all single-family residential properties held by entities that share any common beneficial owner shall be aggregated and treated as held by a single institutional investor. Two or more entities shall be deemed to share a common beneficial owner if any natural person holds a ten percent or greater equity interest in, or exercises substantial control over, each such entity.
- (c) BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP REPORTING.—Any entity that acquires or holds title to single-family residential property shall file with the Secretary a beneficial ownership disclosure identifying all natural persons who are beneficial owners of the entity, within thirty days of acquisition and annually thereafter. Failure to file shall create a rebuttable presumption that the entity is an institutional investor subject to the ownership cap.
- (d) PENALTY FOR EVASION.—Any person who knowingly structures or assists in structuring a transaction or series of transactions to evade the ownership cap shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than one hundred thousand dollars per property involved, plus disgorgement of any profits derived from the properties, and the properties shall be subject to mandatory divestiture within one hundred eighty days.
- (6) TEMPORARY BUSINESS USE EXEMPTION.—
- (a) IN GENERAL.—An institutional investor may hold title to single-family residential property in excess of the ownership cap for a period not to exceed twenty-four months if the property is held exclusively for a documented business use as defined in subparagraph (b). Upon expiration of the twenty-four-month period, the property shall be sold or transferred to a natural person.
- (b) DOCUMENTED BUSINESS USE.—For purposes of this paragraph, "documented business use" means one of the following, supported by written documentation filed with the Secretary at the time of acquisition—
- (i) EMPLOYEE RELOCATION.—Temporary housing provided to an employee of the entity who is relocating to a new work assignment, provided that the employee occupies the property as a principal residence and the entity certifies that the property will be sold or transferred within twenty-four months of acquisition;
- (ii) BUILDER INVENTORY.—A property constructed or substantially rehabilitated by the entity for sale to individual buyers, provided that the entity is actively marketing the property for sale and the property has not been rented or leased;
- (iii) ESTATE SETTLEMENT.—A property acquired through foreclosure, inheritance, or settlement of a legal obligation, provided that the entity files a disposition plan with the Secretary within ninety days of acquisition; or
- (iv) EMPLOYER-PROVIDED HOUSING.—Housing provided by an employer in a location where adequate rental housing is not commercially available, as certified by the Secretary, including but not limited to agricultural operations, remote work sites, and healthcare facilities in rural areas.
- (c) EXTENSION.—The Secretary may grant a single extension of not more than twelve months upon a showing of good cause. No more than one extension may be granted per property.
- (d) FAILURE TO DIVEST.—An entity that fails to sell or transfer a property within the applicable period under this paragraph shall be subject to a civil penalty of ten thousand dollars per month per property until divestiture is completed, and the property shall be treated as subject to the ownership cap under paragraph (2).
Sec. 4. RESTRICTION ON FOREIGN ACQUISITION OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.
- (1) PROHIBITION.—No foreign person may acquire title to single-family residential property in the United States on or after the date of enactment of this Act, except as provided in paragraph (2).
- (2) EXCEPTIONS.—The prohibition shall not apply to—
- (a) a lawful permanent resident of the United States;
- (b) a foreign individual who maintains a valid nonimmigrant visa authorizing employment and who uses the property as a principal residence; or
- (c) a purchase approved by the Secretary upon a finding that the acquisition serves a compelling national interest.
- (3) EXISTING HOLDINGS.—Any foreign person holding single-family residential property as of the date of enactment who does not qualify for an exception under paragraph (2) shall divest such property within three years.
Sec. 5. FIRST-TIME HOMEBUYER LOAN PROGRAM.
- (1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall establish the American Dream Homebuyer Loan Program under which loans with an initial interest-free period shall be made available to first-time homebuyers for the purchase of a principal residence.
- (2) GENERAL TERMS.—Loans issued under this section shall carry—
- (a) an interest rate of zero percent for the first four years following the date of origination;
- (b) upon expiration of the interest-free period, an interest rate equal to the prevailing market rate as determined by the Secretary, fixed for the remaining term of the loan;
- (c) a repayment term of thirty years;
- (d) a maximum loan amount equal to the conforming loan limit for the county in which the property is located; and
- (e) a minimum down payment of three percent of the purchase price.
- (3) ENHANCED VETERAN TERMS.—A qualifying veteran shall receive—
- (a) an interest rate of zero percent for the first six years following the date of origination, after which the rate shall convert to the prevailing market rate as described in paragraph (2)(b);
- (b) a zero-percent down payment requirement;
- (c) a maximum loan amount equal to one hundred fifteen percent of the applicable conforming loan limit; and
- (d) priority processing of the loan application.
- (4) ELIGIBILITY.—The applicant shall—
- (a) be a first-time homebuyer as defined in Section 2;
- (b) intend to occupy the property as a principal residence for not fewer than five years;
- (c) meet creditworthiness standards no more restrictive than FHA standards; and
- (d) complete a homebuyer education course approved by the Secretary.
Sec. 6. CONSTRUCTION LOAN INCENTIVE PROGRAM.
- (1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall establish the American Dream Builder Loan Program to provide construction loans to qualifying builders for new residential housing, including site-built single-family homes, manufactured housing, and modular housing.
- (2) ELIGIBILITY.—The builder or manufacturer shall—
- (a) construct dwellings that meet or exceed FHA minimum property standards or, in the case of manufactured housing, the standards established under the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974;
- (b) offer completed units at prices not exceeding one hundred ten percent of the applicable FHA mortgage limit;
- (c) demonstrate adequate financial capacity and construction or manufacturing experience; and
- (d) commit to completing construction within twenty-four months of loan disbursement.
- (3) LOAN TERMS.—Construction loans shall—
- (a) bear an interest rate of zero percent for the first twenty-four months following the date of disbursement;
- (b) upon expiration of the interest-free period, bear interest at the prevailing market rate as determined by the Secretary, with such interest applied retroactively to the original principal amount from the date of disbursement; and
- (c) not exceed five million dollars per project.
- (4) COMPLETION INCENTIVE.—If construction is completed and a certificate of occupancy is issued within twenty-four months of loan disbursement, the retroactive interest described in paragraph (3)(b) shall be waived in full. The purpose of this provision is to incentivize timely completion of new housing.
- (5) MANUFACTURED HOUSING INCENTIVE.—Projects in which not less than fifty percent of units are manufactured or modular housing shall receive priority processing and an increased loan limit of seven million five hundred thousand dollars per project.
Sec. 7. SHORT-TERM RENTAL REGULATION.
- (1) REGISTRATION REQUIREMENT.—Any owner of residential property who offers or lists a dwelling unit as a short-term rental shall register such unit with the Secretary within ninety days of the effective date of this Act, or prior to the first rental, whichever is later. The Secretary shall charge an annual registration fee of not more than two hundred fifty dollars per unit, which shall be deposited into the American Dream Housing Trust Fund established under Section 10.
- (2) PRIMARY RESIDENCE LIMITATION.—No person may operate a short-term rental of a dwelling unit that is not the owner's primary residence for more than sixty days per calendar year, unless the locality in which the property is located has adopted a local short-term rental ordinance permitting a greater number of days.
- (3) PLATFORM OBLIGATIONS.—A transactional platform shall—
- (a) require hosts to provide a valid registration number before listing a property;
- (b) remove any listing that does not display a valid registration number within thirty days of notice from the Secretary;
- (c) report to the Secretary annually the address, number of nights rented, and gross revenue for each listing; and
- (d) collect and remit applicable lodging taxes to the relevant State and local tax authority.
- (4) PENALTY.—Any person who operates a short-term rental in violation of this section shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than ten thousand dollars per violation. A transactional platform that fails to comply with paragraph (3) shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than fifty thousand dollars per listing per violation.
Sec. 8. EXISTING HOMEOWNER REFINANCING PROGRAM.
- (1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary, in coordination with the Federal Housing Finance Agency, shall establish the American Dream Refinancing Program under which existing homeowners may refinance an existing mortgage on a principal residence to a reduced interest rate.
- (2) ELIGIBILITY.—An applicant shall—
- (a) be a natural person who occupies the property as a principal residence;
- (b) hold an existing mortgage with an interest rate exceeding the applicable Federal Home Loan Bank consolidated obligation rate by more than two percentage points;
- (c) be current on mortgage payments or no more than sixty days delinquent at the time of application; and
- (d) have a household income not exceeding three hundred percent of the area median income.
- (3) TERMS.—A refinanced loan under this section shall carry an interest rate equal to the applicable Federal Home Loan Bank consolidated obligation rate plus one percentage point, for the remaining term of the original mortgage or thirty years, whichever the borrower elects.
- (4) LIMITATION.—The refinanced loan amount shall not exceed the outstanding principal balance of the existing mortgage plus reasonable closing costs as determined by the Secretary.
Sec. 9. HOUSING-FRIENDLY ZONING INCENTIVES.
- (1) INCENTIVE REQUIREMENT.—Beginning three years after the date of enactment, a locality shall not be eligible to participate in the programs established under Sections 5 and 6—and properties within such locality shall not be eligible for loans under those sections—unless the locality has adopted not fewer than three of the five housing-friendly zoning practices defined in Section 2(9).
- (2) CERTIFICATION.—A locality seeking eligibility shall submit to the Secretary a certification, with supporting documentation, that it has adopted the required zoning practices. The Secretary shall maintain a public registry of certified localities.
- (3) GRACE PERIOD.—For the first three years after enactment, all localities shall be eligible for programs under Sections 5 and 6 without regard to zoning practices, to allow time for adoption.
- (4) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary shall provide technical assistance to localities seeking to adopt housing-friendly zoning practices, including model ordinances, implementation guidance, and best practices.
- (5) ANNUAL REVIEW.—The Secretary shall review certifications annually and may revoke eligibility if a locality repeals or materially weakens a previously adopted housing-friendly zoning practice.
Sec. 10. AMERICAN DREAM HOUSING TRUST FUND.
- (1) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established within the Treasury the American Dream Housing Trust Fund, to be administered by the Secretary, for the purpose of financing the programs established under this Act.
- (2) DEPOSITS.—The following amounts shall be deposited into the Fund—
- (a) all civil penalties collected under this Act;
- (b) a surcharge equal to two percent of the gross sale price of each property divested under Sections 3 and 4, to be paid by the seller at closing;
- (c) all registration fees collected under Section 7;
- (d) loan repayments, including principal, received under Sections 5 and 6; and
- (e) such sums as may be appropriated by Congress.
- (3) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the Fund $50,000,000,000 for fiscal years 2026 through 2035, to be available until expended.
- (4) USE OF FUNDS.—Amounts in the Fund shall be available to the Secretary, without further appropriation, for—
- (a) the interest-free homebuyer loan program under Section 5;
- (b) the interest-free construction loan program under Section 6;
- (c) the existing homeowner refinancing program under Section 8;
- (d) administration, enforcement, and reporting under this Act; and
- (e) technical assistance to localities under Section 9.
- (5) ANNUAL REPORT.—The Secretary shall submit to Congress an annual report on Fund receipts, disbursements, outstanding loan balances, and projected solvency.
Sec. 11. PENALTIES FOR NON-COMPLIANCE.
- (1) CIVIL PENALTIES.—Any institutional investor that fails to comply with the divestiture requirements shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than fifty thousand dollars per property per month of non-compliance.
- (2) FOREIGN ACQUISITION VIOLATIONS.—Any foreign person who acquires property in violation of Section 4 shall be subject to a civil penalty equal to the greater of two hundred fifty thousand dollars or the fair market value of the property, and mandatory divestiture within one hundred eighty days.
- (3) SHORT-TERM RENTAL VIOLATIONS.—Penalties for violations of Section 7 shall be as provided therein.
- (4) BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP VIOLATIONS.—Penalties for evasion of the ownership cap shall be as provided in Section 3(5)(d).
Sec. 12. ADMINISTRATION AND REPORTING.
- (1) The Secretary shall administer this Act in coordination with the Secretary of the Treasury, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and the Federal Trade Commission.
- (2) Beginning one year after enactment, the Secretary shall submit to Congress an annual report on loans made, divestiture progress, enforcement actions, short-term rental registrations, zoning certifications, refinancing activity, Fund status, and effects on homeownership rates and home prices.
Sec. 13. EFFECTIVE DATE.
- (1) This Act shall take effect on the date that is ninety days after the date of enactment.
- (2) The short-term rental provisions under Section 7 shall take effect one hundred eighty days after enactment.
- (3) The zoning incentive requirements under Section 9 shall take effect three years after enactment.
- (4) The existing homeowner refinancing program under Section 8 shall begin accepting applications not later than one year after enactment.
Sources
- National Association of Realtors, "Existing Home Sales" historical data. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/HOSMEDUSM052N
- National Association of Realtors, "Housing Affordability Index." https://www.nar.realtor/research-and-statistics/housing-statistics/housing-affordability-index
- U.S. Census Bureau, Historical Census of Housing Tables — Home Values; Census P60-09, "Income of Families and Persons: 1950." https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/dec/coh-values.html
- Federal Reserve FEDS Notes, "Homeownership and Housing Equity in the Mid-Twentieth Century," September 2025. https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/homeownership-and-housing-equity-in-the-mid-twentieth-century-20250924.html
- Joint Center for Housing Studies, Harvard University, "Home Price-to-Income Ratio Reaches Record High." https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/blog/home-price-income-ratio-reaches-record-high-0
- U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, "VA Home Loans — History." https://benefits.va.gov/homeloans/history/
- U.S. Census Bureau, Historical Income Tables — Families. https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/historical-income-families.html
- National Bureau of Economic Research, "The Postwar Pattern of Mortgage Interest Rates." https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c2341/c2341.pdf
- U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, "The Federal Housing Administration (FHA)." https://www.hud.gov/aboutus/fhahistory
- U.S. Census Bureau, Historical Census of Housing Tables — Homeownership. https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/dec/coh-owner.html
- U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-24-106643, "Rental Housing: Institutional Investment in Single-Family Homes," 2024. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106643
- Freddie Mac, "Housing Supply: Still Undersupplied by Millions of Units." https://www.freddiemac.com/research/insight/housing-supply-still-undersupplied
American Farm and Right to Repair Bill
At a Glance
- Requires manufacturers to provide repair manuals, parts, and tools for all products
- Revises farm equipment emissions standards to reduce costs and improve reliability
- Directs USDA to cut food production costs by 15% over four years
- Provides 15% fuel tax credit for farm operations under $5M gross income
- Launches antitrust enforcement against seed, chemical, and fertilizer monopolies

The American family farm has been in steady decline for decades, squeezed between rising production costs, competition from large-scale corporate operations, and pressure from international producers. While consumers benefit from an abundant food supply, small and medium-sized farms increasingly struggle to remain viable. Since 2020, fertilizer costs have risen approximately 35%, fuel and energy costs are up over 30%, and labor and equipment costs have climbed significantly[1]. These pressures fall disproportionately on family operations that lack the scale and purchasing power of corporate farms.
Farmers have long prided themselves on self-reliance, yet that principle has been undermined by manufacturers who restrict access to repair manuals, diagnostic tools, and replacement parts—forcing farmers to rely on authorized dealers for repairs that could be done on-site at lower cost. Equipment breakdowns during planting or harvest can mean the difference between profit and loss, and dealer wait times compound the financial damage. Meanwhile, well-intentioned emissions requirements have added tens of thousands of dollars to equipment costs and introduced complex systems that increase maintenance burdens and reduce reliability in the field.
This legislation takes a three-pronged approach to reducing production costs for family farms. First, Right to Repair protections will be extended to all products manufactured or imported into the United States within 12 months of passage. Manufacturers must provide consumers with full repair manuals, and make available for purchase all parts and tools required to repair their products. Second, federal emissions requirements for farm and heavy equipment will be revised by updating Tier standards to better balance manufacturing costs, reliability, and environmental goals. A public-private partnership led by the EPA will be established to develop long-term emissions solutions for heavy machinery that meet these balanced principles. Third, the USDA will be directed to develop a four-year plan to further reduce food production costs through investment in agricultural innovation, fuel tax credits for farm operations, and enforcement actions addressing market consolidation in the seed and chemical industries.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
Decline of the Family Farm. Small and medium-sized farms face mounting economic pressure from rising input costs they cannot control and competition from large corporate operations with greater economies of scale. Without intervention, consolidation will continue to reduce the number of independent farm operators.
Escalating Equipment and Machinery Costs. The cost of tractors, combines, and other farm machinery has risen sharply since 2020[1]. Tier 4 emissions systems add tens of thousands of dollars to new equipment prices, pushing many family operations toward older, less efficient machinery or unsustainable debt.
Manufacturer Restrictions on Repair. Equipment manufacturers limit access to repair manuals, diagnostic software, and parts, forcing farmers to use authorized dealers for repairs. Dealer wait times during critical planting and harvest windows can result in significant crop and revenue losses. Farmers who once maintained their own equipment now face dependency on third parties.
Emissions System Complexity and Reliability Concerns. Modern emissions systems, including Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) requirements, add maintenance complexity and can disable equipment in the field when malfunctions occur. Farmers report reduced power output and lower fuel efficiency from some emissions systems, and older pre-emissions equipment commands premium prices on the secondary market.
Rising Fertilizer and Chemical Costs. Fertilizer represents the largest share of basic input costs for crop farmers, averaging 33% of seed, fertilizer, pesticide, and fuel expenses[2]. Prices increased approximately 35% between 2020 and 2024[1], and market consolidation among suppliers limits competitive pricing.
Fuel and Energy Cost Increases. Fuel and oil expenses have risen approximately 30% since 2020[1]. Diesel price volatility directly impacts planting, harvesting, irrigation, and transportation costs across all farm operations.
Market Consolidation in Agricultural Inputs. A small number of companies dominate the seed, fertilizer, and crop protection markets, reducing competition and contributing to elevated prices. Federal agencies have begun examining whether anti-competitive practices are driving costs higher than market conditions would otherwise justify.
Lack of Coordinated Federal Strategy. Multiple agencies touch agricultural costs—USDA, EPA, DOJ, DOL—but no unified plan exists to systematically reduce production costs while maintaining environmental and safety standards. Farmers face regulations from multiple directions without a coherent framework balancing affordability and policy goals.
American Farm and Right to Repair Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "American Farm and Right to Repair Act."
Sec. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that food production costs have risen sharply, driven by a 35 percent increase in fertilizer costs, a 30 percent increase in fuel costs, and significant increases in equipment costs since 2020; that manufacturer restrictions on repair access force farmers to pay inflated maintenance prices; that overly burdensome emissions standards on farm equipment have increased costs without proportionate environmental benefit; and that consolidation in the seed, chemical, and equipment industries has reduced competition.
Sec. 3. UNIVERSAL RIGHT TO REPAIR.
- (1) Not later than 12 months after enactment, each manufacturer shall make available to product owners and independent repair providers, on fair and reasonable terms—
- (a) service and repair manuals, including technical documentation and wiring diagrams;
- (b) replacement parts, at a price not exceeding the manufacturer's suggested retail price for authorized providers;
- (c) diagnostic tools and software necessary to identify and repair malfunctions; and
- (d) firmware updates and patches at no additional charge.
- (2) PROHIBITION ON SOFTWARE LOCKS.—No manufacturer shall—
- (a) implement software locks preventing diagnosis, maintenance, or repair;
- (b) void or limit a warranty solely because the owner or independent provider performed a repair using non-manufacturer parts, unless the repair directly caused the damage; or
- (c) require proprietary authorization codes not available to product owners.
- (3) SAFETY EXCEPTION.—This section shall not require disclosure of repair materials that would compromise emissions control systems, vehicle safety systems, or medical device safety features, but this exception shall not exempt an entire product when only a specific component is affected.
Sec. 4. PENALTIES FOR REPAIR RESTRICTIONS.
- (1) A manufacturer that violates Section 3 shall be subject to civil penalties of up to $10,000 per product model per day for failure to provide repair materials, up to $50,000 per product model for software lock violations, and up to $100,000 for a pattern or practice.
- (2) The Federal Trade Commission shall enforce this section. State attorneys general may also bring civil actions.
Sec. 5. FARM EQUIPMENT EMISSIONS STANDARDS REVISION.
- (1) Not later than 18 months after enactment, the EPA Administrator shall complete a review and issue revised emissions standards for non-road diesel engines in agricultural equipment, balancing cost impact, reliability, environmental benefit, and alternative compliance pathways.
- (2) PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP.—The Administrator, with the Secretaries of Agriculture and Energy, shall establish a public-private partnership to develop long-term emissions reduction solutions for heavy agricultural equipment.
- (3) There are authorized to be appropriated $200,000,000 for fiscal years 2026 through 2030 for research and development.
Sec. 6. USDA FOUR-YEAR COST REDUCTION PLAN.
- (1) Not later than one year after enactment, the Secretary of Agriculture shall publish a comprehensive 4-year plan to reduce food production costs by not less than 15 percent, addressing fertilizer costs, fuel costs, equipment costs, and seed and input costs.
- (2) The Secretary shall submit annual progress reports to Congress with measurable cost reduction data.
- (3) There are authorized to be appropriated $500,000,000 for fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
Sec. 7. FUEL TAX CREDITS FOR FARM OPERATIONS.
- (1) A refundable tax credit equal to 15 percent of qualified fuel expenses used directly in farming operations shall be available to taxpayers with gross farm income under $5,000,000.
- (2) The credit shall be available for five years after enactment.
Sec. 8. ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT IN AGRICULTURAL MARKETS.
- (1) The Attorney General shall conduct a comprehensive review of market concentration in the seed, chemical, fertilizer, and farm equipment industries within one year and bring enforcement actions where anti-competitive consolidation has unreasonably raised prices.
- (2) For five years after enactment, any proposed merger in these industries involving parties with combined revenues exceeding $1,000,000,000 shall be subject to enhanced antitrust review with a mandatory 180-day review period.
Sec. 9. AGRICULTURAL INNOVATION GRANTS.
- (1) The Secretary of Agriculture shall award competitive grants for precision agriculture technologies, drought-resistant crop research, alternative fertilizer production, and renewable energy systems for farms.
- (2) Priority shall be given to family farm operations, land-grant universities, and cooperative extension programs.
- (3) There are authorized to be appropriated $300,000,000 for fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
Sec. 10. EFFECTIVE DATE.
- (1) This Act shall take effect on the date of enactment.
- (2) The right to repair provisions shall take full effect 12 months after enactment.
Sources
- USDA Economic Research Service, Farm Income and Wealth Statistics — Production Expenses. https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/farm-income-and-wealth-statistics/production-expenses
- USDA Economic Research Service, "Fertilizer Costs Shape U.S. Corn Production Expenses." https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/chart-gallery/gallery/chart-detail/?chartId=100882
Social Security Guarantee Bill
At a Glance
- Extends Social Security solvency by lifting the payroll tax cap above $250,000
- Prohibits any benefit cuts for current or future retirees
- Locks trust fund money so it cannot be diverted to other spending
- Phases in full payroll tax coverage of all earnings over seven years
- 85% of Americans support preserving benefits through higher taxes on top earners

Social Security is the most successful anti-poverty program in American history and the foundation of retirement security for tens of millions of Americans. More than 68 million people receive monthly benefits[1], including retirees, disabled workers, and survivors of deceased workers. For most elderly Americans, Social Security represents their largest source of income, and for many it is the difference between dignity and destitution. Without Social Security, approximately 4 in 10 elderly Americans would have incomes below the poverty line[2].
The program is now approaching a crisis that has been decades in the making. The Social Security Trustees project that the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund will be depleted by 2033[3]—just seven years away. If Congress fails to act, all beneficiaries will face an automatic benefit cut of approximately 23 percent[3], regardless of age, income, or need. Current retirees who have paid into the system their entire working lives would see their monthly checks reduced. Workers nearing retirement who have planned their finances around promised benefits would have the rug pulled out from under them.
The program's financial challenges stem primarily from demographic shifts that were foreseeable but never adequately addressed. In 1960, there were more than five workers paying into the system for every beneficiary[4]. Today, that ratio has fallen to fewer than three-to-one[4] and is projected to decline further. Americans are living longer—a 65-year-old today can expect to live significantly longer than when Social Security was created[5]—and the Baby Boom generation has been reaching retirement age at a rate of roughly 10,000 people per day[6]. These trends are not temporary; they reflect permanent changes in American society that require permanent policy adjustments.
The system's revenue base has also eroded since Congress last addressed solvency in 1983. At that time, 90 percent of covered earnings were subject to the payroll tax[7]. Today, only about 83 percent of earnings are taxed[7] because wages at the top have grown faster than the taxable maximum. The current payroll tax cap—$176,100 in 2025[8]—means that a worker earning that amount pays the same Social Security tax as a billionaire. Someone earning $2 million per year finishes paying their Social Security taxes for the entire year before the end of February, while middle-income workers contribute on every paycheck throughout the year.
Americans overwhelmingly support preserving Social Security through increased revenue rather than benefit cuts. Polling consistently shows that 85 percent of Americans believe benefit levels should be maintained or increased even if it means higher taxes, with support crossing party lines[9]. Specifically, a large majority supports raising or eliminating the payroll tax cap on high earners as the fairest way to address the funding gap.
This legislation ensures long-term solvency of Social Security by gradually lifting the payroll tax cap on high earners while protecting benefits for current and future retirees. By asking those who have benefited most from the American economy to pay their fair share, we can preserve the program that has kept generations of Americans out of poverty without burdening middle-class workers or cutting benefits that retirees have earned through a lifetime of work.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
Social Security Faces Insolvency Within a Decade. The Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund is projected to be depleted by 2033[3]. At that point, the program will only be able to pay approximately 77 percent of scheduled benefits[3], resulting in an automatic cut of 23 percent for all beneficiaries. This is not a distant hypothetical—it will affect people who are already retired and those planning to retire in the coming years. Every year Congress fails to act, the solutions become more painful and the options more limited.
Automatic Benefit Cuts Would Devastate Retirees. If the trust fund is depleted without congressional action, benefits will be cut indiscriminately across the board. A retiree currently receiving $2,000 per month would see their benefit reduced by approximately $460[3]. For millions of seniors who depend on Social Security as their primary income source, such cuts would force impossible choices between food, medicine, housing, and other necessities. Workers who have paid into the system for decades would be denied the benefits they were promised and have earned.
The Worker-to-Beneficiary Ratio Has Fundamentally Changed. When Social Security was designed, there were many workers supporting each retiree. That ratio has fallen from five-to-one in 1960 to fewer than three-to-one today[4], and will decline further as the population ages. This demographic shift is permanent and requires adjustments to the program's revenue base. The system cannot sustain itself using parameters designed for a fundamentally different demographic reality.
High Earners Stop Paying Into the System Early in the Year. The payroll tax cap means that workers earning above $176,100[8] stop contributing to Social Security once they reach that threshold. A worker earning $2 million finishes paying Social Security taxes before the end of February, while middle-class workers contribute on every paycheck all year long. This cap exempts the highest earners from contributing proportionally to the system that provides a safety net for all Americans, making the payroll tax effectively regressive.
The Taxable Share of Earnings Has Declined. In 1983, when Congress last reformed Social Security, 90 percent of covered earnings were subject to the payroll tax[7]. Today, only about 83 percent of earnings are taxed[7] because wages at the top have grown faster than the cap. This erosion of the tax base costs the system billions annually and reflects a growing concentration of income among those who escape the payroll tax entirely on their highest earnings.
Congressional Inaction Breaks Faith with the American People. Workers have paid into Social Security throughout their careers with the understanding that benefits would be there when they retired. Allowing the trust fund to deplete through inaction represents a fundamental betrayal of that promise. Americans have done their part by contributing to the system; Congress must do its part by ensuring the system can deliver on its commitments. Preserving Social Security is not a partisan issue—it is a matter of honoring the social contract that binds generations of Americans together.
Social Security Guarantee Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Social Security Guarantee Act."
Sec. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
- (1) The Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund is projected to be depleted by 2033, at which point benefits would be automatically reduced by approximately 23 percent.
- (2) More than 68 million Americans receive Social Security benefits, and for the majority of elderly Americans it constitutes their largest source of income.
- (3) The current contribution and benefit base of $176,100 means only approximately 83 percent of covered earnings are subject to the payroll tax, compared with 90 percent in 1983.
- (4) Americans overwhelmingly support preserving benefits through increased contributions by high earners rather than benefit reductions.
Sec. 3. APPLICATION OF PAYROLL TAX TO EARNINGS ABOVE $250,000.
- (1) Effective for remuneration paid after December 31, 2025, OASDI taxes shall apply to wages and self-employment income in excess of $250,000, in addition to taxes on earnings up to the contribution and benefit base.
- (2) PHASE-IN.—The gap between the contribution and benefit base and $250,000 shall be closed over 7 years:
- (a) For 2026, taxes apply up to the base and above $250,000.
- (b) For 2027 through 2032, the threshold above which additional taxes apply shall be reduced by equal annual increments so that by 2032 the threshold equals the contribution and benefit base.
- (c) The Commissioner shall publish the applicable threshold for each year by November 1 of the preceding year.
Sec. 4. BENEFIT FORMULA PROTECTION.
- (1) Earnings above the contribution and benefit base that become subject to OASDI taxes under Section 3 shall not be included in the computation of the primary insurance amount.
- (2) This ensures additional taxes contribute to solvency without creating disproportionate benefit entitlements.
Sec. 5. PROHIBITION ON BENEFIT REDUCTIONS.
- (1) No provision of this Act shall authorize a reduction in benefits for any current beneficiary.
- (2) No provision shall reduce benefits for any future beneficiary below amounts payable under the formula in effect on the date of enactment.
- (3) Cost-of-living adjustments shall continue without modification.
Sec. 6. SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND LOCK BOX.
- (1) Amounts in the OASI and DI Trust Funds shall be used exclusively for benefit payments and administrative expenses under title II of the Social Security Act.
- (2) No amounts may be transferred, loaned, or made available for any other purpose including general revenue expenditures or deficit reduction.
- (3) Any provision or action that would divert trust fund resources shall be subject to a point of order in both chambers, waivable only by a three-fifths vote.
Sec. 7. ANNUAL SOLVENCY REPORTING.
- (1) The Board of Trustees shall submit an annual report on trust fund solvency, the effect of this Act's revenue changes, and recommendations for additional action if the 75-year actuarial balance remains in deficit.
- (2) The first report shall be submitted within 12 months of enactment and made publicly available.
Sec. 8. EFFECTIVE DATE.
- (1) This Act shall take effect on the date of enactment.
- (2) The payroll tax provisions shall apply to remuneration paid after December 31, 2025.
Sources
- Social Security Administration, "Social Security Announces 2.5 Percent Benefit Increase for 2025," October 10, 2024. https://www.ssa.gov/news/en/press/releases/2024-10-10.html
- Social Security Administration, "Income of the Population 55 or Older." https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/income_pop55/
- Board of Trustees of the OASDI Trust Funds, "The 2025 Annual Report," Highlights. https://www.ssa.gov/oact/TR/2025/II_A_highlights.html
- Social Security Administration, "Ratio of Covered Workers to Beneficiaries," Historical Data. https://www.ssa.gov/history/ratios.html
- Social Security Administration, "Life Expectancy for Social Security." https://www.ssa.gov/history/lifeexpect.html
- U.S. Census Bureau, "By 2030, All Baby Boomers Will Be Age 65 or Older," December 2019. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/12/by-2030-all-baby-boomers-will-be-age-65-or-older.html
- Social Security Administration, "The Evolution of Social Security's Taxable Maximum," Policy Brief No. 2011-02. https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/policybriefs/pb2011-02.html
- Social Security Administration, "Contribution and Benefit Base." https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/cbb.html
- National Academy of Social Insurance, "Social Security at 90: A Bipartisan Roadmap for the Program's Future," January 2025. https://www.nasi.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/NASI_SocialSecurityat90.pdf
Fair Share Minimum Tax Bill
At a Glance
- Sets a 25% minimum tax on total economic income above $25 million
- Taxes unrealized gains on publicly traded assets and asset-backed borrowing
- Eliminates the stepped-up basis that erases capital gains at death
- Reduces minimum rate to 15% for creating good jobs and funding education
- Closes the "buy, borrow, die" strategy used to avoid taxes on wealth

The American tax system is built on the principle that those who earn more should contribute proportionally more to the public institutions and infrastructure that enable their success. In practice, this principle has broken down at the very top of the income scale. While most working Americans pay effective federal tax rates of 20 to 30 percent[1], many of the wealthiest individuals in the country pay effective rates in the single digits—and in some cases pay nothing at all[2].
This is not the result of illegal tax evasion. It is the predictable outcome of a tax code that taxes wages and salaries at full rates while providing preferential treatment to investment income, allows unlimited deferral of gains on appreciated assets, permits taxpayers to borrow against vast wealth without triggering a taxable event, and erases all accumulated gains at death through the stepped-up basis. Taken together, these provisions create a parallel tax system in which the wealthiest Americans can access and enjoy their wealth while reporting little or no taxable income[3]. The result is that a teacher, a firefighter, or a small business owner pays a higher effective tax rate than a billionaire.
This legislation establishes a minimum effective tax rate of 25 percent on total economic income—broadly defined to include unrealized gains on publicly traded assets and loan proceeds drawn against appreciated property—for any taxpayer whose total economic income exceeds $25 million in a taxable year. Critically, the bill also rewards taxpayers who contribute to economic growth and workforce development: the minimum rate may be reduced to as low as 15 percent through credits for net new job creation that meets rigorous compensation and benefits standards, and for direct investment in higher education for workers and their families. The stepped-up basis at death is eliminated so that accumulated gains are eventually taxed rather than disappearing between generations.
The goal is not punitive taxation. It is simple fairness: no American who earns more than $25 million in a year should pay a lower effective tax rate than the working families whose labor, consumption, and civic participation sustain the economy. Those who use their wealth to create good jobs and invest in education should be rewarded with meaningful tax relief. Those who do not should pay their fair share.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
The Ultra-Wealthy Pay Lower Effective Tax Rates Than Working Families. The federal tax code's preferential treatment of capital gains, combined with unlimited deferral of unrealized gains, allows individuals with tens of billions in wealth to report effective federal tax rates far below those paid by middle-income wage earners[1]. This undermines public confidence in the fairness of the tax system and shifts the burden of funding public services onto those least able to bear it.
The "Buy, Borrow, Die" Strategy Eliminates Taxation on Vast Wealth. Ultra-wealthy individuals accumulate appreciated assets, borrow against those assets to fund consumption and investment, and hold the assets until death when the stepped-up basis erases all accumulated gains. At no point in this cycle is income tax paid on the appreciation that constitutes the bulk of their economic income. This is not a loophole—it is a deliberate strategy enabled by the structure of the tax code, and it is available only to those with sufficient wealth to employ it.
Unrealized Gains Are Economically Indistinguishable from Income. When a taxpayer's publicly traded portfolio increases by $500 million in a year, that gain is as real and as accessible as $500 million in wages—it can be borrowed against, pledged as collateral, used to secure lines of credit, and converted to cash at any time. The decision not to sell is a tax planning choice, not a reflection of economic reality. The current system rewards that choice with indefinite deferral.
The Stepped-Up Basis Erases Generational Tax Obligations. When appreciated assets pass to heirs at death, the cost basis resets to fair market value, permanently eliminating the tax on all gains accumulated during the decedent's lifetime[4]. This creates a powerful incentive to hold assets until death rather than sell them, and it ensures that the wealthiest dynasties can pass vast fortunes from generation to generation without ever paying tax on the appreciation.
Tax Policy Should Reward Economic Contribution. Wealthy individuals who use their resources to create high-quality jobs and invest in education make direct contributions to economic growth and social mobility. The tax code should distinguish between wealth that is productively deployed—creating employment, funding workforce development, and expanding opportunity—and wealth that is passively accumulated. A minimum tax with meaningful incentive credits accomplishes this distinction.
Fair Share Minimum Tax Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Fair Share Minimum Tax Act."
Sec. 2. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act—
- (1) COVERED TAXPAYER.—The term "covered taxpayer" means any individual whose total economic income for the taxable year exceeds $25,000,000. For married individuals filing jointly, the threshold shall apply to the combined total economic income of both spouses.
- (2) TOTAL ECONOMIC INCOME.—The term "total economic income" means the sum of—
- (a) adjusted gross income as defined under section 62 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
- (b) net unrealized gains on tradable assets as determined under Section 4;
- (c) imputed income from covered asset-backed borrowing as determined under Section 5; and
- (d) any other item of economic benefit that increases the taxpayer's net worth or funds the taxpayer's consumption, as determined by the Secretary of the Treasury by regulation.
- (3) TRADABLE ASSET.—The term "tradable asset" means any asset for which a readily ascertainable fair market value exists, including publicly traded securities, exchange-traded options and futures, publicly traded partnership interests, and any other asset regularly traded on an established securities market.
- (4) ILLIQUID ASSET.—The term "illiquid asset" means any asset that is not a tradable asset, including interests in private businesses, closely held corporations, real property, art, collectibles, and other assets for which a readily ascertainable fair market value does not exist.
- (5) COVERED ASSET-BACKED BORROWING.—The term "covered asset-backed borrowing" means the aggregate amount of loan proceeds received by a covered taxpayer during the taxable year that are secured in whole or in part by appreciated assets, to the extent that the aggregate amount of such borrowing exceeds $1,000,000 for the taxable year. The term includes refinancing, renewal, or rollover of any such loan.
- (6) APPRECIATED ASSET.—The term "appreciated asset" means any asset held by the taxpayer whose fair market value exceeds the taxpayer's adjusted basis in such asset.
- (7) QUALIFYING POSITION.—The term "qualifying position" means a full-time position of not fewer than 30 hours per week that—
- (a) provides total compensation equal to or exceeding 150 percent of the area median income for the metropolitan or nonmetropolitan statistical area in which the position is located, as published annually by the Department of Housing and Urban Development;
- (b) includes employer-sponsored health coverage that meets the essential health benefits requirements under section 1302 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; and
- (c) includes an employer contribution to a qualified retirement plan of not less than 3 percent of the employee's base salary.
- (8) TOTAL COMPENSATION.—The term "total compensation" means the aggregate value of all remuneration provided to an employee, including base salary or wages, employer-paid health insurance premiums, employer retirement contributions, employer-paid life and disability insurance, paid leave (including vacation, sick leave, family leave, and parental leave), tuition assistance or reimbursement, and any other benefit with a quantifiable monetary value provided as a condition of employment.
- (9) NET NEW QUALIFYING POSITIONS.—The term "net new qualifying positions" means the number of qualifying positions maintained by the taxpayer or any entity in which the taxpayer holds a controlling interest at the end of the taxable year, minus the highest number of qualifying positions maintained at the end of any of the three immediately preceding taxable years. Positions eliminated and replaced within the same taxable year shall not be counted as net new. For purposes of this paragraph, positions transferred between entities controlled by the same taxpayer shall not be counted as net new, and a reduction in qualifying positions in one entity may not be offset by creation of positions in another entity to generate credits—the calculation shall be performed on an aggregate basis across all entities in which the taxpayer holds a controlling interest.
- (10) QUALIFIED EDUCATION EXPENDITURE.—The term "qualified education expenditure" means a direct payment made by a covered taxpayer for tuition, mandatory fees, books, supplies, and reasonable room and board at an accredited institution of higher education on behalf of—
- (a) an employee of the taxpayer or of any entity in which the taxpayer holds a controlling interest;
- (b) a dependent of such an employee; or
- (c) a contribution to a scholarship fund administered by an accredited institution of higher education, provided that the fund awards scholarships on the basis of merit, financial need, or both, and that the taxpayer does not control the selection of individual recipients.
For purposes of subparagraph (c), a contribution shall not be treated as a qualified education expenditure if (i) the covered taxpayer, or any person related to the taxpayer within the meaning of section 267(b) of the Internal Revenue Code, serves on the governing board of the institution administering the fund; (ii) more than 10 percent of the fund's recipients in any academic year are employees, dependents of employees, or business associates of the taxpayer or any entity in which the taxpayer holds a controlling interest; or (iii) the taxpayer or any related person receives any direct or indirect benefit from the institution in connection with the contribution, other than the tax credit provided under this Act.
Sec. 3. MINIMUM EFFECTIVE TAX RATE.
- (1) IMPOSITION.—In addition to any other tax imposed by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, a covered taxpayer shall owe a minimum tax for each taxable year equal to the excess, if any, of—
- (a) 25 percent of the taxpayer's total economic income for the taxable year; over
- (b) the sum of all federal income taxes otherwise imposed on the taxpayer for such taxable year (including taxes on capital gains, self-employment taxes, and the net investment income tax), reduced by the incentive credits allowed under Section 8.
- (2) INCENTIVE-ADJUSTED FLOOR.—In no event shall the total federal income tax liability of a covered taxpayer, after application of incentive credits under Section 8, be less than 15 percent of the taxpayer's total economic income for the taxable year.
- (3) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.—Beginning in the second calendar year after the date of enactment, the $25,000,000 threshold under Section 2(1) shall be adjusted annually for inflation using the Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, rounded to the nearest $100,000.
Sec. 4. INCLUSION OF UNREALIZED GAINS IN TOTAL ECONOMIC INCOME.
- (1) TRADABLE ASSETS.—A covered taxpayer shall include in total economic income for each taxable year the net unrealized gain on all tradable assets, determined by marking such assets to fair market value as of the last business day of the taxable year, minus the taxpayer's adjusted basis in such assets.
- (2) LOSS CARRYFORWARD.—If the mark-to-market valuation under paragraph (1) results in a net unrealized loss for the taxable year, such loss may be carried forward to offset net unrealized gains in subsequent taxable years, but may not reduce total economic income below the amount that would be determined without regard to this section.
- (3) CREDIT FOR TAXES PAID ON UNREALIZED GAINS.—Upon the subsequent disposition of an asset on which tax was paid under this section, the taxpayer shall receive a credit against tax otherwise due equal to the tax attributable to the previously included unrealized gain, to prevent double taxation.
- (4) ILLIQUID ASSETS—DEFERRED RECOGNITION.—Unrealized gains on illiquid assets shall not be included in total economic income annually but shall be recognized upon—
- (a) disposition of the asset by sale, exchange, gift, or other transfer;
- (b) the death of the taxpayer, as provided in Section 6; or
- (c) a determination by the Secretary that the asset has become a tradable asset.
- (5) INTEREST CHARGE ON DEFERRED ILLIQUID GAINS.—Upon recognition of gain on an illiquid asset under paragraph (4), an interest charge shall be imposed on the deferred tax amount at the applicable federal short-term rate plus 3 percentage points, compounded annually from the date on which the gain would have been recognized had the asset been a tradable asset.
- (6) CHARITABLE VEHICLE ANTI-ABUSE RULE.—If a covered taxpayer contributes appreciated assets to a charitable remainder trust, charitable lead trust, donor-advised fund, or private foundation—
- (a) the contribution shall be treated as a disposition for purposes of this Act, and the taxpayer shall include in total economic income for the taxable year the net unrealized gain on the contributed assets as of the date of contribution;
- (b) income received by the taxpayer from a charitable remainder trust or similar arrangement funded with appreciated assets shall be included in total economic income; and
- (c) no charitable deduction attributable to the contribution of appreciated assets shall reduce total economic income below the minimum tax floor established under Section 3.
This paragraph shall not apply to outright charitable gifts of appreciated assets where the taxpayer retains no income interest, annuity, or other economic benefit from the contributed property.
- (7) ANTI-CONVERSION RULE.—If a covered taxpayer transfers, contributes, or exchanges a tradable asset for an interest in an entity or arrangement that would be classified as an illiquid asset under this Act, the transferred asset shall retain its classification as a tradable asset for purposes of mark-to-market valuation under paragraph (1), and the taxpayer shall continue to include in total economic income the net unrealized gain attributable to the underlying tradable asset as though the transfer had not occurred. This paragraph shall apply to transfers to private investment funds, family limited partnerships, holding companies, trusts, and any other entity or arrangement, regardless of legal form, where the principal effect is to convert a tradable asset into an illiquid interest for purposes of this Act.
Sec. 5. TREATMENT OF ASSET-BACKED BORROWING AS ECONOMIC INCOME.
- (1) INCLUSION.—The aggregate amount of covered asset-backed borrowing received by a covered taxpayer during the taxable year shall be included in total economic income, to the extent such aggregate amount exceeds $1,000,000 for the taxable year.
- (2) CREDIT ON REPAYMENT OR DISPOSITION.—Upon repayment of a covered loan from the proceeds of a taxable disposition of the collateral, the taxpayer shall receive a credit against tax otherwise due equal to the tax previously paid under this section on the included loan proceeds, to prevent double taxation.
- (3) REFINANCING.—Refinancing, renewal, or rollover of a covered loan shall not reset the inclusion under paragraph (1). Any additional loan proceeds received in excess of the outstanding balance of the original loan shall be treated as new covered asset-backed borrowing for the taxable year.
- (4) AGGREGATION.—For purposes of the $1,000,000 threshold under paragraph (1), covered asset-backed borrowing shall be aggregated across the covered taxpayer, the taxpayer's spouse, any dependent of the taxpayer, any trust or estate in which the taxpayer holds a beneficial interest or exercises control, and any entity in which the taxpayer holds a controlling or significant interest (defined as 25 percent or greater ownership, voting power, or beneficial interest). All borrowing by such persons and entities secured by the taxpayer's appreciated assets, or by appreciated assets attributable to the taxpayer, shall be treated as borrowing by the taxpayer.
- (5) ANTI-AVOIDANCE.—The Secretary shall promulgate regulations to prevent circumvention of this section through the use of intermediaries, related-party lending, pledges of assets held by trusts or entities controlled by the taxpayer, daisy-chain lending arrangements, or any other arrangement the principal purpose of which is to obtain the economic benefit of borrowing against appreciated assets without triggering inclusion under this section. Any such arrangement identified by the Secretary shall be disregarded and the borrowing shall be attributed to the covered taxpayer as though the arrangement did not exist.
Sec. 6. ELIMINATION OF STEPPED-UP BASIS AT DEATH.
- (1) CARRYOVER BASIS.—On and after the date of enactment of this Act, the basis of any asset acquired from a decedent shall be equal to the decedent's adjusted basis in such asset immediately before death, rather than the fair market value at the date of death.
- (2) RECOGNITION AT DEATH.—Unrealized gains on all assets held by a covered taxpayer at the time of death shall be recognized and included in the decedent's final return as total economic income, subject to the minimum tax under Section 3.
- (3) EXEMPTIONS.—The following transfers shall be exempt from recognition under paragraph (2)—
- (a) transfers to a surviving spouse, provided that the spouse assumes the decedent's adjusted basis (deferral, not exemption) and provided further that assets transferred from a decedent who was a covered taxpayer shall be treated as covered assets in the hands of the surviving spouse—the spouse shall be subject to the mark-to-market, minimum tax, and reporting obligations of this Act with respect to such assets regardless of whether the spouse's own total economic income independently exceeds the threshold under Section 2(1);
- (b) transfers of a personal residence with unrealized gain not exceeding $5,000,000; and
- (c) transfers of an active family-owned business interest, provided that the heir continues to materially participate in the business for not fewer than 10 years, with recapture of the deferred tax plus interest at the applicable federal short-term rate plus 3 percentage points if the business is sold or the heir ceases to materially participate before the 10-year period expires. For purposes of this subparagraph, "material participation" requires that the heir (i) devotes more than 50 percent of their working time to the active conduct of the business, (ii) derives more than 50 percent of their gross earned income from the business, and (iii) is involved in the day-to-day management or operations of the business in a capacity beyond serving solely as a director, officer, or passive investor. The heir shall file an annual certification with the Secretary attesting to continued material participation, and the Secretary may audit such certification at any time during the 10-year period.
Sec. 7. EXPATRIATION TAX.
- (1) DEEMED DISPOSITION.—Any individual who is or was a covered taxpayer in any of the five taxable years preceding the date of expatriation and who relinquishes United States citizenship or ceases to be a lawful permanent resident shall be treated as having sold all assets (tradable and illiquid) at fair market value on the day before expatriation. All resulting gains shall be included in total economic income for the final taxable year and shall be subject to the minimum tax under Section 3.
- (2) DEFERRED ILLIQUID GAINS.—For purposes of paragraph (1), all deferred gains on illiquid assets shall be recognized immediately, and the interest charge under Section 4(5) shall apply through the date of expatriation.
- (3) NO EXEMPTIONS.—The exemptions provided under Section 6(3) shall not apply to deemed dispositions under this section. The spousal deferral, personal residence exclusion, and family business deferral are not available upon expatriation.
- (4) COLLECTION AUTHORITY.—The Secretary may place liens on any assets of the expatriating taxpayer remaining within United States jurisdiction and may enter into collection agreements with foreign tax authorities to ensure payment of the tax imposed under this section.
Sec. 8. INCENTIVE CREDITS AGAINST THE MINIMUM TAX.
- (1) JOB CREATION CREDIT.—A covered taxpayer shall be allowed a credit against the minimum tax imposed under Section 3 equal to 10 percent of the total compensation paid during the taxable year for each net new qualifying position created during such year, up to a maximum credit of 5 percentage points of the taxpayer's total economic income.
- (2) HIGHER EDUCATION CREDIT.—A covered taxpayer shall be allowed a credit against the minimum tax imposed under Section 3 equal to 100 percent of qualified education expenditures made during the taxable year, up to a maximum credit of 5 percentage points of the taxpayer's total economic income.
- (3) COMBINED LIMITATION.—The total credits allowed under this section shall not reduce the taxpayer's effective federal tax rate below 15 percent of total economic income for the taxable year, as provided in Section 3(2).
- (4) NO CARRYFORWARD.—Credits under this section that exceed the amount allowable for the taxable year may not be carried forward to subsequent taxable years. Credits must be earned and applied in the same taxable year.
- (5) SUBSTANTIATION.—A covered taxpayer claiming credits under this section shall maintain and provide to the Secretary upon request—
- (a) for the job creation credit: payroll records, employment contracts, evidence of health coverage and retirement contributions, and a certified statement of net new qualifying positions compared to the prior taxable year; and
- (b) for the higher education credit: receipts, enrollment verification from the accredited institution, and identification of the employees or dependents on whose behalf payments were made, or documentation of scholarship fund contributions and the fund's selection criteria.
Sec. 9. REPORTING AND TRANSPARENCY.
- (1) COVERED TAXPAYER DISCLOSURE.—Each covered taxpayer shall file with the Secretary, as part of the annual tax return, a schedule disclosing—
- (a) total economic income, itemized by category (adjusted gross income, unrealized gains on tradable assets, covered asset-backed borrowing, and deferred illiquid gains recognized during the year);
- (b) the effective federal tax rate before and after application of incentive credits;
- (c) a description of all tradable assets marked to market and the net gain or loss thereon;
- (d) the aggregate amount of outstanding covered asset-backed borrowing as of the end of the taxable year; and
- (e) a description of all incentive credits claimed, including the number of net new qualifying positions and the amount of qualified education expenditures.
- (2) AGGREGATE PUBLIC REPORTING.—The Secretary shall publish annually an aggregate statistical report, without identifying individual taxpayers, showing the number of covered taxpayers, the distribution of effective tax rates before and after incentive credits, the total revenue collected under this Act, and the total credits claimed by category.
Sec. 10. PENALTIES.
- (1) UNDERPAYMENT.—A covered taxpayer who fails to pay the minimum tax required under Section 3 shall be subject to a penalty equal to 25 percent of the underpayment, in addition to interest on the unpaid amount at the applicable federal rate plus 5 percentage points.
- (2) FAILURE TO DISCLOSE.—A covered taxpayer who fails to file the schedule required under Section 9(1) or who materially understates total economic income shall be subject to a penalty of the greater of $500,000 or 5 percent of total economic income for the taxable year.
- (3) FRAUDULENT UNDERREPORTING.—A covered taxpayer who willfully understates total economic income or willfully claims credits to which the taxpayer is not entitled shall be subject to a penalty of 75 percent of the underpayment attributable to the fraud, in addition to any criminal penalties applicable under existing law.
- (4) ANTI-AVOIDANCE VIOLATIONS.—Any person who participates in an arrangement the principal purpose of which is to enable a covered taxpayer to avoid the minimum tax under this Act shall be subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,000,000 per arrangement.
Sec. 11. EFFECTIVE DATE.
- (1) This Act shall take effect for taxable years beginning after December 31 of the year of enactment.
- (2) The mark-to-market provisions of Section 4 shall first apply to the taxable year beginning after December 31 of the year of enactment, using the taxpayer's adjusted basis in tradable assets as of that date.
- (3) The elimination of the stepped-up basis under Section 6 shall apply to decedents dying after the date of enactment.
- (4) The expatriation tax under Section 7 shall apply to any individual who relinquishes citizenship or permanent residency on or after the date of enactment.
- (5) The Secretary shall promulgate all regulations required under this Act not later than 180 days after the date of enactment.
Sources
- Congressional Budget Office, "The Distribution of Household Income, 2021." https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59509
- White House Council of Economic Advisers, "What Is the Average Federal Individual Income Tax Rate on the Wealthiest Americans?" September 2021. https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/cea/written-materials/2021/09/23/what-is-the-average-federal-individual-income-tax-rate-on-the-wealthiest-americans/
- U.S. Treasury, Remarks by Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy Lily Batchelder on Tax Evasion and Tax Avoidance, May 2022. https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0767
- Congressional Budget Office, "Change the Taxation of Assets Transferred at Death," Budget Options, 2024. https://www.cbo.gov/budget-options/60943
Immigration Reform and Guest Worker Bill
At a Glance
- Requires all unauthorized immigrants to register within 180 days or face permanent ineligibility
- Creates guest worker visas tied to quarterly labor shortage data
- Mandates E-Verify for all employers within two years
- Penalties up to $150,000 per worker for employers who hire unauthorized workers
- Citizenship requires departing first and applying from home country -- no general amnesty
- Earned pathway for Dreamers: education + service + 7-year conditional period before permanent residency
- Both parents of minor Dreamers receive deferred enforcement until child turns 18
- Directs reduction of legal immigration backlogs and increased per-country visa caps

An estimated 11 to 12 million people live in the United States without legal status[1]. They are the workers who pick the produce Americans eat, frame the houses Americans live in, clean the offices Americans work in, and care for the children and elderly Americans love. Many have lived here for decades, paid taxes, raised families, and become part of the fabric of their communities—yet they exist in a permanent shadow, vulnerable to exploitation by employers who know these workers cannot complain, and separated from the legal protections that every person in America deserves. This is not a system that works for anyone: not for unauthorized immigrants living in fear, not for American workers whose wages are undercut by an exploitable labor force, and not for employers trying to follow the law while competitors cheat.
The current immigration system is broken in ways that defy common sense. Industries that depend on immigrant labor—agriculture, construction, food processing, hospitality, healthcare—face chronic worker shortages that domestic labor cannot fill, yet legal pathways for these workers are capped at arbitrary numbers, buried in bureaucratic delays, and disconnected from actual economic demand. The H-2A and H-2B visa programs are so cumbersome that many employers find it easier to hire without verifying status than to navigate the system legally. Meanwhile, border enforcement agencies spend billions processing economic migrants who pose no security threat, diverting resources from the drug traffickers, human smugglers, and genuine security risks that demand attention.
The human cost of inaction is staggering. Families live in constant fear of separation. Children who are American citizens grow up with the psychological burden of knowing their parents could be deported at any moment. Workers endure wage theft, unsafe conditions, and abuse because reporting violations means risking everything. And communities across America—from meatpacking towns in the Midwest to farming communities in California—depend on a workforce that has no legal standing, no stability, and no path forward.
This legislation replaces dysfunction with accountability. Every unauthorized immigrant must register within 180 days, submit to a background check, and either obtain a guest worker visa tied to a verified labor shortage or depart. Those who fail to register face permanent ineligibility for any visa or immigration benefit. Employers face escalating penalties—up to $150,000 per worker and criminal prosecution—for knowingly hiring unauthorized workers. E-Verify becomes mandatory for all employers within two years. A new guest worker visa program, calibrated quarterly to actual labor market data, creates legal pathways where demand exists while requiring prevailing wage payments that protect American workers from undercutting. The bill does not offer general amnesty. Adults who entered voluntarily must depart and apply for citizenship through the same process as everyone else. However, registered guest workers in good standing who depart voluntarily will not be penalized by the unlawful presence bars that currently make return impossible, giving them a real opportunity to get in line without being punished for having come forward. It offers a choice: come into the light, follow the rules, and contribute legally, or face consequences. That is not open borders. It is the rule of law applied with common sense.
The single exception is for Dreamers—people brought to this country as children who had no choice in the matter. A three-year-old carried across a border bears no moral culpability for that crossing. Many Dreamers have lived here for decades, attended American schools, speak English as their first language, and know no other home. This legislation creates a demanding earned pathway to conditional permanent residency and eventual citizenship for those who prove they deserve it: education through at least a trade certificate or associate degree, two years of employment or military or national service, English proficiency, tax compliance, a clean criminal record, and a seven-year conditional period with annual compliance checks—all before they can even apply for permanent residency. The minimum timeline from registration to citizenship is thirteen to fifteen years. This is not a handout. It is the most demanding earned pathway in any proposed immigration legislation—and the only in-country path in this bill.
The legislation also recognizes that deporting the parents of a minor Dreamer would undermine the child's ability to meet the pathway's rigorous requirements. Both parents of a qualifying Dreamer under age eighteen receive deferred enforcement—not exemption—until the child reaches adulthood, at which point the full requirements of this Act apply. During the deferral, parents must check in annually, submit to background checks, and maintain a clean record. This is a bridge for the child's stability, not a reward for the parents. To ensure the Dreamer pathway does not come at the expense of those who followed the rules, the bill also directs improvements to the legal immigration system—reducing processing backlogs, increasing per-country visa caps, and streamlining bureaucratic delays—so that patience and compliance are rewarded rather than punished.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
Erosion of Immigration System Integrity. Unregulated immigration undermines the rule of law and public confidence in government institutions. An estimated 11 to 12 million unauthorized immigrants reside in the United States[1], with that population having remained largely stable for much of the past decade due to a combination of increased border enforcement and economic factors. Without a structured process for those already in the country without legal status, enforcement becomes inconsistent, creating a shadow population that exists outside formal legal structures. This ambiguity breeds public cynicism about whether immigration laws have any practical meaning and fuels political polarization that prevents constructive reform.
Exploitation of Vulnerable Workers. Individuals without legal status are highly susceptible to abuse by employers, landlords, and criminal actors because they lack legal protection and fear deportation if they report mistreatment. Wage theft, unsafe working conditions, sexual harassment, and human trafficking disproportionately affect unauthorized workers who have no practical recourse. The Department of Labor has documented systematic violations in industries with high concentrations of unauthorized workers, including agriculture, construction, food processing, and domestic services[2]. This exploitation is not only a humanitarian concern—it creates a two-tiered labor system that undermines protections for all workers.
Labor Market Mismatches and Economic Inefficiency. U.S. industries experience both skilled and unskilled labor shortages that shift with economic conditions, regional demand, and demographic changes. The current visa system, designed decades ago, does not adapt quickly or transparently to these changing needs. Agricultural employers report chronic shortages during harvest seasons. Construction, healthcare, and hospitality industries face persistent vacancies that domestic workers cannot or will not fill at prevailing wages. Meanwhile, the H-2A and H-2B visa programs are bureaucratically cumbersome, with caps that bear no relationship to actual employer demand[3]. The disconnect between labor needs and legal pathways incentivizes illegal hiring and unauthorized entry.
Wage Suppression and Unfair Competition. When employers can hire workers outside normal labor protections—paying below minimum wage, avoiding payroll taxes, and ignoring workplace safety standards—it creates downward pressure on wages and working conditions for all workers in affected industries. American workers and law-abiding employers cannot compete fairly against those who exploit unauthorized labor. Studies indicate that industries with high concentrations of unauthorized workers experience measurable wage depression, particularly affecting native-born workers without college degrees[4]. A functional guest worker program with prevailing wage requirements would level the playing field while meeting legitimate labor demand.
Border Security Resource Misallocation. Current policy forces border enforcement agencies to process large numbers of economic migrants alongside genuine asylum seekers, drug traffickers, and security threats. Creating legal pathways for workers who pose no security risk would allow Customs and Border Protection to concentrate resources on actual threats rather than processing families seeking employment. The absence of realistic legal options for economic migration guarantees continued unauthorized crossings regardless of enforcement spending.
Family Separation and Community Disruption. The current system forces millions of families into legal limbo, with unauthorized parents of U.S. citizen children facing potential deportation at any moment. This uncertainty disrupts communities, schools, and local economies. Children growing up in mixed-status families experience documented psychological harm from deportation fears[5]. A registration and accountability system would bring these families into the open, allowing them to contribute fully to their communities while meeting all legal obligations.
Dreamers Bear Consequences for Decisions They Did Not Make. An estimated 3.6 million people were brought to the United States as children and have grown up as Americans in every respect except legal status[6]. Many have lived here for decades, attended American schools, speak English as their first language, and have no meaningful connection to their country of birth. The current system treats them identically to adults who chose to cross the border—requiring departure and reentry through standard channels that could mean years abroad in a country they do not know. This fails the basic legal principle that individuals should not be punished for acts they had no role in choosing. DACA recipients alone contribute approximately $42 billion annually to GDP[7] and pay $6.2 billion in federal taxes, yet they live in permanent legal limbo with no pathway to the stability they have earned through decades of contribution. A system that cannot distinguish between a thirty-year-old who crossed the border last year and someone brought here at age three who has lived, worked, and paid taxes for twenty-five years is not firm—it is indiscriminate.
Legal Immigration Backlogs Punish Those Who Follow the Rules. Millions of people who applied through legal channels wait years or decades for their visas to be processed. Employment-based visa applicants from countries like India face backlogs exceeding twenty years due to per-country caps that bear no relationship to demand[8]. Family-sponsored applicants in some categories wait ten to twenty-five years. These delays punish compliance—the people who did everything right spend the longest waiting. Any reform that creates new pathways for unauthorized immigrants without simultaneously improving the legal system sends a message that following the rules is for suckers. Reducing backlogs, increasing per-country caps, and streamlining processing are essential both on the merits and as a matter of basic fairness to legal immigrants whose patience has been tested long enough.
Immigration Reform and Guest Worker Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Immigration Reform and Guest Worker Act."
Sec. 2. DEFINITIONS.
- (1) COVERED INDIVIDUAL.—The term "covered individual" means any person present in the United States without lawful immigration status as of the date of enactment or who has overstayed or violated the terms of a previously issued visa.
- (2) GUEST WORKER VISA.—The term "Guest Worker Visa" means the GW-1 nonimmigrant visa classification established under Section 5.
- (3) LABOR SHORTAGE DETERMINATION.—The term "labor shortage determination" means a finding by the Secretary of Labor that a specific occupation or geographic region faces a documented shortage of available domestic workers.
- (4) PREVAILING WAGE.—The term "prevailing wage" means the wage level determined by the Secretary of Labor for the applicable occupation and geographic area.
- (5) DREAMER.—The term "Dreamer" means a covered individual who—
- (A) was physically present in the United States on the date of enactment of this Act;
- (B) was younger than 16 years of age on the date the individual first entered the United States without lawful immigration status or first became subject to an overstayed or violated visa;
- (C) was younger than 38 years of age on the date of enactment of this Act;
- (D) has maintained continuous physical presence in the United States for not less than five consecutive years immediately preceding the date of enactment; and
- (E) is not a person described in Section 3(2).
- (6) CONDITIONAL PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS.—The term "conditional permanent resident status" means the status granted under Section 6 of this Act to a qualified Dreamer, which confers lawful residence and employment authorization subject to conditions and revocation as provided therein.
- (7) QUALIFYING DREAMER.—The term "qualifying Dreamer" means a Dreamer as defined in paragraph (5) who is under the age of eighteen as of the date on which a parent applies for deferred enforcement under Section 7.
- (8) DISQUALIFYING CRIMINAL OFFENSE.—The term "disqualifying criminal offense" means any felony, any offense classified as an aggravated felony under section 101(a)(43) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, any crime of domestic violence or child abuse, any offense involving drug trafficking, or accumulation of three or more misdemeanor convictions excluding minor traffic violations.
Sec. 3. MANDATORY REGISTRATION PERIOD.
- (1) Each covered individual shall, not later than 180 days after enactment, appear at a designated registration center to submit to a background check, provide biometric data, provide proof of identity, and submit to a medical screening.
- (2) DISQUALIFICATION.—A covered individual shall be ineligible for registration and referred for removal if convicted of a felony, convicted of three or more misdemeanors, identified as a national security threat, or previously formally deported and unlawfully reentered.
- (3) Upon completion, each qualified individual shall receive a provisional registration document valid for one year.
Sec. 4. CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE TO REGISTER.
- (1) Any covered individual who fails to register within the 180-day period shall be subject to immediate removal proceedings upon identification and permanently ineligible for any visa or immigration benefit.
- (2) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall conduct a multilingual public awareness campaign during the registration period.
Sec. 5. GUEST WORKER VISA PROGRAM.
- (1) There is established a GW-1 Guest Worker Visa for registered individuals with employment in a labor-shortage occupation, or foreign nationals applying from outside the United States for such employment.
- (2) The Secretary of Labor shall publish quarterly labor shortage determinations based on BLS data and employer attestations.
- (3) VISA TERMS.—A GW-1 visa shall be valid for one year, renewable annually for up to six years. Holders may change employers if the new employment is in a shortage occupation.
- (4) WAGE REQUIREMENTS.—Employers shall pay not less than the prevailing wage.
- (5) NO PATH TO CITIZENSHIP FROM WITHIN THE UNITED STATES.—
- (a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in Section 6 with respect to qualified Dreamers, nothing in this Act creates a path to permanent resident status or citizenship for any individual while present in the United States under a GW-1 visa or provisional registration.
- (b) CITIZENSHIP THROUGH STANDARD CHANNELS.—A GW-1 visa holder who wishes to pursue United States citizenship must first depart the United States and apply for an immigrant visa through the standard process administered by the Department of State from outside the United States. No application for permanent resident status or naturalization may be filed from within the United States by a current or former GW-1 visa holder.
- (c) WAIVER OF UNLAWFUL PRESENCE BARS.—Notwithstanding sections 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I) and 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the three-year and ten-year bars for unlawful presence), any individual who was registered under Section 3 of this Act, maintained good standing under the GW-1 program for not less than three consecutive years, has no criminal convictions other than minor traffic offenses, and departed the United States voluntarily shall not be subject to the unlawful presence bars when applying for an immigrant visa from outside the United States.
- (d) NO PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT.—An individual applying under subparagraph (b) shall receive no priority, preference, or expedited processing relative to any other applicant for an immigrant visa. Compliance with this Act demonstrates respect for the rule of law but does not confer an advantage over individuals who have waited in line through existing legal channels.
Sec. 6. DREAMER EARNED RESIDENCY PATHWAY.
- (a) REGISTRATION REQUIREMENT.—
- (1) A Dreamer seeking status under this section shall register during the same 180-day period established under Section 3 and shall comply with all registration requirements therein, including background check, biometric data submission, proof of identity, and medical screening.
- (2) At the time of registration, a Dreamer shall declare intent to apply for conditional permanent resident status under this section and provide such evidence of eligibility as the Secretary of Homeland Security shall require by regulation, including but not limited to—
- (A) documentary evidence of the date of initial entry into the United States, including school records, medical records, religious institution records, or sworn affidavits from two or more individuals with personal knowledge;
- (B) documentary evidence of continuous physical presence for not less than five consecutive years, including lease agreements, utility records, employment records, tax filings, school enrollment records, or dated correspondence from Federal, State, or local government agencies; and
- (C) proof of age at the time of initial entry.
- (A) documentary evidence of the date of initial entry into the United States, including school records, medical records, religious institution records, or sworn affidavits from two or more individuals with personal knowledge;
- (3) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall adjudicate each Dreamer declaration within 180 days of receipt and issue a Dreamer Registration Document to each individual determined to meet the eligibility requirements. A Dreamer Registration Document shall authorize employment and protect the holder from removal proceedings for the duration of its validity.
- (b) APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS.—
- (1) IN GENERAL.—Not earlier than one year and not later than three years after receiving a Dreamer Registration Document, a Dreamer may apply for conditional permanent resident status by demonstrating that the individual meets each of the following requirements:
- (A) EDUCATION.—The applicant has obtained a high school diploma or General Education Development certificate from an accredited institution in the United States, and at least one of the following: an associate degree or higher from an accredited institution of higher education; a postsecondary certificate, credential, or license from an accredited trade, vocational, or technical program of not less than one year in duration; or completion of not less than 60 semester credit hours toward a bachelor's degree at an accredited institution. An applicant who has not yet obtained a high school diploma or GED at the time of application may satisfy this requirement by enrolling in a GED program within six months of receiving a Dreamer Registration Document and completing the program within two years of being granted conditional permanent resident status. Failure to complete within two years shall result in revocation of conditional status under subsection (f).
- (B) ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY.—The applicant demonstrates English language proficiency at a level sufficient for civic participation, as measured by a standardized test approved by the Secretary of Homeland Security. The Secretary may waive this requirement for an applicant who completed all secondary and postsecondary education in English.
- (C) EMPLOYMENT OR SERVICE.—The applicant demonstrates at least one of the following: not less than two years of cumulative employment in the United States, including employment documented through tax filings, employer statements, or other verifiable records; not less than two years of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States or reserve components thereof; or not less than two years of full-time service in a national civilian service program designated by the Secretary, including AmeriCorps, the Peace Corps, or a federally recognized volunteer emergency response organization.
- (D) CRIMINAL RECORD.—The applicant has not been convicted of any disqualifying criminal offense as defined in Section 2(8).
- (E) TAX COMPLIANCE.—The applicant has filed Federal income tax returns, or demonstrated exemption therefrom, for each year of the three-year period preceding the application and has no outstanding Federal tax liability or has entered into an approved installment agreement with the Internal Revenue Service.
- (F) SELECTIVE SERVICE.—If male and between the ages of 18 and 26, the applicant has registered with the Selective Service System.
- (A) EDUCATION.—The applicant has obtained a high school diploma or General Education Development certificate from an accredited institution in the United States, and at least one of the following: an associate degree or higher from an accredited institution of higher education; a postsecondary certificate, credential, or license from an accredited trade, vocational, or technical program of not less than one year in duration; or completion of not less than 60 semester credit hours toward a bachelor's degree at an accredited institution. An applicant who has not yet obtained a high school diploma or GED at the time of application may satisfy this requirement by enrolling in a GED program within six months of receiving a Dreamer Registration Document and completing the program within two years of being granted conditional permanent resident status. Failure to complete within two years shall result in revocation of conditional status under subsection (f).
- (2) FEES.—An applicant shall pay an application processing fee of $2,500 and a penalty assessment of $1,000 to reflect the violation of immigration law. The penalty assessment shall be deposited in a dedicated account within the Treasury to fund immigration court operations.
- (3) BACKGROUND CHECK.—An applicant shall submit to a comprehensive background investigation conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Homeland Security. Any material misrepresentation shall result in denial and referral for removal proceedings.
- (c) TERMS OF CONDITIONAL PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS.—
- (1) DURATION.—Conditional permanent resident status shall be granted for a period of seven years from the date of approval.
- (2) RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS.—An individual granted conditional permanent resident status shall be authorized to reside and work in the United States without restriction as to employer or occupation; be eligible for Federal student financial aid on the same terms as a lawful permanent resident; not be eligible to vote in any Federal, State, or local election; be subject to all obligations of United States residents including tax filing, jury service when called, and Selective Service registration; and not sponsor any family member for immigration benefits until the individual has obtained lawful permanent resident status under subsection (d).
- (3) ANNUAL COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION.—During the conditional period, the individual shall certify annually to the Secretary of Homeland Security that the individual has not been convicted of any disqualifying criminal offense; has been employed, enrolled in an accredited educational institution, or serving in the Armed Forces or a designated national service program for not less than nine months of the preceding twelve-month period, except for documented medical incapacity or parental leave not exceeding six months; has filed all required Federal tax returns and has no delinquent Federal tax liability; has not departed the United States for any single period exceeding 180 consecutive days or for an aggregate period exceeding 365 days during the full conditional period without advance authorization by the Secretary; and has maintained a valid address on file with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
- (4) FAILURE TO CERTIFY.—An individual who fails to submit the annual certification within 90 days of its due date shall receive written notice at the last known address. If certification is not received within 60 days of such notice, conditional permanent resident status shall be terminated and the individual shall be placed in removal proceedings.
- (d) ADJUSTMENT TO LAWFUL PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS.—
- (1) Not earlier than 90 days before the expiration of the seven-year conditional period and not later than one year after such expiration, an individual may apply for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status by demonstrating that the individual has satisfied all annual compliance certification requirements for the entire conditional period; has not been convicted of any disqualifying criminal offense at any time; has been employed, enrolled in education, or serving in the Armed Forces or national service for not less than 75 percent of the seven-year conditional period; demonstrates English language and civics knowledge sufficient for naturalization as prescribed by section 312 of the Immigration and Nationality Act; has filed all required Federal and State tax returns and has satisfied all tax obligations or entered into approved payment arrangements; and has not been a public charge as determined under section 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act during the conditional period.
- (2) An applicant shall pay an adjustment processing fee of $1,500.
- (3) Upon approval, the individual shall be granted lawful permanent resident status with the same rights and obligations as any other lawful permanent resident of the United States.
- (e) NATURALIZATION.—
- (1) An individual granted lawful permanent resident status under subsection (d) may apply for naturalization under the same terms, conditions, and waiting periods applicable to all lawful permanent residents under title III of the Immigration and Nationality Act, including the five-year continuous residence requirement under section 316(a).
- (2) Service in the Armed Forces of the United States during the conditional or permanent resident period shall be credited toward the continuous residence requirement for naturalization as provided under sections 328 and 329 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
- (3) No provision of this section shall be construed to create an expedited or preferential pathway to naturalization. An individual applying under this subsection shall be processed in the same queue and under the same timeline as all other applicants for naturalization.
- (f) REVOCATION AND REMOVAL.—
- (1) MANDATORY REVOCATION.—Conditional permanent resident status shall be revoked and the individual placed in removal proceedings if the individual is convicted of any disqualifying criminal offense; obtained status through fraud, material misrepresentation, or submission of falsified documents; is determined to pose a threat to national security or public safety by the Secretary of Homeland Security; departs the United States for a continuous period exceeding 365 days without advance authorization; or fails to complete a GED program within the timeframe specified in subsection (b)(1)(A) where applicable.
- (2) DISCRETIONARY REVOCATION.—The Secretary of Homeland Security may revoke conditional permanent resident status if the individual fails to satisfy annual compliance certification requirements and does not demonstrate good cause for such failure within 120 days of written notice.
- (3) JUDICIAL REVIEW.—An individual whose conditional permanent resident status is revoked may seek review in immigration court within 30 days of notice of revocation. The immigration court shall have jurisdiction to review the factual and legal basis for revocation under a substantial evidence standard.
- (4) EFFECT OF REVOCATION.—An individual whose conditional permanent resident status is revoked shall be ineligible to reapply under this section and shall be subject to removal proceedings. Voluntary departure within 60 days of a final order of revocation shall not bar the individual from applying for an immigrant visa from outside the United States, subject to all applicable bars and waiting periods under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
- (g) PHYSICAL PRESENCE REQUIREMENT.—
- (1) This section shall apply only to individuals physically present in the United States on the date of enactment of this Act who register during the 180-day period established under Section 3.
- (2) No individual who was removed, deported, or voluntarily departed from the United States prior to the date of enactment may apply for benefits under this section from outside the United States or upon subsequent entry.
- (3) No individual who enters the United States after the date of enactment may qualify as a Dreamer under Section 2(5) of this Act.
- (h) LIMITATION ON PRECEDENT.—
- (1) This section constitutes a one-time resolution of a specific historical situation and shall not be construed to create a precedent for, or authorize the creation of, any additional in-country path to permanent resident status or citizenship for any other class of individuals.
- (2) No executive order, regulation, or administrative action may expand the class of individuals eligible under this section beyond those who meet the definition of Dreamer in Section 2(5) as of the date of enactment.
- (3) The principle underlying this section—that individuals should not bear legal consequences for immigration decisions made on their behalf during childhood—applies exclusively to the specific earned pathway established herein and does not authorize any generalized amnesty or blanket relief.
- (i) RULEMAKING.—Not later than 180 days after enactment, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Education, and the Attorney General, shall promulgate regulations to implement this section, including standards for documentary evidence, approved English proficiency tests, designated national civilian service programs, and the annual compliance certification process.
Sec. 7. DEFERRED ENFORCEMENT FOR PARENTS OF QUALIFYING DREAMERS.
- (1) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established a deferred enforcement status for the parents or legal guardians of a qualifying Dreamer, under which the obligations imposed by Sections 3, 4, 5, and 11 of this Act shall be held in abeyance for the duration of the deferral period.
- (2) ELIGIBILITY.—A covered individual may apply for deferred enforcement status if the applicant is the biological parent, adoptive parent, or legal guardian of a qualifying Dreamer; has resided in the same household as the qualifying Dreamer continuously for not less than one year as of the date of application; has not been convicted of a disqualifying criminal offense; is not identified as a national security threat; and has not been previously formally deported and unlawfully reentered the United States.
- (3) LIMITATION.—
- (a) Not more than two parents or legal guardians may receive deferred enforcement status with respect to any individual qualifying Dreamer.
- (b) Where a parent has more than one qualifying Dreamer, the deferral period shall terminate upon the date on which the youngest qualifying Dreamer attains the age of eighteen.
- (4) DEFERRAL PERIOD.—
- (a) The deferral period shall begin on the date on which the Secretary approves the application for deferred enforcement status.
- (b) The deferral period shall terminate on the earliest of the date on which the youngest qualifying Dreamer of that parent attains the age of eighteen; the date on which the qualifying Dreamer departs the United States; the date on which the parent departs the United States; the date on which the parent is convicted of a disqualifying criminal offense; or the date on which the Secretary determines that the parent has engaged in fraud or material misrepresentation in obtaining deferred enforcement status.
- (5) OBLIGATIONS DURING DEFERRAL.—
- (a) PRELIMINARY REGISTRATION.—A parent granted deferred enforcement status shall, not later than 90 days after approval, appear at a designated registration center to provide biometric data, proof of identity, proof of relationship to the qualifying Dreamer, and proof of the qualifying Dreamer's age and continuous presence.
- (b) ANNUAL CHECK-IN.—The parent shall appear annually at a designated registration center to confirm continued eligibility, provide updated address and employment information, and submit to a criminal background check.
- (c) CRIMINAL CONDUCT PROHIBITION.—A conviction for a disqualifying criminal offense shall result in immediate termination of deferred enforcement status and referral for removal proceedings.
- (d) COOPERATION.—The parent shall cooperate with all reasonable requests by the Secretary for information or documentation relevant to continued eligibility.
- (6) EFFECT OF TERMINATION.—
- (a) TRANSITION PERIOD.—Upon termination of the deferral period because the qualifying Dreamer attains the age of eighteen, the parent shall have one year to comply with the registration requirements of Section 3 and either obtain a GW-1 visa under Section 5 or other lawful status.
- (b) CREDIT FOR PRELIMINARY REGISTRATION.—Biometric data and identity verification completed under paragraph (5)(a) shall satisfy the corresponding requirements of Section 3, and the parent shall not be required to duplicate those procedures.
- (c) FAILURE TO COMPLY.—A parent who fails to complete registration or obtain lawful status within the one-year transition period shall be subject to the consequences set forth in Section 4.
- (d) INVOLUNTARY TERMINATION.—Where the deferral period terminates because of departure, criminal conviction, or fraud, the parent shall be subject to immediate removal proceedings and permanently ineligible for deferred enforcement status under this section.
- (7) NO ADDITIONAL RIGHTS CONFERRED.—
- (a) Deferred enforcement status does not constitute lawful immigration status and does not confer eligibility for any Federal public benefit.
- (b) Nothing in this section creates a path to permanent resident status or citizenship.
- (c) A parent granted deferred enforcement status remains a covered individual for all purposes of this Act, with the sole exception that enforcement of the specified obligations is held in abeyance during the deferral period.
- (8) WORK AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary may, in the Secretary's discretion, issue a limited work authorization to a parent with deferred enforcement status, valid for one year and renewable during the deferral period, upon a determination that the parent has complied with all requirements of this section and is employed in or has a bona fide offer of employment in an occupation subject to a labor shortage determination under Section 5.
- (9) RULEMAKING.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall promulgate regulations to implement this section not later than 180 days after the date of enactment.
Sec. 8. LEGAL IMMIGRATION PROCESSING IMPROVEMENTS.
- (1) BACKLOG REDUCTION.—The Secretary of State, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall reduce the average processing time for employment-based and family-sponsored immigrant visa applications by not less than 50 percent within three years of enactment through additional staffing, technology modernization, and procedural streamlining.
- (2) PER-COUNTRY CAP REFORM.—Notwithstanding section 202(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, no employment-based immigrant visa category shall be subject to a per-country numerical limitation of less than 15 percent of the total number of such visas available in any fiscal year, effective in the first fiscal year beginning after the date of enactment.
- (3) PROCESSING TRANSPARENCY.—The Secretary of State shall publish quarterly reports detailing average processing times by visa category and country of chargeability, the number of applications pending, and the projected wait time for new applicants. Such reports shall be made publicly available online.
- (4) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated $500,000,000 for fiscal years 2027 through 2031 to carry out this section.
Sec. 9. MANDATORY EMPLOYER VERIFICATION.
- (1) All employers with 50 or more employees shall participate in E-Verify within one year of enactment. All employers shall participate within two years.
- (2) The Secretary shall upgrade E-Verify to provide real-time verification, biometric capability, and a secure appeals process.
Sec. 10. EMPLOYER PENALTIES.
- (1) An employer who knowingly employs unauthorized workers shall be subject to civil penalties of $25,000 to $75,000 per worker for a first violation, $75,000 to $150,000 for a second violation, and for third or subsequent violations, $150,000 per worker plus criminal penalties of up to five years imprisonment and debarment from Federal contracts for five years.
- (2) An employer engaged in a pattern or practice of violations shall be subject to criminal prosecution and a fine of not more than $500,000 per offense.
- (3) No worker who reports an employer violation shall be subject to adverse action or removal proceedings.
Sec. 11. DEPARTURE REQUIREMENTS.
- (1) A registered individual who does not obtain a GW-1 visa or other lawful status within one year shall depart the United States within 60 days.
- (2) Voluntary departure shall not bar future lawful visa applications.
- (3) Failure to depart shall result in formal removal proceedings and a ten-year bar on reentry.
Sec. 12. BORDER SECURITY RESOURCE REALLOCATION.
- (1) The Secretary shall conduct a comprehensive assessment of border security deployment within one year and reallocate resources to prioritize drug trafficking, human smuggling, and weapons trafficking interdiction; deploy advanced surveillance technology; and increase staffing at ports of entry.
- (2) There are authorized to be appropriated $3,000,000,000 for fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
Sec. 13. EFFECTIVE DATE.
- (1) This Act shall take effect 90 days after enactment.
- (2) The 180-day registration period begins on the effective date.
Sources
- Department of Homeland Security, Office of Homeland Security Statistics, "Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population." https://ohss.dhs.gov/topics/immigration/illegal/population-estimates
- U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division, Southeast Agricultural Industry Compliance Campaign Results, 2024. https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/whd/whd20240319
- U.S. Government Accountability Office, "H-2B Visas: Additional Steps Needed to Meet Employers' Hiring Needs and Protect U.S. Workers," GAO-20-230. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-230
- Congressional Budget Office, "The Foreign-Born Population and Its Effects on the U.S. Economy and the Federal Budget," 2020. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/55967
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, "The Integration of Immigrants into American Society," 2015. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/21746/the-integration-of-immigrants-into-american-society
- Fwd.us, "Dreamers in the United States," based on Migration Policy Institute data. https://www.fwd.us/news/daca-fix/
- Center for American Progress, "10th Annual DACA Survey: 2024 Findings." https://www.americanprogress.org/article/10th-annual-daca-survey-2024-findings-reveal-whats-at-stake-for-recipients-and-the-united-states/
- Cato Institute, "Immigration Wait Times from Quotas Have Doubled." https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/immigration-wait-times-quotas-have-doubled-exposed-unreasonableness
Government Accountability Bill
At a Glance
- Limits Congress members to 12 years in either chamber
- Bans members and their families from trading individual stocks
- Extends the lobbying cooling-off period to five years for former members
- Requires quarterly public disclosure of all financial transactions
- Violations trigger disgorgement of profits and criminal referral

Public trust in Congress has fallen to historic lows. Americans consistently rate it among the least respected institutions in the country—not because of policy disagreements but because they believe members serve their own interests rather than those of constituents. Three interconnected problems fuel this perception: the absence of term limits that has created a permanent political class, the ability of members to trade stocks in companies affected by their legislation, and a revolving door that allows former lawmakers to cash in by lobbying their former colleagues.
The Founders envisioned citizen legislators who would serve temporarily and return home to live under the laws they passed. Today, career politicians spend decades in office, accumulating power and becoming disconnected from the communities they represent. Without term limits, incumbents enjoy overwhelming advantages that make competitive elections rare and accountability nearly impossible.
Meanwhile, members trade millions in stocks while accessing nonpublic information that would constitute insider trading for ordinary citizens. The STOCK Act of 2012[1] was supposed to address this, but its $200 penalty for violations is meaningless and no member has ever been prosecuted[2]. Suspiciously timed trades continue making headlines—members selling before crashes, buying before favorable legislation, and consistently outperforming hedge fund managers. The public reasonably concludes the game is rigged.
The revolving door compounds these problems. Hundreds of former members now work as lobbyists, using relationships and access to influence former colleagues. The prospect of lucrative post-congressional careers incentivizes sitting members to curry favor with industries they may soon represent.
This legislation establishes term limits of twelve years for both chambers, prohibits members and immediate families from trading individual stocks, and extends cooling-off periods while closing loopholes that allow former members to influence legislation without registering as lobbyists. Together, these provisions restore the principle that public service is a temporary duty for constituents' benefit, not a career path for personal enrichment.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
Career Politicians Have Replaced Citizen Legislators. Congress has become dominated by career politicians who spend decades in office, losing touch with ordinary Americans. Without term limits, incumbents enjoy overwhelming advantages in fundraising and name recognition, making competitive elections the exception. Members focus on perpetuating careers rather than solving problems, while the same faces occupy powerful positions year after year as the country's challenges go unaddressed.
Members Trade Stocks While Making Laws That Affect Those Stocks. Elected officials access nonpublic information about pending legislation and economic conditions, yet continue trading stocks in companies their work directly affects. The STOCK Act's $200 penalty[1] is meaningless and no member has been prosecuted[2]. The public watches representatives make well-timed trades and outperform market benchmarks, concluding that those who write the rules are exempt from following them.
The Revolving Door Corrupts the Legislative Process. Hundreds of former members work as lobbyists, selling relationships and insider knowledge. The prospect of lucrative post-congressional careers creates incentives for sitting members to favor industries they may soon represent. Current cooling-off periods are too short and full of loopholes allowing former members to influence legislation as "strategic consultants" without registering as lobbyists.
Concentrated Power Enables Corruption and Stifles Reform. Long-tenured members accumulate disproportionate power through chairmanships and seniority, creating opportunities for corruption while insulating them from accountability. The same members who benefit from the current system control whether reforms ever receive a vote. Newer members with fresh ideas are marginalized while career politicians dominate.
Public Trust Has Collapsed. Americans overwhelmingly believe members prioritize personal enrichment over constituent needs. This perception has driven trust in Congress to historic lows. When citizens believe their representatives are corrupt, they disengage from civic life and lose faith in democratic institutions. Restoring legitimacy requires structural reforms that make self-dealing difficult and accountability certain.
Government Accountability Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Government Accountability Act."
Sec. 2. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act—
- (1) MEMBER.—The term "Member" means a Member of the Senate or a Member of the House of Representatives, including a Delegate or the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico.
- (2) COVERED INDIVIDUAL.—The term "covered individual" means—
- (a) any Member;
- (b) the spouse of a Member; and
- (c) any dependent child of a Member.
- (3) COVERED INVESTMENT.—The term "covered investment" means any investment in a security, commodity, future, or other financial instrument, but does not include—
- (a) widely held investment funds such as mutual funds and exchange-traded funds that track a broad market index;
- (b) United States Treasury securities;
- (c) municipal bonds; or
- (d) interests in Federal retirement plans, including the Thrift Savings Plan.
- (4) LOBBYING ACTIVITY.—The term "lobbying activity" has the meaning given that term in section 3 of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1602), and shall additionally include any strategic advisory, consulting, or other activity in which a person leverages government relationships or non-public knowledge gained through Federal service to influence government action on behalf of a client.
Sec. 3. CONGRESSIONAL TERM LIMITS.
- (1) JOINT RESOLUTION.—There is hereby proposed an amendment to the Constitution of the United States:
"No person who has served six full terms as a Representative in Congress shall be eligible for election or appointment to the House of Representatives. No person who has served two full terms as a Senator shall be eligible for election or appointment to the Senate. Service for more than one half of a term to which another person was elected shall count as one full term. Terms of service that commenced before the date of ratification of this Article shall be counted."
- (2) SUBMISSION TO STATES.—The joint resolution shall be submitted to the States for ratification by the legislatures thereof within seven years.
Sec. 4. PROHIBITION ON INDIVIDUAL SECURITIES TRADING.
- (1) PROHIBITION.—No covered individual may purchase, sell, or enter into any transaction involving a covered investment during any period in which the Member holds office.
- (2) DIVESTITURE.—Each covered individual holding a covered investment on the date of enactment, or the date on which a Member takes office, shall divest or transfer such investment to a qualified blind trust not later than one hundred eighty days after such date.
- (3) PERMITTED TRANSACTIONS.—The prohibition shall not apply to—
- (a) sales for the purpose of complying with the divestiture requirement;
- (b) transactions within a qualified blind trust directed by an independent trustee; and
- (c) exercise of employee stock options received before taking office, provided resulting securities are divested within thirty days.
Sec. 5. DISCLOSURE AND REPORTING.
- (1) Each Member shall file with the appropriate ethics committee a quarterly report listing all financial transactions by any covered individual within thirty days of each calendar quarter.
- (2) All reports shall be made publicly available in a searchable, machine-readable electronic database within seven days of filing.
Sec. 6. EXTENDED LOBBYING COOLING-OFF PERIOD.
- (1) MEMBERS.—The cooling-off period for former Members shall be five years.
- (2) SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL STAFF.—The cooling-off period for senior congressional staff compensated at seventy-five percent or more of a Member's salary shall be three years.
- (3) SCOPE.—The cooling-off restrictions shall apply to lobbying activity, strategic consulting on behalf of clients seeking to influence legislative or executive action, and employment by registered lobbying firms in a client-facing capacity.
- (4) ANTI-EVASION.—No former Member or senior staff member may circumvent these restrictions by providing lobbying services under any alternative title or designation.
Sec. 7. PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT.
- (1) SECURITIES TRADING VIOLATIONS.—Any covered individual who violates Section 4 shall be subject to disgorgement of all profits, a civil penalty equal to the greater of fifty thousand dollars or the profit gained, and referral to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution where material non-public information was used.
- (2) DISCLOSURE VIOLATIONS.—Any Member who fails to file a required report shall be subject to a fine of five hundred dollars per day of delinquency, not payable from official or campaign funds.
- (3) LOBBYING VIOLATIONS.—Any person who violates Section 6 shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than two hundred thousand dollars per violation and criminal prosecution under section 207 of title 18, United States Code.
Sec. 8. EFFECTIVE DATE.
- (1) Sections 4 through 7 shall take effect ninety days after enactment.
- (2) Section 3 shall take effect upon enactment and shall be transmitted to the States for ratification.
Sources
- Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act, Public Law 112-105 (2012). https://www.congress.gov/112/plaws/publ105/PLAW-112publ105.htm
- Congressional Research Service, "Proposals to Limit Financial Activities of Members of Congress," Report R47818. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R47818
One Person, One Vote Bill
At a Glance
- Caps all political contributions at $1,000 per candidate per election cycle
- Creates a 6:1 small donor matching fund to amplify ordinary voters
- Requires corporate and union political spending be approved by shareholders or members
- Mandates real-time disclosure of all political spending and donor identities
- Restructures the FEC to five members to end partisan enforcement deadlock

The influence of money in politics has eroded the foundation of American democracy, allowing wealthy individuals and organizations to exert outsized influence while ordinary citizens' voices are drowned out. Supreme Court decisions, most notably Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission[1] (2010), have enabled unlimited independent expenditures by corporations, unions, and wealthy individuals, creating a system where a small number of major donors can shape elections and policy priorities.
The consequences have transformed American politics. Outside spending has exploded, with super PACs and dark money groups now integral to most major campaigns[2]. A tiny donor class dominates political giving, with the wealthiest families routinely outspending the combined contributions of millions of small donors. Candidates without access to wealthy networks face significant barriers to mounting competitive campaigns, narrowing the pool of potential leaders.
This flood of money has also transformed how members of Congress spend their time. Both parties instruct members to spend hours each day fundraising from call centers near the Capitol—time taken directly from legislative work, constituent service, and oversight responsibilities. Elected representatives have become, in effect, part-time legislators and full-time fundraisers, with success in meeting fundraising targets determining committee assignments and leadership positions.
Public trust has collapsed accordingly. Americans overwhelmingly believe elected officials prioritize the interests of big donors over ordinary constituents, and trust in the federal government has fallen to historic lows[3]. This perception fuels cynicism, suppresses civic participation, and undermines the legitimacy of democratic institutions.
To restore the principle that every voter's voice should be weighed equally, this legislation takes an approach designed to survive constitutional scrutiny under current Supreme Court precedent. Direct contributions to candidates and committees are capped at $1,000 per election cycle—well within Congress's established authority under Buckley v. Valeo. Because Citizens United prohibits outright bans on independent expenditures, the bill instead requires corporate and union political spending to be approved by shareholders or dues-paying members before disbursement, tightens coordination rules so that spending directed or arranged by candidates is treated as a regulable contribution rather than protected independent speech, mandates comprehensive real-time disclosure of all political spending so voters know who is trying to influence them, creates a 6:1 small donor matching system that amplifies ordinary voices without restricting anyone's speech, and reforms the Federal Election Commission to end the structural deadlock that has rendered campaign finance enforcement nearly nonexistent[4]. Political participation should be a civic act, not a financial transaction. In a democracy, influence should flow from votes—not dollars.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
Wealthy Donors Have Captured the Political Process. When a handful of billionaires and wealthy families can outspend millions of ordinary citizens combined, elections become contests of wealth rather than ideas. Candidates become responsive to those who fund their campaigns rather than those who cast votes. This concentration of political spending among the few fundamentally undermines the democratic principle of political equality and transforms representative government into government by and for donors.
Unlimited Spending Has Overwhelmed Democratic Participation. The Citizens United decision and subsequent rulings enabled unlimited political spending through super PACs and dark money organizations. Outside spending now rivals or exceeds candidate spending in competitive races, meaning voters face not just candidates but shadow campaigns funded by anonymous wealthy interests. When spending has no limits, those with the most money inevitably dominate, regardless of the merit of their positions or the breadth of their support.
Members of Congress Spend More Time Fundraising Than Governing. Both parties instruct members to spend significant portions of each day—often four hours or more—calling donors rather than working on legislation, meeting with constituents, or conducting oversight. This fundraising treadmill diverts elected officials from the responsibilities voters entrusted to them. When raising money becomes the primary activity of public servants, the quality of governance inevitably suffers, and qualified candidates unwilling to become full-time fundraisers are deterred from seeking office.
Dark Money Has Eroded Transparency and Accountability. Groups that do not disclose their donors now spend hundreds of millions on elections, preventing voters from knowing who is attempting to influence their choices. This secrecy enables wealthy interests to shape elections without accountability, opens doors to foreign influence, and allows corruption to flourish in darkness. Democratic self-governance requires that citizens know who is trying to persuade them and why.
Public Trust in Government Has Collapsed. Americans overwhelmingly believe that elected officials care more about donors than constituents and that Congress prioritizes the interests of big spenders. This perception—rooted in observable reality—has driven trust in government to historic lows. When citizens conclude that their voice doesn't matter regardless of how they vote, democratic legitimacy erodes, civic participation declines, and the social contract that binds citizens to their government frays.
The Federal Election Commission Is Structurally Incapable of Enforcement. The FEC's six-member structure—evenly split between parties by design—ensures that enforcement actions require bipartisan agreement, which rarely occurs on consequential matters. Commissioners routinely deadlock along party lines[5], blocking investigations, dismissing complaints, and allowing violations to go unpunished. The agency tasked with enforcing campaign finance law has become, in effect, an institution designed to prevent its own mission from being carried out. Without structural reform, any new campaign finance rules will be as unenforceable as the existing ones.
The Current System Violates Democratic Equality. The principle of "one person, one vote" is meaningless if some citizens can amplify their political voice a million-fold through spending. Democracy requires not just equal voting rights but meaningful political equality—the assurance that citizens have roughly equal ability to influence their government. A system where billionaires can single-handedly shape elections while ordinary voters' contributions are rendered insignificant betrays this foundational principle and transforms democracy into plutocracy.
One Person, One Vote Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "One Person, One Vote Act."
Sec. 2. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act—
- (1) CONTRIBUTION.—The term "contribution" has the meaning given that term in section 301(8) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (52 U.S.C. 30101(8)), and shall additionally include any transfer of funds, donation, expenditure, or in-kind contribution made for the purpose of influencing a Federal election.
- (2) COVERED ENTITY.—The term "covered entity" means any individual, corporation, limited liability company, partnership, labor union, trade association, political action committee, super PAC, 527 organization, or any other organization or entity of any kind.
- (3) ELECTION CYCLE.—The term "election cycle" means the period beginning on the day after the date of the most recent general election for the office sought and ending on the date of the next general election.
- (4) SMALL DOLLAR CONTRIBUTION.—The term "small dollar contribution" means a contribution of two hundred dollars or less made by an individual who is a citizen or lawful permanent resident.
- (5) COMMISSION.—The term "Commission" means the Federal Election Commission as restructured under Section 8.
- (6) INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURE.—The term "independent expenditure" means an expenditure for a communication expressly advocating the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate that is not made in coordination with a candidate, a candidate's authorized committee, or their agents.
- (7) COORDINATED EXPENDITURE.—The term "coordinated expenditure" means an expenditure that meets any of the coordination standards set forth in Section 5.
- (8) COVERED ORGANIZATION.—The term "covered organization" means any corporation, limited liability company, partnership, labor union, trade association, or tax-exempt organization that makes or intends to make political expenditures exceeding ten thousand dollars in the aggregate during an election cycle.
Sec. 3. CONTRIBUTION LIMITS.
- (1) PER-CANDIDATE LIMIT.—No covered entity may make direct contributions to any single candidate for Federal office in excess of one thousand dollars per election cycle.
- (2) PER-COMMITTEE LIMIT.—No covered entity may make direct contributions to any single political committee in excess of one thousand dollars per election cycle.
- (3) AGGREGATE LIMIT.—No covered entity may make direct contributions to all candidates and committees in excess of twenty-five thousand dollars per election cycle in the aggregate.
- (4) COORDINATED EXPENDITURES TREATED AS CONTRIBUTIONS.—Any coordinated expenditure, as defined in Section 2(7) and determined under Section 5, shall be treated as a direct contribution to the candidate with whom the expenditure was coordinated and shall count against the limits established in this section.
Sec. 4. SHAREHOLDER AND MEMBER APPROVAL OF POLITICAL EXPENDITURES.
- (1) CORPORATE EXPENDITURES.—No corporation may make political expenditures exceeding ten thousand dollars in the aggregate during an election cycle from its general treasury unless—
- (a) the board of directors has adopted a political expenditure policy by majority vote, disclosed in the corporation's annual proxy statement;
- (b) shareholders have approved the aggregate amount authorized for political expenditures by majority vote at the most recent annual meeting or by written consent; and
- (c) each individual expenditure exceeding fifty thousand dollars has been separately approved by the board and disclosed to shareholders within forty-eight hours.
- (2) UNION EXPENDITURES.—No labor union may make political expenditures exceeding ten thousand dollars in the aggregate during an election cycle from dues or general funds unless—
- (a) the union's governing body has adopted a political expenditure policy approved by a majority of dues-paying members through a vote conducted by secret ballot; and
- (b) any dues-paying member who objects to political expenditures may direct that a pro rata share of the member's dues be excluded from political spending, with the union providing an annual opt-out mechanism and written notice of the right to opt out.
- (3) TRADE ASSOCIATIONS AND TAX-EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONS.—No trade association or organization described in section 501(c)(4), 501(c)(5), or 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code may make political expenditures exceeding ten thousand dollars in the aggregate during an election cycle unless—
- (a) the organization has disclosed its intent to make political expenditures to all members or donors contributing more than one thousand dollars annually; and
- (b) political expenditures are funded only from contributions specifically designated for political purposes.
- (4) ANNUAL DISCLOSURE.—Each covered organization that makes political expenditures shall file with the Commission and publish on its website an annual report listing the total amount of political expenditures, each expenditure exceeding one thousand dollars, and the authorization under which the expenditure was made.
- (5) SEPARATE SEGREGATED FUNDS.—A corporation or labor union may continue to establish a separate segregated fund for political contributions, provided all contributions to the fund are voluntary and the fund complies with the contribution limits established in Section 3.
Sec. 5. COORDINATION STANDARDS.
- (1) CONDUCT STANDARD.—An expenditure shall be treated as coordinated with a candidate if the expenditure is made—
- (a) at the request, suggestion, or direction of the candidate, the candidate's authorized committee, or any agent thereof;
- (b) pursuant to any general or particular understanding with the candidate, the candidate's authorized committee, or any agent thereof regarding the content, timing, location, intended audience, or volume of the communication;
- (c) after substantial discussion or strategic consultation between the spender or the spender's agents and the candidate, the candidate's authorized committee, or any agent thereof, regarding the candidate's campaign plans, needs, messaging strategy, or advertising schedule, whether or not the specific expenditure was discussed; or
- (d) by a person who, within the preceding twenty-four months, served as an employee, consultant, or contractor of the candidate's campaign or any committee controlled by the candidate, unless the person has maintained a complete firewall certified to the Commission.
- (2) CONTENT STANDARD.—An expenditure shall be treated as coordinated with a candidate if the resulting communication—
- (a) republishes, disseminates, or distributes campaign materials produced by the candidate's authorized committee; or
- (b) uses footage, audio, images, polling data, or opposition research that was created by or for the candidate's campaign and made available, directly or indirectly, to the spender.
- (3) COMMON VENDOR STANDARD.—An expenditure shall be treated as coordinated with a candidate if the spender and the candidate's authorized committee use a common vendor or consultant who provides strategic advice, media buying, polling, or fundraising services to both, unless both parties certify to the Commission that a complete informational firewall has been maintained and the vendor provides a written attestation of compliance.
- (4) REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION.—An expenditure by an entity that shares a current or recent officer, director, or senior employee with a candidate's campaign or authorized committee shall be presumed to be a coordinated expenditure. The presumption may be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence of a functioning informational firewall.
- (5) EFFECT OF COORDINATION.—Any expenditure determined to be a coordinated expenditure shall be treated as a contribution to the candidate and subject to the limits established in Section 3.
Sec. 6. DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS.
- (1) Any covered entity that makes political expenditures exceeding two hundred dollars in the aggregate during an election cycle shall file disclosure reports with the Commission.
- (2) Reports shall include the identity, address, and employer of each contributor, the amount and date of each expenditure, and the candidate or committee to which it was directed.
- (3) Any contribution or expenditure exceeding five hundred dollars made within twenty days of an election shall be reported within twenty-four hours.
- (4) The Commission shall maintain a searchable, publicly accessible electronic database of all disclosures, updated in real time as reports are received.
- (5) DONOR DISCLOSURE FOR INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES.—Any covered organization that makes independent expenditures exceeding ten thousand dollars in the aggregate during an election cycle shall disclose to the Commission, within twenty-four hours, the identity of each person who contributed more than ten thousand dollars to the organization during the preceding twelve months.
- (6) DISCLAIMER REQUIREMENTS.—Any communication funded by independent expenditures exceeding ten thousand dollars shall include a clear and conspicuous disclaimer identifying the organization responsible for the communication, the names of the top three donors to the organization during the preceding twelve months, and a statement that the communication was not authorized by any candidate.
- (7) TRANSFER DISCLOSURE.—Any organization that transfers funds to another organization that then makes political expenditures shall disclose such transfer to the Commission if the transferring organization knew or had reason to know that the funds would be used for political expenditures. Transfers structured to obscure the original source of funds used for political expenditures shall be treated as a violation of this Act.
Sec. 7. PROHIBITION ON FOREIGN NATIONAL POLITICAL SPENDING.
- (1) Section 319(a) of the Federal Election Campaign Act (52 U.S.C. 30121(a)) is amended to additionally prohibit any foreign national from making any disbursement for an electioneering communication or any communication that promotes, supports, attacks, or opposes a candidate for Federal office.
- (2) Any corporation making a political expenditure shall certify to the Commission that no foreign national or foreign entity directed, controlled, or financed such expenditure.
- (3) Any covered organization with foreign ownership of fifteen percent or more, or with a foreign national serving as a principal officer or on the board of directors with decision-making authority over political expenditures, shall be prohibited from making political expenditures.
Sec. 8. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION REFORM.
- (1) RESTRUCTURING.—The Federal Election Commission shall be restructured to consist of five members, no more than two of whom may be affiliated with the same political party. The fifth member shall serve as Chair and shall not be registered with any political party.
- (2) APPOINTMENT.—Members shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate for staggered six-year terms. The Chair shall be selected by the President from among individuals with demonstrated nonpartisan experience in law enforcement, election administration, or judicial service, confirmed by a three-fifths vote of the Senate.
- (3) DEADLOCK PREVENTION.—Three members shall constitute a quorum. Decisions shall be made by majority vote. If the Commission fails to act on a complaint within one hundred twenty days, the Office of General Counsel shall be authorized to pursue the matter independently, subject to judicial review.
- (4) INVESTIGATIVE AUTHORITY.—The Commission shall have full subpoena authority, the power to conduct audits and investigations on its own initiative, and the authority to impose civil penalties without prior referral to the Department of Justice for amounts not exceeding five hundred thousand dollars per violation.
- (5) RANDOM AUDIT PROGRAM.—The Commission shall establish a program of random audits covering not fewer than ten percent of all committees required to file reports under Federal law each election cycle.
Sec. 9. SMALL DONOR MATCHING PROGRAM.
- (1) There is established within the Treasury the Freedom to Vote Fund for providing matching funds for small dollar contributions.
- (2) Each small dollar contribution to a qualifying candidate shall be matched at a ratio of six dollars in Federal funds for every one dollar contributed, up to a maximum match of one thousand two hundred dollars per contributor per candidate per election cycle.
- (3) A qualifying candidate must raise not fewer than one thousand small dollar contributions from residents of the State or district and agree to total spending limits set by the Commission.
- (4) The Fund shall be financed by a surcharge of two and one-half percent on any criminal or civil fine, penalty, or settlement paid to the Federal Government in excess of one million dollars.
Sec. 10. ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES.
- (1) The Commission shall have jurisdiction to investigate and enforce violations of this Act with subpoena authority and the power to impose civil penalties.
- (2) Any covered entity that violates contribution limits shall be subject to a civil penalty equal to three times the excess contribution or fifty thousand dollars, whichever is greater.
- (3) Any covered organization that makes political expenditures without the required shareholder, member, or donor authorization under Section 4 shall be subject to a civil penalty equal to two hundred percent of the unauthorized expenditure.
- (4) Any covered organization that fails to comply with disclosure requirements under Sections 4 or 6 shall be subject to a civil penalty of ten thousand dollars per day of non-compliance.
- (5) Any person who structures transfers or uses intermediary organizations to evade the disclosure requirements of this Act shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than the amount of the expenditure and not more than three times such amount.
- (6) Any person who knowingly and willfully violates this Act shall be subject to a fine of not more than two hundred fifty thousand dollars, imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.
Sec. 11. EFFECTIVE DATE.
- (1) This Act shall take effect on January 1 of the first calendar year beginning not less than one hundred eighty days after the date of enactment.
- (2) The restructuring of the Federal Election Commission under Section 8 shall be completed not later than one year after enactment, with current commissioners serving until their successors are confirmed.
Sources
- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010). https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf
- Federal Election Commission, "Statistical Summary of 24-Month Campaign Activity of the 2023-2024 Election Cycle." https://www.fec.gov/updates/statistical-summary-of-24-month-campaign-activity-of-the-2023-2024-election-cycle/
- Pew Research Center, "Public Trust in Government: 1958-2024." https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/06/24/public-trust-in-government-1958-2024/
- U.S. Government Accountability Office, "Campaign Finance: Federal Framework, Agency Roles and Responsibilities, and Perspectives," GAO-20-66R. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-66r
- Congressional Research Service, "Deadlocked Votes Among Members of the Federal Election Commission," Report R40779. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R40779
America Works and National Security Bill
At a Glance
- Tax incentives and federal matching funds for new U.S. factories
- Companies must pay prevailing wages and keep production domestic for 15 years
- Creates a National Manufacturing Strategy Commission for defense and economic priorities
- Authorizes Grand National Projects in critical infrastructure and strategic capacity
- Rebuilds skilled trades pipeline through workforce development programs

For generations, manufacturing was the backbone of the American middle class. A worker without a college degree could walk into a factory, earn a wage that supported a family, buy a home, and build a life with dignity and purpose. Manufacturing jobs paid well not because of charity but because they required skill, discipline, and expertise that took years to develop. These jobs anchored communities—the steel towns of Pennsylvania, the auto corridors of Michigan, the textile mills of the Carolinas, the aerospace plants of the Pacific Northwest. When the factory thrived, so did the barber shop, the diner, the hardware store, and the school district. Manufacturing didn't just produce goods; it produced a way of life.
Starting in the 1970s, the United States began offshoring this industrial foundation in pursuit of cheaper labor overseas. Trade agreements prioritized corporate flexibility over worker stability. Tax policy rewarded companies that moved production abroad. The result was devastating: the nation lost nearly 8 million manufacturing jobs between 1979 and 2020[1], hollowing out the communities that depended on them. Entire regions were left behind—not temporarily, but permanently. The jobs that replaced factory work paid less, offered fewer benefits, and provided none of the stability or sense of purpose that manufacturing had delivered. Retraining programs promised a bridge to the new economy, but for most displaced workers that bridge led nowhere. The consequences went beyond economics: communities that lost their industrial base experienced surging rates of opioid addiction, family breakdown, and deaths of despair that continue to this day[2].
The loss was not only economic and social—it was strategic. The United States can no longer produce many of the goods its military needs to fight and win. In the event of a sustained conflict, America would be unable to manufacture sufficient ammunition, missiles, ships, and critical components to supply its armed forces and allies[3]. The defense industrial base that won the Second World War has been reduced to a handful of contractors who cannot surge production when it matters most. Meanwhile, China has become the world's dominant manufacturer, producing more steel, ships, and electronics than any other nation, and has used that industrial power to build a military that increasingly challenges American interests.
Rebuilding American manufacturing is not nostalgia—it is necessity. This legislation aims to put Americans back to work in high-paying manufacturing jobs by making it profitable to build things in the United States again. Through tax incentives, federal matching funds for new factories, strengthened Buy American requirements, and workforce development programs focused on the skilled trades, the bill creates the conditions for a manufacturing renaissance. It demands that companies receiving federal support pay prevailing wages, provide health insurance and retirement benefits, and keep production domestic for at least 15 years. These are not just manufacturing jobs—they are careers that can rebuild the working class and restore economic dignity to communities that have been written off for decades.
The bill also establishes a National Manufacturing Strategy Commission to identify which industries matter most for both economic prosperity and national defense, and authorizes Grand National Projects—large-scale undertakings in critical infrastructure, advanced energy, and strategic capacity that put American workers and ingenuity to work on challenges worthy of a great nation. America has always been at its best when it builds—the transcontinental railroad, the Interstate Highway System, the Apollo program. This legislation is an invitation to build again.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
Decades of Manufacturing Job Losses Have Gutted the Working Class. The United States lost nearly 8 million manufacturing jobs between 1979 and 2020[1]. These were not marginal positions—they were skilled, well-paying careers that allowed workers without college degrees to own homes, raise families, and retire with security. No sector of the economy has replaced what manufacturing provided: stable employment at middle-class wages with health insurance, pensions, and a sense of professional identity. The workers displaced by offshoring were not absorbed into equivalent jobs; they were pushed into lower-wage service work, forced into early retirement, or dropped out of the labor force entirely.
The Disappearance of the Path to the Middle Class Without a Degree. Manufacturing once offered the clearest route from working poverty to middle-class stability for Americans who did not attend college. A high school graduate could apprentice as a machinist, welder, or electrician and earn a family-sustaining wage within a few years. That pathway has largely vanished. Today, workers without four-year degrees face a labor market that offers fewer opportunities for advancement, lower wages, and less job security than at any point since the Great Depression. Rebuilding manufacturing is the most direct way to restore economic mobility for the majority of Americans who do not hold bachelor's degrees.
Devastated Communities and Human Costs. The closure of factories did not just eliminate jobs—it destroyed communities. Towns that lost their industrial base experienced cascading failures: population decline, collapsing tax revenues, deteriorating schools and infrastructure, shuttered Main Street businesses, and a loss of civic identity. The human toll has been staggering. Regions hit hardest by deindustrialization have experienced surging rates of opioid addiction, alcohol abuse, suicide, and family dissolution—what economists and public health researchers have termed "deaths of despair." These are not independent crises; they are consequences of an economy that abandoned the people who built it.
Erosion of Manufacturing Knowledge and Skilled Trades. As production moved overseas, the United States lost not just jobs but the institutional expertise, skilled trades, and technical knowledge that take generations to develop. Master machinists, tool-and-die makers, welders, and industrial engineers retired without passing their knowledge to the next generation. Vocational programs were defunded in favor of college-for-all policies that left the skilled trades without a pipeline of new talent. This capability cannot be rebuilt overnight—it requires sustained investment in apprenticeships, community college programs, and on-the-job training partnerships with manufacturers.
Weakened National Security and Defense Industrial Capacity. Dependence on foreign manufacturing for critical goods—including defense materials, semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, and rare earth minerals—creates strategic vulnerabilities that adversaries can exploit. In a sustained conflict, the United States would struggle to produce sufficient ammunition, missiles, ships, and replacement parts to supply its armed forces and allies. China now dominates global manufacturing output and has used that industrial power to build military capacity that directly challenges American interests. Restoring domestic manufacturing is not just an economic priority—it is a national security imperative.
Insufficient Surge Production Capacity. Current manufacturing infrastructure is optimized for peacetime efficiency and just-in-time delivery, not for the demands of a national emergency. Whether the crisis is a military conflict, a pandemic, or a natural disaster, the United States lacks the industrial depth to rapidly scale production of critical goods. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed this vulnerability when the nation could not produce sufficient protective equipment, ventilators, or pharmaceuticals domestically.
Failed Promises of Retraining and the "New Economy." For decades, displaced manufacturing workers were told that retraining programs and the transition to a knowledge economy would replace what they lost. For the vast majority, this did not happen. Federal retraining programs have consistently shown limited results[4]—most participants end up in jobs paying significantly less than their prior manufacturing employment. The promise of the service economy and the gig economy has meant lower wages, no benefits, unpredictable schedules, and no path to advancement. Policy must move beyond retraining rhetoric and instead create the actual jobs that working Americans need.
Lack of Strategic Vision for American Industry. The nation has not articulated a cohesive plan for which industries to prioritize or how to align manufacturing investment with long-term national interests. Other nations—China, Germany, Japan, South Korea—pursue deliberate industrial strategies that direct investment toward sectors critical to economic competitiveness and national security. The United States has largely left these decisions to market forces that optimize for short-term shareholder returns rather than long-term national strength. A strategic manufacturing policy is not central planning—it is the recognition that some industries matter more than others for the prosperity and security of the nation.
America Works and National Security Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "America Works and National Security Act."
Sec. 2. DEFINITIONS.
- (1) COMMISSION.—The term "Commission" means the National Manufacturing Strategy Commission established under Section 3.
- (2) CRITICAL SECTOR.—The term "critical sector" means defense and aerospace, semiconductors and advanced electronics, pharmaceuticals and medical devices, rare earth elements and critical minerals, and advanced energy systems.
- (3) DOMESTIC FACILITY.—The term "domestic facility" means a manufacturing facility located within the United States in which not less than 80 percent of value-added production activity occurs.
- (4) GRAND NATIONAL PROJECT.—The term "Grand National Project" means a large-scale infrastructure or industrial undertaking designated by the Commission as serving a vital national interest.
Sec. 3. NATIONAL MANUFACTURING STRATEGY COMMISSION.
- (1) There is established within the Department of Commerce a National Manufacturing Strategy Commission, chaired by the Secretary of Commerce and including the Secretaries of Defense, Labor, and Energy, plus representatives from domestic manufacturers and organized labor.
- (2) DUTIES.—The Commission shall develop a comprehensive 10-year National Manufacturing Strategy within 18 months, identify critical sector vulnerabilities, recommend investments and procurement reforms, and designate Grand National Projects.
Sec. 4. TAX INCENTIVES FOR CRITICAL SECTOR MANUFACTURING.
- (1) A manufacturing investment tax credit shall equal 25 percent of qualified capital expenditures for construction or expansion of domestic facilities in a critical sector, and 15 percent for modernization of existing facilities.
- (2) Credits shall be available for ten years after enactment.
- (3) RECAPTURE.—A taxpayer that ceases manufacturing or relocates more than 20 percent of capacity outside the United States within ten years shall repay the full credit plus interest.
Sec. 5. FEDERAL MATCHING FUNDS FOR FACILITY CONSTRUCTION.
- (1) The Secretary of Commerce shall establish a Federal Manufacturing Facility Matching Fund providing dollar-for-dollar matching grants, not to exceed $250,000,000 per project.
- (2) CONDITIONS.—Recipients shall maintain domestic production for not fewer than 15 years, pay prevailing wages, and provide health insurance and retirement benefits.
- (3) There are authorized to be appropriated $20,000,000,000 for fiscal years 2026 through 2035.
Sec. 6. WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS.
- (1) The Secretary of Labor shall award competitive grants to community colleges, registered apprenticeship programs, and workforce development boards for manufacturing skills training.
- (2) Priority shall be given to communities with significant manufacturing job losses, programs partnering with manufacturers to guarantee employment, and programs serving veterans.
- (3) There are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000,000 for fiscal years 2026 through 2035.
Sec. 7. DEFENSE PRODUCTION RESERVE.
- (1) Each DOD contractor with contracts exceeding $50,000,000 shall maintain demonstrated surge production capacity of not less than 150 percent of baseline output.
- (2) Each contractor shall submit an annual surge capacity certification to the Secretary of Defense.
- (3) Non-compliant contractors shall be subject to a contract price reduction of not less than 5 percent and ineligibility for new defense contracts until compliance is achieved.
Sec. 8. BUY AMERICAN STRENGTHENING.
- (1) The domestic content threshold for Federal procurement is increased to not less than 75 percent of component cost, rising to 85 percent within 5 years.
- (2) No waiver may be granted unless the agency head certifies in writing that no domestic alternative exists, a 30-day Federal Register notice is published, and the Commission is consulted.
Sec. 9. GRAND NATIONAL PROJECTS PROGRAM.
- (1) The Commission may designate not more than 5 Grand National Projects at any time in areas such as critical infrastructure, advanced energy, strategic transportation, water security, and space and defense industrial capacity.
- (2) Each project shall be eligible for direct Federal appropriations, tax-exempt bond authority, and streamlined Federal permitting not to exceed 2 years.
- (3) Not less than 90 percent of materials and labor shall be sourced domestically.
Sec. 10. ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS.
Not later than March 1 of each year, the Commission shall submit a report on manufacturing employment, capacity, critical sector supply chain vulnerabilities, defense industrial base readiness, and Grand National Project status.
Sec. 11. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act shall take effect 90 days after enactment.
Sources
- Bureau of Labor Statistics, "All Employees, Manufacturing," Current Employment Statistics (CES). https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MANEMP
- U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee, "Long-Term Trends in Deaths of Despair," Social Capital Project Report No. 4-19. https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/analysis?id=B29A7E54-0E13-4C4D-83AA-6A49105F0F43
- Congressional Research Service, "The U.S. Defense Industrial Base: Background and Issues for Congress," R47751. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/details?prodcode=R47751
- U.S. Government Accountability Office, "Employment and Training Programs: Department of Labor Should Assess Efforts to Coordinate Services Across Programs," GAO-19-200. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-19-200
United States Cyber Force Bill
At a Glance
- Establishes the U.S. Cyber Force as a new military branch under the DoD
- Unifies Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine cyber units under one command
- Mandates cybersecurity standards for all federal contractors within 18 months
- Creates a Cyber Reserve Corps of civilian professionals for emergencies
- Sets competitive pay with 25% base supplements to retain cyber talent

The digital battlefield has become as consequential to national security as land, sea, air, and space. Foreign adversaries—nation-states and their proxies—conduct daily operations against American infrastructure, government systems, and private industry. They probe electrical grids, water systems, financial networks, and healthcare facilities for vulnerabilities. They infiltrate supply chains, steal intellectual property, and harvest data on millions of Americans. They seek to manipulate elections, amplify social divisions, and erode public trust in democratic institutions. These are not theoretical threats but ongoing operations documented by intelligence agencies and experienced by American businesses and citizens[1].
Yet the United States lacks a unified military organization dedicated to defending cyberspace. Cyber operations are currently distributed across multiple service components—Army Cyber Command, Fleet Cyber Command, Marine Corps Forces Cyberspace Command, and Air Force cyber units—each with different training standards, career paths, and organizational priorities[2]. U.S. Cyber Command coordinates these disparate elements but must compete with parent services for personnel, funding, and attention. Military leaders have acknowledged this fragmented approach is unsustainable: none of the existing services prioritizes cyberspace as its core mission, resulting in inconsistent support, unclear career paths, insufficient expertise, and cyber operations perpetually treated as secondary to other missions.
Meanwhile, critical infrastructure remains vulnerable. Federal contractors and suppliers operate under inconsistent security requirements. Private companies in essential industries—energy, communications, transportation, finance, healthcare—face sophisticated attacks with varying levels of federal support and guidance. Information about threats flows unevenly between government agencies and the private sector, leaving potential targets unaware of dangers until after breaches occur.
This legislation establishes the United States Cyber Force as a dedicated branch of the armed forces under the Department of Defense, with a singular mission: protecting American infrastructure and interests in cyberspace. The Cyber Force will unify defensive and offensive cyber capabilities, establish mandatory security requirements for federal suppliers and critical industries, detect and counter foreign influence operations targeting American elections and society, and conduct operations against adversaries while sharing actionable intelligence with government agencies and private sector partners. Just as the creation of the Air Force recognized that air power required dedicated doctrine, training, and leadership, and the Space Force acknowledged the unique demands of the space domain, the Cyber Force recognizes that cyberspace is a distinct warfighting domain requiring focused attention, specialized expertise, and organizational priority that the current structure cannot provide.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
Fragmented Cyber Capabilities Across Military Services. Cyber operations are currently spread across Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps components, each with different priorities, training programs, and career structures. No single service treats cyberspace as its primary mission, resulting in inconsistent readiness and competing demands for resources and personnel.
Talent Recruitment and Retention Failures. The military struggles to recruit and retain skilled cyber professionals who can command significantly higher salaries in the private sector[3]. Existing services lack the specialized incentive structures, career paths, and organizational culture needed to compete for top talent. Personnel are frequently rotated out of cyber positions just as they develop expertise.
Persistent Foreign Attacks on American Infrastructure. Nation-state adversaries conduct continuous cyber operations against U.S. electrical grids, water systems, financial institutions, healthcare networks, and government systems[1]. These attacks probe for vulnerabilities, position for future disruption, and steal sensitive data—often without effective detection or response.
Inconsistent Security Standards for Federal Suppliers. Companies that provide goods and services to the federal government operate under varying and often inadequate cybersecurity requirements. Supply chain compromises have enabled adversaries to access government systems through trusted vendors, yet no unified security baseline exists across federal contracting.
Vulnerable Critical Infrastructure in the Private Sector. Essential industries—energy, communications, transportation, finance, healthcare—face sophisticated cyber threats but lack clear federal security requirements or consistent access to threat intelligence[4]. The line between national security and private enterprise has blurred, yet responsibilities remain undefined.
Foreign Interference in Elections and Public Discourse. Adversaries actively work to manipulate American elections, amplify social divisions, and undermine public trust in democratic institutions through coordinated influence operations. Detection and response capabilities are scattered across agencies without unified authority or mission focus.
Inadequate Intelligence Sharing with the Private Sector. Government agencies possess valuable threat intelligence that could help private companies defend themselves, but information sharing mechanisms remain slow, cumbersome, and inconsistent[5]. Companies often learn of threats only after successful attacks.
Lack of Offensive Deterrence Capability. Without a credible, unified offensive cyber capability, adversaries face insufficient consequences for attacks on American interests. Deterrence requires adversaries to believe the United States can and will impose costs for malicious cyber activity—a posture undermined by fragmented authorities and capabilities.
No Unified Command Authority for Cyber Defense. Responsibility for defending American cyberspace is divided among military commands, intelligence agencies, law enforcement, and civilian departments. This diffusion of authority creates gaps, delays responses, and prevents the coordinated action that modern cyber threats demand.
United States Cyber Force Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "United States Cyber Force Act."
Sec. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CYBER FORCE.
- (1) There is established as a branch of the armed forces a United States Cyber Force, organized, trained, and equipped to conduct defensive and offensive operations in cyberspace.
- (2) The Cyber Force shall be a military service within the Department of Defense, organized under the Department of the Cyber Force, headed by the Secretary of the Cyber Force.
- (3) MISSION.—The Cyber Force shall defend DOD and Federal Government networks; conduct offensive cyber operations as directed; protect critical infrastructure from cyberattack; detect, attribute, and counter foreign influence operations targeting elections and public discourse; and share cyber threat intelligence with Federal agencies and the private sector.
Sec. 3. COMMANDANT OF THE CYBER FORCE.
- (1) The Commandant shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, from among officers with significant cyber operations experience.
- (2) The Commandant shall serve as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and hold the grade of general for a term of 4 years.
Sec. 4. TRANSFER OF CYBER UNITS.
- (1) Not later than 24 months after enactment, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the Cyber Force: Army Cyber Command, Fleet Cyber Command and Tenth Fleet, Marine Corps Forces Cyberspace Command, and Sixteenth Air Force (Air Forces Cyber).
- (2) A detailed transition plan shall be submitted to Congress within 180 days of enactment, including phased timelines, continuity provisions, personnel reassignment plans, and budget requirements.
Sec. 5. MANDATORY CYBERSECURITY STANDARDS FOR FEDERAL CONTRACTORS.
- (1) Not later than 18 months after enactment, the Secretary of Defense shall promulgate mandatory cybersecurity standards for all federal contractors, including zero-trust architecture, multi-factor authentication, encrypted storage and transmission, mandatory 24-hour incident reporting, and annual third-party audits.
- (2) Non-compliant contractors shall be subject to suspension or debarment and civil penalties up to $500,000 per violation.
Sec. 6. CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE CYBER PROTECTION PROGRAM.
- (1) There is established a Critical Infrastructure Cyber Protection Program to coordinate defense of energy, telecommunications, transportation, financial services, and healthcare sectors.
- (2) The program shall establish minimum cybersecurity standards, provide technical assistance and threat assessments, and conduct regular cyberattack simulation exercises.
Sec. 7. CYBER THREAT INTELLIGENCE SHARING.
- (1) The Cyber Force shall establish a real-time intelligence sharing system for all Federal departments and agencies.
- (2) Declassified intelligence shall be made available to private sector entities through a secure automated platform. Participation by private entities shall be voluntary.
- (3) Private sector entities sharing threat indicators in good faith shall not be liable in civil actions for such sharing.
Sec. 8. FOREIGN INFLUENCE OPERATIONS DETECTION AND RESPONSE.
- (1) The Cyber Force shall maintain a dedicated mission for monitoring, detecting, and attributing foreign influence operations; coordinating with the intelligence community and FBI to protect election integrity; and developing countermeasures against foreign manipulation of digital communications.
- (2) The Commandant shall submit an annual classified report to Congress and a public unclassified summary.
Sec. 9. COMPETITIVE PAY AND CYBER RESERVE CORPS.
- (1) The Secretary of the Cyber Force shall establish a cyber-specific pay table with base pay supplements of not less than 25 percent, retention bonuses up to $75,000, and recruitment bonuses up to $50,000 for qualified personnel.
- (2) CYBER RESERVE CORPS.—A Cyber Reserve Corps of civilian cybersecurity professionals who volunteer for part-time service and may be called to active duty during declared cyber emergencies. Members shall maintain clearances, complete annual training not exceeding 30 days, and receive equivalent active-duty compensation upon activation.
Sec. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated $15,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2026 and such sums as necessary for fiscal years 2027 through 2031.
Sec. 11. EFFECTIVE DATE.
- (1) This Act shall take effect on the date of enactment.
- (2) The Cyber Force shall achieve initial operational capability within 18 months and full capability within 36 months.
Sources
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, "People's Republic of China Cyber Threat" and related advisories. https://www.cisa.gov/topics/cyber-threats-and-advisories/nation-state-cyber-actors/china
- U.S. Government Accountability Office, "Military Cyber Personnel: Opportunities Exist to Improve Service Obligation Guidance and Data Tracking," GAO-23-105423. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-105423
- RAND Corporation, "Attracting, Recruiting, and Retaining Successful Cyberspace Operations Officers: Cyber Workforce Interview Findings." https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2618.html
- U.S. Government Accountability Office, "Cybersecurity High-Risk Series: Challenges in Protecting Cyber Critical Infrastructure," GAO-23-106441. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-106441
- U.S. Government Accountability Office, "Critical Infrastructure Protection: National Cybersecurity Strategy Needs to Address Information Sharing Performance Measures and Methods," GAO-23-105468. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-105468
Defense Modernization and Financial Accountability Bill
At a Glance
- Requires commercial solutions before custom development for defense acquisitions
- DoD must pass a clean audit within 24 months or generals take a 10% pay cut
- Mandates force structure reassessment incorporating lessons from Ukraine
- $5B annually to diversify defense supply chains and reduce foreign dependence
- Secures intellectual property rights to end sole-source vendor lock-in

The United States maintains the world's most capable military, yet the systems that equip our forces are increasingly delivered late, over budget, and sometimes obsolete before they reach the warfighter. The defense acquisition process—designed for a different era—has become a barrier to military readiness rather than an enabler of it. Major weapons programs routinely exceed initial cost estimates by billions of dollars and slip schedules by years or decades. The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, conceived in the 1990s, still struggles with software deficiencies and sustainment costs decades later. When the government does not own the technical data and intellectual property rights for the systems it buys, it becomes locked into sole-source sustainment contracts that drive costs even higher. Meanwhile, adversaries field new capabilities at a fraction of the cost and time, exploiting commercial technologies that American defense procurement struggles to incorporate. Small businesses and non-traditional companies that could inject competition and innovation face certification timelines, compliance burdens, and slow payment cycles that effectively bar them from the market.
The war in Ukraine has exposed uncomfortable truths about modern conflict. Precision-guided munitions, drones, and electronic warfare have transformed the battlefield in ways that challenge long-held assumptions about force structure and platform survivability. Inexpensive drones destroy tanks costing millions. Commercial satellite imagery provides real-time intelligence. Encrypted communications on civilian devices coordinate military operations. The conflict has demonstrated that mass, adaptability, and the ability to rapidly produce and replace losses matter as much as technological superiority in any single platform. America's defense industrial base, consolidated over decades into a handful of prime contractors producing exquisite but limited quantities of expensive systems, is not postured to sustain a prolonged high-intensity conflict. The skilled workforce needed to expand that base—machinists, welders, engineers, shipyard workers—has been hollowed out by decades of offshoring and underinvestment, and cannot be reconstituted overnight.
Supply chain vulnerabilities compound these challenges. Critical components—semiconductors, rare earth minerals, precision bearings, specialized chemicals—often depend on single sources, sometimes located in or controlled by potential adversaries. The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent supply disruptions revealed how fragile these dependencies have become. In a sustained conflict against a peer adversary, the United States could find itself unable to replace losses or surge production when it matters most. Strengthening ties with allied nations to create redundant manufacturing capacity and diversified supply chains is not merely prudent planning—it is a strategic imperative.
Underlying all of these challenges is a fundamental lack of financial accountability. The Department of Defense has failed every annual audit since the first was conducted in fiscal year 2018[1], remaining the only major federal agency never to achieve a clean opinion. Auditors have identified 28 material weaknesses in financial reporting[1]. The Pentagon's books have required trillions of dollars in adjustments[2]. The department cannot fully account for $4.7 trillion in assets spread across 4,500 locations worldwide[3]. This is not merely an accounting problem—it reflects systemic failures in tracking equipment, managing inventory, and stewarding taxpayer resources. Without accurate financial data, informed decisions about resource allocation, readiness, and investment are impossible.
This legislation addresses these interconnected failures through comprehensive reform. The defense acquisition process will be restructured to favor commercially available solutions that meet requirements over bespoke systems from a limited number of prime contractors, reducing costs and accelerating delivery. The government will secure intellectual property and data rights for the systems it funds, breaking vendor lock-in and enabling competitive sustainment. Barriers that prevent small businesses and non-traditional innovators from competing for defense contracts will be reduced. The Department of Defense will conduct a fundamental reassessment of force structure and spending priorities within 12 months, incorporating lessons from Ukraine and the realities of modern asymmetric warfare. Supply chain resilience will be strengthened through diversification of domestic manufacturing and deepened cooperation with allied nations. And financial accountability will be enforced through meaningful consequences: the department must develop an audit remediation plan within 12 months and implement it within 24 months. Failure to meet audit requirements thereafter will result in a 10% pay reduction for active-duty generals and admirals and dismissal of the Secretary of Defense—ensuring that leadership has personal stake in restoring public trust in defense spending.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
Broken Defense Acquisition Model. Major weapons programs consistently exceed budgets by billions of dollars and deliver years or decades behind schedule. The process designed to ensure accountability has instead created bureaucratic delays, risk aversion, and cost overruns that leave warfighters waiting for systems that may be outdated upon arrival. Programs routinely advance past milestones despite failing operational tests, resulting in systems fielded before they are operationally suitable.
Overreliance on Bespoke Solutions from Limited Suppliers. The defense industrial base has consolidated into a small number of prime contractors who deliver custom-built systems at premium prices. Commercially available technologies that could meet requirements at lower cost and faster timelines are often excluded by procurement processes designed around traditional defense contractors.
Barriers to Small Business and Non-Traditional Competitors. Startups, small manufacturers, and technology companies outside the traditional defense sector face lengthy certification timelines, burdensome compliance requirements, and payment cycles that can stretch months—effectively barring the most innovative firms from competing for defense work. The result is less competition, higher prices, and slower adoption of commercial breakthroughs.
Vendor Lock-In Through Intellectual Property and Data Rights. The Department of Defense frequently fails to secure technical data rights and intellectual property for the systems it funds. Without ownership of design data, the government cannot competitively bid sustainment, maintenance, or upgrades, locking it into sole-source contracts with the original developer at whatever price that contractor sets—often for the entire multi-decade life of a platform.
Failure to Adapt to Modern Warfare Realities. The war in Ukraine has demonstrated that asymmetric capabilities—drones, precision munitions, electronic warfare, commercial technologies—can neutralize expensive conventional platforms. Current force structure and spending priorities reflect assumptions about warfare that may no longer hold, yet institutional inertia resists fundamental reassessment.
Inability to Produce at Scale for Sustained Conflict. America's defense industrial base can produce exquisite systems in limited quantities but lacks the capacity to surge production or replace losses in a prolonged high-intensity conflict. Production lines are optimized for peacetime efficiency rather than wartime surge capacity.
Erosion of the Defense Skilled Workforce. The machinists, welders, shipyard workers, and engineers needed to build and maintain military systems have been hollowed out by decades of offshoring, facility closures, and underinvestment in vocational training. Without a pipeline of skilled labor, even fully funded production expansions cannot translate into actual output.
Fragile and Concentrated Supply Chains. Critical defense components depend on single sources, sole suppliers, or foreign manufacturers—sometimes in nations that could become adversaries. Disruption of any link could halt production of essential systems when they are needed most.
Insufficient Coordination with Allied Manufacturing. Allied nations possess complementary industrial capabilities that could provide redundancy and surge capacity, yet formal mechanisms to integrate allied supply chains and coordinate wartime production remain underdeveloped.
Chronic Financial Accountability Failures. The Department of Defense has failed every audit since fiscal year 2018[1] and remains the only major federal agency never to achieve a clean opinion. Auditors have identified 28 material weaknesses[1], and the department cannot fully account for trillions in assets and liabilities. The Pentagon cannot accurately track weapons, vehicles, ammunition, and other assets distributed across thousands of locations worldwide, undermining readiness assessments, maintenance planning, and informed investment decisions. Hundreds of legacy financial and logistics systems that cannot communicate effectively produce inconsistent data that auditors cannot verify, and modernization of these systems has been slow and underfunded. The continued inability to account for hundreds of billions in annual appropriations erodes public confidence that taxpayer dollars are being spent effectively and jeopardizes sustained support for necessary defense investments.
Misaligned Incentives and Lack of Accountability in Leadership. Despite years of audit failures, no senior leader has faced meaningful consequences. Current structures allow senior military and civilian leaders to rotate through positions without bearing responsibility for long-term financial management failures or acquisition program performance, diffusing accountability across administrations and leadership tenures. The revolving door between senior Pentagon positions and defense contractor executive suites creates conflicts of interest that undermine objective acquisition decisions and oversight. Without personal accountability, there is insufficient incentive for the cultural and systemic changes required to achieve financial transparency.
Defense Modernization and Financial Accountability Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Defense Modernization and Financial Accountability Act."
Sec. 2. DEFINITIONS.
- (1) COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE SOLUTION.—The term "commercially available solution" means a product, service, or technology sold in substantial quantities in the commercial marketplace that meets or can be modified to meet Department requirements without significant custom development.
- (2) ALLIED NATION.—The term "allied nation" means a NATO member, a major non-NATO ally, or a nation with which the United States has a mutual defense treaty.
- (3) CLEAN AUDIT OPINION.—The term "clean audit opinion" means an unmodified opinion on the Department's financial statements issued by an independent auditor.
- (4) SENIOR MILITARY OFFICER.—The term "senior military officer" means any commissioned officer in pay grade O-7 or above.
Sec. 3. ACQUISITION REFORM—PREFERENCE FOR COMMERCIAL SOLUTIONS.
- (1) In any acquisition exceeding $10,000,000, the Department shall survey the commercial marketplace before initiating custom development.
- (2) Where a commercial solution meets not less than 80 percent of requirements, it shall be selected unless the Secretary of Defense certifies that no commercial solution can be adapted, modification cost exceeds custom development cost, or national security precludes commercial use.
- (3) The Department shall report annually to Congress on commercial alternatives evaluated for each major defense acquisition program.
Sec. 4. FORCE STRUCTURE AND SPENDING REASSESSMENT.
- (1) Not later than 12 months after enactment, the Secretary of Defense shall complete a comprehensive reassessment incorporating lessons from Ukraine regarding unmanned systems, precision munitions, electronic warfare, and commercial technologies; evaluating survivability and cost-effectiveness of major platforms; assessing industrial base surge capacity; and proposing reallocations toward capabilities demonstrated effective in modern warfare.
- (2) The reassessment shall be submitted to Congress as both a classified report and an unclassified summary.
Sec. 5. SUPPLY CHAIN DIVERSIFICATION.
- (1) The Secretary shall identify single points of failure, foreign adversary dependencies, and components lacking domestic or allied manufacturing capability.
- (2) DEFENSE MANUFACTURING INVESTMENT PROGRAM.—There is established a program to provide grants, loans, and loan guarantees to domestic manufacturers expanding production of critical defense components. There are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000,000 annually for fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
Sec. 6. ALLIED MANUFACTURING COORDINATION AGREEMENTS.
- (1) The Secretary of Defense shall negotiate agreements with allied nations to establish reciprocal production arrangements, shared stockpile reserves, coordinated surge production plans, and harmonized technical standards.
- (2) A status report shall be submitted to Congress within 24 months of enactment.
Sec. 7. AUDIT REMEDIATION AND FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY.
- (1) PLAN.—Not later than 12 months after enactment, the Secretary shall submit a detailed remediation plan with corrective actions for each material weakness, quarterly benchmarks, cost estimates, and named senior officials responsible.
- (2) IMPLEMENTATION.—The Department shall achieve a clean audit opinion within 24 months of enactment.
- (3) CONSEQUENCES FOR FAILURE.—If a clean audit opinion is not achieved within 24 months—
- (a) the rate of basic pay for all senior military officers in grade O-7 and above shall be reduced by 10 percent until compliance is achieved; and
- (b) the President shall dismiss the Secretary of Defense within 60 days, unless the President certifies to Congress that the Secretary has demonstrated substantial progress and that dismissal would be detrimental to national security.
- (4) The Comptroller General shall independently assess audit progress semiannually.
Sec. 8. LEGACY INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MODERNIZATION.
- (1) Not later than 12 months after enactment, the Secretary shall submit a plan for modernizing all legacy financial and logistics systems that impede audit compliance, with completion within 5 years.
- (2) There are authorized to be appropriated $3,000,000,000 annually for fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
Sec. 9. INSPECTOR GENERAL EXPANDED AUTHORITY.
- (1) The Inspector General of the Department of Defense shall have authority to conduct unannounced audits, access all financial records without restriction, and issue subpoenas for documents and testimony.
- (2) Inspector General reports on financial accountability shall not be subject to review by any other office prior to transmission to Congress.
Sec. 10. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act shall take effect on the date of enactment.
Sources
- U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-24-107478, "DOD Financial Management: FY 2023 Financial Statement Audit Progress and Challenges." https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107478
- Department of Defense Office of Inspector General, "Understanding the Results of the Audit of the DoD Financial Statements." https://www.dodig.mil/reports.html/Article/1725880/understanding-the-results-of-the-audit-of-the-dod-fy-2018-financial-statements/
- U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-25-108052, "DOD Financial Management: Insights into FY 2024 Balance Sheet Auditability." https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-25-108052
Education Affordability and National Service Bill
At a Glance
- Aligns federal grants and loans with national workforce shortage areas
- Two years of public service earns four years of free college tuition
- Requires universities with $500M+ endowments to spend 20% annually on student aid
- Employers get a 50% tax credit for sponsoring employee education
- Students who skip service commitments must repay education costs pro rata

The promise of higher education—that hard work and academic achievement would open doors to economic opportunity—has become increasingly difficult to fulfill. Over the past four decades, college tuition has risen faster than wages, healthcare costs, and nearly every other household expense[1]. Millions of Americans now carry student debt that delays home purchases, family formation, and retirement savings, while many graduates find their degrees misaligned with available jobs. At the same time, critical sectors of the economy face persistent workforce shortages: healthcare systems lack doctors and nurses[2], manufacturers cannot find skilled technicians, and infrastructure projects stall for want of trained workers. The disconnect between educational investment and economic need represents a failure of planning that harms students, employers, and the nation's competitive position.
Meanwhile, American universities sit on endowments totaling hundreds of billions of dollars[3]—assets that have grown substantially even as tuition has climbed. These institutions benefit from tax-exempt status and federal research funding, yet too often treat their endowments as wealth to be accumulated rather than resources to be deployed for their educational mission. Students graduate burdened with debt while their universities report record endowment growth. This imbalance demands correction.
The human cost is measured in deferred lives. Young Americans delay buying homes[4], starting families, and launching businesses because student loan payments consume the income that would make those milestones possible. Workers in their forties and fifties still carry undergraduate debt. Parents take on loans to help their children only to jeopardize their own retirement. And an entire generation has absorbed the lesson that higher education is a financial gamble rather than a reliable investment—leading many to forgo college entirely, even when their talents and ambitions would benefit from it. The system punishes exactly the kind of aspiration that a healthy economy should reward.
This legislation addresses college affordability and workforce alignment through three complementary approaches. First, federal grants and student loans will be aligned with national workforce needs as forecast by the Department of Labor, prioritizing funding for students pursuing careers in shortage areas such as healthcare, skilled trades, engineering, and other critical fields. Students pursuing education outside these priority areas remain eligible for federal assistance but at reduced levels. Second, the bill expands pathways to earn free or subsidized post-secondary education through public and military service, and creates a public-private partnership allowing companies to sponsor student education in exchange for equivalent years of service and a federal tax benefit. Recipients who fail to complete their service commitment will be responsible for a prorated share of their education costs. Third, universities and colleges will be required to dedicate 20% of their endowments annually in grants to cover education costs for U.S. citizens who graduated from high school and are under the age of 28—ensuring that institutional wealth serves students rather than simply growing in perpetuity.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
Unsustainable Student Debt Burden. Americans collectively owe approximately $1.7 trillion in federal and private student loan debt[5]. Monthly payments consume income that would otherwise support household formation, homeownership, small business creation, and retirement savings—delaying economic participation for an entire generation.
Disconnect Between Education and Workforce Needs. Federal funding currently flows to students regardless of whether their chosen field addresses national labor shortages. The result is oversupply in some professions and persistent shortages in critical sectors including healthcare, skilled manufacturing, and technical trades.
Critical Workforce Shortages in Essential Industries. Hospitals, manufacturers, infrastructure projects, and other vital sectors cannot find enough qualified workers. These shortages raise costs, delay projects, and weaken national competitiveness—yet the federal education financing system does nothing to steer students toward these opportunities.
Rising Tuition Despite Growing Institutional Wealth. University endowments have reached historic levels, yet tuition continues to climb. Institutions benefit from tax-exempt status and federal support but deploy only a fraction of their resources to reduce student costs, prioritizing endowment growth over affordability.
Limited Pathways to Debt-Free Education. Military service offers educational benefits, but options for civilians to earn education through public service remain limited and underfunded. Students without family wealth face a binary choice: take on debt or forgo higher education.
Employer Training Investments Lack Federal Support. Companies willing to invest in workforce development receive little incentive to sponsor student education directly. A structured partnership between employers, students, and the federal government could expand educational access while ensuring graduates enter jobs aligned with their training.
No Accountability for Students Who Receive Sponsored Education. Without clear service requirements and repayment obligations, education sponsorship programs risk becoming one-sided transfers rather than mutual commitments. Students who benefit from public or private investment should be accountable for fulfilling their end of the agreement.
Education Affordability and National Service Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Education Affordability and National Service Act."
Sec. 2. DEFINITIONS.
- (1) PRIORITY FIELD.—The term "priority field" means a field of study aligned with an occupation designated as a critical shortage area by the Department of Labor, including healthcare, skilled trades, engineering, advanced manufacturing, and cybersecurity.
- (2) ENDOWMENT ASSETS.—The term "endowment assets" means the aggregate fair market value of institutional endowment funds as reported to the Department of Education.
Sec. 3. WORKFORCE-ALIGNED FEDERAL EDUCATION FUNDING.
- (1) The Secretary of Labor shall publish an annual DOL Workforce Forecast identifying occupations experiencing critical labor shortages, updated by January 31 each year.
- (2) Federal Pell Grants and Direct Loans shall be allocated as follows:
- (a) Students in priority fields shall be eligible for maximum award amounts plus supplemental grants of up to $5,000 per academic year.
- (b) Students in non-priority fields shall remain eligible at amounts not less than 75 percent of maximum awards.
- (3) Nothing in this section shall prohibit any student from pursuing any field of study.
Sec. 4. NATIONAL SERVICE EDUCATION PROGRAM.
- (1) There is established a National Service Education Program under which eligible individuals may earn post-secondary education through qualified public service.
- (2) QUALIFIED SERVICE.—Includes service in AmeriCorps and successor programs, state or local government in capacities meeting critical public needs, and nonprofit organizations in healthcare, education, infrastructure, and disaster response.
- (3) An individual who completes 2 years of full-time qualified service shall be entitled to tuition coverage at any public institution for up to 4 years, or equivalent value at private institutions.
- (4) MILITARY SERVICE EXPANSION.—Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits shall cover 100 percent of tuition at any eligible institution for members completing not less than 2 years of active duty. Transferability to dependents shall require 4 years of service with no additional obligation.
Sec. 5. PUBLIC-PRIVATE EDUCATION PARTNERSHIPS.
- (1) Qualified employers may sponsor student education in exchange for a commitment to equivalent employment.
- (2) Sponsoring employers shall receive a tax credit equal to 50 percent of qualified education expenses paid, not to exceed $25,000 per student per year.
- (3) Students shall enter binding agreements to maintain satisfactory progress and commence employment upon completion for a period equivalent to years of education received.
Sec. 6. PRORATED REPAYMENT FOR INCOMPLETE SERVICE.
- (1) Any individual who receives education benefits and fails to complete the associated service commitment shall be liable for prorated repayment based on months of service not completed.
- (2) The Secretary may waive repayment in cases of medical hardship, disability, or involuntary separation.
Sec. 7. UNIVERSITY ENDOWMENT SPENDING MANDATE.
- (1) Each eligible institution with endowment assets exceeding $500,000,000 shall expend not less than 20 percent of endowment value annually in grants to cover tuition, fees, room, board, and qualified educational expenses.
- (2) Grants shall be awarded to students who are United States citizens, under age 28, and graduates of secondary school, with priority based on demonstrated financial need.
- (3) Institutions shall submit annual reports to the Secretary of Education on amounts expended and students served.
Sec. 8. PENALTIES FOR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH ENDOWMENT REQUIREMENT.
- (1) First year: written warning and corrective action plan required within 90 days.
- (2) Second consecutive year: civil penalty equal to 10 percent of the shortfall.
- (3) Third or subsequent consecutive year: loss of eligibility for Federal grants and contracts, and recommendation for revocation of tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Sec. 9. EFFECTIVE DATE.
- (1) This Act shall take effect on October 1, 2026.
- (2) Workforce-aligned funding shall apply to award years beginning July 1, 2027.
- (3) The endowment mandate shall apply to fiscal years beginning January 1, 2027.
Sources
- NCES Digest of Education Statistics, Table 330.10: Average undergraduate tuition, fees, room and board rates, 1963-64 through 2022-23. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_330.10.asp
- Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook: Healthcare Occupations, 2024-34 projections. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/
- NCES Fast Facts: Endowments — market value of college and university endowment funds. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=73
- Federal Reserve Board, "Student Loans and Homeownership," FEDS Working Paper 2016-010. https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/student-loans-and-homeownership.htm
- Federal Student Aid, U.S. Department of Education, "Federal Student Loan Portfolio." https://studentaid.gov/data-center/student/portfolio
Artificial Intelligence Employment and Intellectual Property Protection Bill
At a Glance
- Employers must provide 12 months of full salary and benefits to AI-displaced workers
- Creators can opt out of AI training or receive fair compensation for their work
- Bans AI-assisted cloning of product designs, both digital and physical
- All AI-generated content must be clearly labeled for consumers
- Triggers Universal Basic Income (~$3,000/month) if AI unemployment exceeds 10%

Artificial intelligence is transforming the American economy at a pace that neither workers nor creators are prepared for. Employees who spent years mastering their craft—customer service representatives, paralegals, data analysts, graphic designers, copywriters—are discovering that AI systems can perform significant portions of their jobs at a fraction of the cost. When displacement comes, it comes fast: a department of fifty is restructured to fifteen, and the workers who remain are expected to supervise the machines that replaced their colleagues. For those let go, the safety net is thin. Severance is discretionary, retraining is expensive, and the skills that defined their careers may have diminished market value overnight.
At the same time, the creative economy faces an existential challenge. AI systems are trained on vast datasets of copyrighted material—books, articles, photographs, music, software code, video—harvested from the internet without the knowledge or consent of the people who created it. A songwriter who spent years building an audience discovers that an AI model trained on her catalog can generate songs in her style on demand, competing directly with the original. A software developer finds that an AI tool has analyzed his application's interface and documentation and produced a functional clone in weeks. A journalist's investigative reporting is ingested, summarized, and republished by AI content mills that capture the audience and advertising revenue that once sustained the original work. The creators who fuel AI's capabilities receive nothing while their livelihoods erode.
These are not hypothetical concerns—they are happening now, and the pace is accelerating. Without clear rules, workers will be displaced without support, creators will be exploited without recourse, and the public will be unable to distinguish human expression from machine-generated content. But overly restrictive regulation could stifle an innovation that has genuine potential to improve productivity, healthcare, scientific research, and quality of life. The challenge is balance: protecting people without blocking progress.
This legislation strikes that balance through five pillars. First, employers must provide displaced workers with 12 months of full salary and benefits and contribute to a Future Skills Training Fund for workforce retraining. Second, intellectual property owners must be given the choice of fair compensation or exclusion of their work from AI training datasets, enforced through a public Opt-Out Registry. Third, the bill prohibits AI-generated derivative works that are not substantially transformative and bans AI-assisted cloning of product designs—both digital and physical—protecting innovators from having years of development replicated by automated analysis. Fourth, all AI-generated content must be clearly labeled so consumers know what they are reading, watching, or hearing. Fifth, the bill establishes an automatic trigger for Universal Basic Income: if AI-attributable unemployment exceeds 10 percent of the civilian labor force for two consecutive quarters, every adult American will receive a monthly payment equal to 60 percent of the national median individual wage—approximately $3,000 per month—tax-free, with no further congressional action required. The infrastructure and funding mechanism are established now so that if AI displacement becomes systemic, the safety net deploys immediately rather than waiting for Congress to act in the middle of a crisis. This framework gives businesses and AI developers the predictable rules they need while ensuring that the humans whose work and livelihoods make AI possible are not discarded in the process.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
Worker Displacement Without a Safety Net. As AI systems become capable of performing tasks previously done by humans, employees face job loss with little warning or support[1]. Without intervention, displaced workers may struggle financially while trying to find new employment or retrain for different careers.
Lack of Resources for Workforce Transition. Even when workers recognize the need to develop new skills, training programs can be expensive and inaccessible. There is no dedicated funding mechanism to help AI-displaced workers acquire the skills needed for emerging jobs.
Unauthorized Use of Copyrighted Material in AI Training. AI systems are frequently trained on vast datasets that include copyrighted works—articles, books, artwork, music, code—often without the knowledge, consent, or compensation of the creators[2]. This undermines the economic value of creative work.
Creators Forced into an All-or-Nothing Position. Without formal protections, IP owners currently have limited recourse. They can either accept that their work may be used without compensation or pursue costly litigation. The bill creates a middle path where creators can choose compensation or exclusion.
Tension Between Innovation and Rights Protection. Overly restrictive IP rules could slow AI development, while no rules at all harms creators. The bill attempts to balance continued AI advancement with fair treatment of those whose work contributes to that advancement.
AI-Generated Derivative Content Exploits Fair Use Protections. Current fair use doctrine does not adequately address AI systems that extract clips, text, and other elements from existing works to generate derivative content that is not substantially different from the original. Creators who invest years building original content have no meaningful recourse when AI tools are used to rapidly produce low-value imitations that compete directly with the source material, diluting its audience and undermining the creator's livelihood. While existing copyright law may technically prohibit such conduct, enforcement requires costly litigation that individual creators cannot afford—particularly when AI enables the creation of infringing works at a scale and speed that overwhelms any practical ability to pursue claims.
AI-Assisted Cloning Threatens Product Innovation. Artificial intelligence now enables bad actors to systematically analyze a product's design—whether by examining a software application's interface and documentation or by feeding photographs of a physical product into an AI system that generates 3D models and manufacturing specifications—and produce a functional clone in days or weeks, replicating what took the original creator years and significant investment to build. Existing intellectual property law does not adequately protect against this threat: copyright covers specific expression but generally not functionality or utilitarian design, design patents are narrow and expensive to obtain, trade dress requires proof of consumer recognition, and trade secret law cannot protect features that are inherently public-facing. Without a prohibition on AI-assisted cloning, innovators who bring products to market—whether software applications or physical goods—risk having their competitive advantage stripped by automated replication before they can recoup their investment.
No Safety Net Exists for Systemic AI Displacement. Current protections address individual workers displaced by specific employers, but no mechanism exists to respond if AI displacement becomes economy-wide. If tens of millions of jobs are automated within a short period, the existing unemployment insurance system—designed for cyclical downturns, not structural transformation—will be overwhelmed. Without a pre-authorized response that activates automatically, Congress would be forced to design and pass emergency legislation during a crisis, a process that history shows is slow, inadequate, and politically fraught.
Consumers Cannot Distinguish AI-Generated Content from Human-Created Content. As AI systems produce increasingly sophisticated text, images, audio, and video, the public has no reliable way to determine whether the content they consume was created by a human or generated by a machine. This opacity undermines informed decision-making, enables deception, and erodes public trust. Without mandatory labeling and notification, AI-generated content may be presented as authentic human expression in journalism, advertising, legal filings, academic work, and public discourse—with no accountability for the misrepresentation.
Artificial Intelligence Employment and Intellectual Property Protection Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Artificial Intelligence Employment and Intellectual Property Protection Act."
Sec. 2. DEFINITIONS.
- (1) ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEM.—The term "artificial intelligence system" means any machine-based system designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy that infers from input how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions.
- (2) AI DISPLACEMENT.—The term "AI displacement" means the elimination of an employee's position, or a substantial reduction in the duties, hours, or compensation of an employee's position, that is primarily attributable to the adoption of an artificial intelligence system.
- (3) AFFECTED EMPLOYEE.—The term "affected employee" means an employee who has been employed for not fewer than 12 months and who experiences AI displacement.
- (4) COVERED EMPLOYER.—The term "covered employer" means any employer with 50 or more employees.
- (5) AI DEVELOPER.—The term "AI developer" means any person or entity that designs, develops, or trains an AI system using copyrighted works, patented inventions, or other protected intellectual property.
- (6) IP OWNER.—The term "IP owner" means the holder of a copyright, patent, trademark, or other intellectual property right whose protected work has been used or is proposed to be used as training data for an AI system.
- (7) SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION.—The term "substantial reduction" means a reduction of 25 percent or more in assigned duties, scheduled hours, or total compensation.
- (8) AI-GENERATED DERIVATIVE WORK.—The term "AI-generated derivative work" means any content produced in whole or in substantial part by an artificial intelligence system that incorporates, adapts, recombines, or is otherwise based upon one or more preexisting copyrighted works, including but not limited to video, audio, text, or images extracted, transcribed, or otherwise derived from such works.
- (9) SUBSTANTIALLY TRANSFORMATIVE.—The term "substantially transformative" means that the new work adds significant original expression, meaning, or creative value beyond that contained in the source material, such that the new work serves a fundamentally different purpose or conveys a fundamentally different message than the original. Mere reformatting, rearrangement, summarization, compilation, or recombination of elements from existing works does not constitute substantial transformation.
- (10) CONTENT PLATFORM.—The term "content platform" means any online service that hosts, indexes, distributes, or monetizes user-uploaded content, including video-sharing platforms, social media services, and podcast hosting services.
- (11) PROTECTED PRODUCT.—The term "protected product" means any product, system, or device that has been commercially offered, sold, licensed, or otherwise made available to the public or to paying customers, including but not limited to—
- (a) software applications, platforms, software-as-a-service products, mobile applications, firmware, and digital tools;
- (b) consumer electronics, appliances, personal devices, and household goods;
- (c) vehicles, including automobiles, motorcycles, watercraft, aircraft, and their component systems;
- (d) machinery, tools, equipment, and industrial systems;
- (e) medical devices, scientific instruments, and laboratory equipment;
- (f) furniture, fixtures, lighting, and architectural components;
- (g) toys, sporting goods, recreational equipment, and personal accessories; and
- (h) any other tangible or digital product offered in commerce.
The term includes the product's composite design—meaning the specific combination of visual appearance, form, shape, dimensions, configuration, surface treatment, ornamentation, materials selection, color scheme, features, user interaction design, workflows, internal architecture, functional architecture, and overall aesthetic and functional character that, taken together, constitutes the product's distinct identity. The term does not include abstract ideas, general product categories, naturally occurring forms, or functional elements dictated solely by the laws of physics or by applicable regulatory requirements.
- (12) AI-ASSISTED CLONING.—The term "AI-assisted cloning" means the use of an artificial intelligence system to systematically analyze, reverse-engineer, or replicate the composite design of a protected product by ingesting, processing, or interpreting photographs, images, video, three-dimensional scans, point clouds, technical drawings, blueprints, schematics, user interfaces, user manuals, marketing materials, product listings, documentation, specifications, teardown analyses, or any other representation of the product, for the purpose of producing a functionally equivalent, visually equivalent, or substantially similar product, including but not limited to the generation of three-dimensional models, manufacturing specifications, computer-aided design files, engineering drawings, bill-of-materials documents, tooling specifications, circuit designs, software code, or prototypes.
- (13) INDEPENDENT DEVELOPMENT.—The term "independent development" means the creation of a product through original design decisions and engineering effort that does not rely on the systematic AI-assisted analysis of a specific competing product's composite design, even if the resulting product serves a similar market or offers overlapping functionality.
Sec. 3. ADVANCE NOTICE OF AI-RELATED WORKFORCE REDUCTIONS.
- (1) A covered employer planning an AI displacement affecting 10 or more employees within any 90-day period shall provide written notice not less than 90 days before the first displacement takes effect.
- (2) Notice shall be provided to each affected employee, the State dislocated worker unit, and the Secretary of Labor.
- (3) Failure to provide notice shall result in payment of an additional 60 days of salary and benefits to each affected employee.
Sec. 4. DISPLACED WORKER TRANSITION BENEFITS.
- (1) A covered employer shall provide each affected employee with continuation of full salary and all employer-provided benefits for 12 months following displacement.
- (2) Payments may be offset by wages from new employment, but shall not be reduced below 50 percent of pre-displacement salary.
- (3) Any agreement by an employee to waive these benefits shall be void and unenforceable.
Sec. 5. EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS TO FUTURE SKILLS TRAINING FUND.
- (1) A covered employer carrying out an AI displacement shall contribute to the Fund an amount equal to 10 percent of the combined annual salaries of all affected employees.
- (2) Contributions shall be paid within 30 days of displacement and shall be deductible as an ordinary business expense.
Sec. 6. FUTURE SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAM.
- (1) There is established within the Department of Labor a Future Skills Training Fund and Program.
- (2) Amounts shall be used for retraining grants to affected employees, grants to educational institutions developing curricula in high-demand fields, career counseling and job placement services, and workforce adaptation research.
- (3) Individual retraining grants shall not exceed $25,000 per year for a maximum of 2 years.
Sec. 7. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN AI TRAINING DATA.
- (1) Each IP owner whose protected work is used or proposed to be used as training data shall have the right to elect either fair compensation under Section 8 or exclusion of the work from the training dataset.
- (2) An AI developer shall, before using any protected work, make reasonable efforts to identify and notify the IP owner.
- (3) The Register of Copyrights shall establish a publicly accessible Opt-Out Registry in which IP owners may register works that shall not be used as AI training data.
- (4) An AI developer that uses a work listed in the Opt-Out Registry shall be liable for willful infringement.
Sec. 8. FAIR COMPENSATION FRAMEWORK.
- (1) An IP owner who elects compensation and the AI developer shall negotiate in good faith.
- (2) Factors shall include market value, extent of contribution to the training dataset, commercial revenue generated, availability of substitutes, and transformative nature of the AI system's use.
- (3) If parties fail to agree within 90 days, either may submit to binding arbitration under rules established by the Register of Copyrights.
- (4) Compensation shall not be less than the amount under a reasonable licensing arrangement.
Sec. 9. AI TRAINING DATA DISCLOSURE.
- (1) Each AI developer shall publish and maintain a disclosure identifying categories and sources of training data, whether protected works were included, and compliance steps taken.
- (2) Disclosures shall be updated at least annually.
Sec. 10. PROHIBITION ON NON-TRANSFORMATIVE AI-GENERATED DERIVATIVE WORKS.
- (1) PROHIBITION.—No person or entity shall use an artificial intelligence system to create, distribute, publish, or monetize an AI-generated derivative work that is not substantially transformative of the preexisting copyrighted work or works from which it is derived.
- (2) PRESUMPTION OF NON-TRANSFORMATION.—An AI-generated derivative work shall be presumed not to be substantially transformative if it—
- (a) incorporates clips, excerpts, transcriptions, or other identifiable elements from a copyrighted work without adding significant original commentary, criticism, analysis, or creative expression;
- (b) serves the same purpose or targets the same audience as the original work such that it functions as a market substitute; or
- (c) is produced through automated extraction, recombination, or summarization of one or more copyrighted works with minimal human creative input.
- (3) REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION.—The presumption under paragraph (2) may be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence that the new work adds substantial original expression and serves a fundamentally different purpose than the source material.
- (4) PLATFORM RESPONSIBILITIES.—A content platform shall—
- (a) establish and maintain a process by which rights holders may submit claims that content hosted on the platform constitutes a non-transformative AI-generated derivative work;
- (b) upon receipt of a facially valid claim, remove or disable access to the disputed content within 72 hours, pending resolution;
- (c) provide the uploader with notice of the claim and an opportunity to submit a counter-notice demonstrating that the work is substantially transformative; and
- (d) restore content within 14 business days of receiving a valid counter-notice unless the claimant initiates legal proceedings.
- (5) RIGHT OF ACTION.—An IP owner whose copyrighted work has been used to create a non-transformative AI-generated derivative work shall have a private right of action against the person or entity that created, distributed, or monetized such work. The court may award—
- (a) actual damages and any profits attributable to the infringing work;
- (b) statutory damages of not less than $10,000 and not more than $150,000 per work infringed, at the election of the rights holder;
- (c) reasonable attorney's fees and costs to the prevailing rights holder; and
- (d) injunctive relief, including orders requiring the removal of infringing content and the disgorgement of revenue derived therefrom.
- (6) REVENUE RECOVERY.—Where a non-transformative AI-generated derivative work has generated advertising revenue, subscription revenue, or other monetization on a content platform, the rights holder shall be entitled to recover the greater of actual damages or the full amount of revenue generated by the infringing work during the period of infringement.
- (7) SAFE HARBOR LIMITATION.—A content platform that complies with the obligations set forth in paragraph (4) shall not be liable for damages under this section solely by reason of hosting the infringing content, provided that the platform did not participate in the creation of the work and acted expeditiously to remove or disable access upon receiving a valid claim.
Sec. 11. PROHIBITION ON AI-ASSISTED CLONING OF PRODUCT DESIGNS.
- (1) PROHIBITION.—No person or entity shall engage in AI-assisted cloning of a protected product. It shall be unlawful to use an artificial intelligence system to systematically analyze a protected product's design—whether by ingesting photographs, images, three-dimensional scans, technical drawings, user interfaces, documentation, specifications, or any other representation of the product—for the purpose of producing a product that replicates the composite design of the original.
- (2) PRESUMPTION OF AI-ASSISTED CLONING.—A product shall be presumed to be the result of AI-assisted cloning if—
- (a) the product replicates a substantial portion of the composite design of an identified protected product, including specific combinations of visual appearance, form, features, workflows, functional architecture, or overall aesthetic and functional character;
- (b) the product was developed or released within a timeframe substantially shorter than would be expected through independent development of a product of comparable complexity; and
- (c) the developer or manufacturer of the product had access to the protected product, images or scans thereof, its documentation, or its publicly available specifications prior to or during development.
- (3) REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION.—The presumption under paragraph (2) may be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence demonstrating independent development, including contemporaneous design documents, engineering records, sketches, prototypes, version control records, or other evidence establishing that the product's design originated from the developer's own creative and engineering effort rather than from AI-assisted analysis of the protected product.
- (4) EXCLUSIONS.—This section shall not apply to—
- (a) the development of products that implement general-purpose functionality, standard design patterns, common industry conventions, generic geometric forms, or widely used open-source components, provided that the developer does not replicate the specific composite design of an identified protected product;
- (b) interoperability development, including the creation of products designed to connect to, interface with, or operate alongside a protected product through published or documented specifications;
- (c) security research or safety testing conducted in good faith for the purpose of identifying and reporting vulnerabilities or hazards;
- (d) development performed under a license or written authorization from the owner of the protected product;
- (e) repair, maintenance, or the manufacture of replacement parts for a protected product, provided such activity does not result in the production of a substantially complete replica of the protected product; or
- (f) design elements dictated solely by applicable law, regulation, industry safety standards, or functional requirements imposed by the physical or technical environment in which the product must operate.
- (5) RIGHT OF ACTION.—The owner of a protected product that has been the subject of AI-assisted cloning shall have a private right of action against the person or entity that developed, manufactured, distributed, or commercialized the cloned product. The court may award—
- (a) actual damages, including lost revenue and diminished market value attributable to the cloned product;
- (b) statutory damages of not less than $50,000 and not more than $5,000,000 per protected product cloned, at the election of the rights holder;
- (c) disgorgement of all profits derived from the cloned product;
- (d) reasonable attorney's fees and costs to the prevailing rights holder; and
- (e) injunctive relief, including orders requiring the cessation of manufacture and distribution and the removal of the cloned product from all marketplaces and platforms.
- (6) MARKETPLACE OBLIGATIONS.—Any digital marketplace, application distribution platform, e-commerce platform, or manufacturing service that hosts, distributes, or facilitates the production of products shall—
- (a) establish and maintain a process by which rights holders may submit claims that a listed or hosted product constitutes an AI-assisted clone;
- (b) upon receipt of a facially valid claim supported by reasonable evidence, suspend distribution or production of the disputed product within 72 hours pending resolution;
- (c) provide the developer or manufacturer of the disputed product with notice of the claim and an opportunity to submit a counter-notice demonstrating independent development; and
- (d) restore the product within 14 business days of receiving a valid counter-notice unless the claimant initiates legal proceedings.
- (7) SAFE HARBOR FOR MARKETPLACES.—A marketplace, platform, or manufacturing service that complies with the obligations set forth in paragraph (6) shall not be liable for damages under this section solely by reason of hosting, distributing, or facilitating the production of the cloned product, provided that it did not participate in the design of the product and acted expeditiously upon receiving a valid claim.
Sec. 12. MANDATORY MARKING AND NOTIFICATION OF AI-GENERATED CONTENT.
- (1) MARKING REQUIREMENT.—Any person or entity that creates, distributes, or publishes content generated in whole or in substantial part by an artificial intelligence system shall clearly and conspicuously mark such content as AI-generated. The marking shall be—
- (a) in a form that is reasonably likely to be seen and understood by the intended audience;
- (b) affixed to, embedded within, or prominently displayed alongside the content at the point of presentation; and
- (c) in the case of digital content, embedded in the metadata of the file using standards established by the Secretary of Commerce under paragraph (4).
- (2) NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.—Any person or entity that provides AI-generated content to a consumer, client, or end user shall, at or before the time of delivery, notify the recipient that the content was generated in whole or in substantial part by an artificial intelligence system. Notification shall—
- (a) identify the content as AI-generated;
- (b) identify, to the extent practicable, the artificial intelligence system or systems used to generate the content; and
- (c) be provided in a clear, conspicuous, and accessible manner appropriate to the medium of delivery.
- (3) SCOPE.—The requirements of this section shall apply to text, images, audio, video, and any other form of content generated by an artificial intelligence system, including content that has been substantially modified by an artificial intelligence system. The requirements shall not apply to—
- (a) content generated by an artificial intelligence system and used solely for internal purposes by the entity that generated it, provided the content is not distributed to any external party;
- (b) minor automated functions such as spell-check, grammar correction, or basic formatting that do not substantially alter the meaning or substance of human-authored content; or
- (c) content generated for purposes of national security by a Federal agency, where the head of such agency certifies that marking or notification would compromise a classified operation.
- (4) STANDARDS.—Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology and industry stakeholders, shall promulgate standards for—
- (a) machine-readable metadata labels for AI-generated digital content;
- (b) watermarking techniques for AI-generated images, audio, and video; and
- (c) uniform visual or textual marking formats for consumer-facing AI-generated content.
- (5) PLATFORM OBLIGATIONS.—Any online platform, as defined by the Secretary of Commerce, that hosts or distributes user-generated content shall—
- (a) implement reasonable measures to detect and label AI-generated content uploaded to the platform;
- (b) preserve any AI-generated content markings or metadata present in uploaded content; and
- (c) provide users with a mechanism to report unmarked AI-generated content.
Sec. 13. PENALTIES.
- (1) An employer that fails to comply with Section 4 or 5 shall be liable for unpaid benefits plus equal liquidated damages, and subject to civil penalties of up to $50,000 per violation.
- (2) An AI developer that fails to comply with Sections 7, 8, or 9 shall be subject to civil penalties up to $500,000 for disclosure failures and up to $1,000,000 for using Opt-Out Registry works, plus treble damages for willful violations.
- (3) In addition to the private right of action and damages provided under Section 10(5) and (6), any person or entity that violates Section 10(1) shall be subject to a civil penalty of up to $250,000 per violation. A content platform that fails to comply with the obligations set forth in Section 10(4) shall be subject to a civil penalty of up to $500,000 per violation.
- (4) In addition to the private right of action and damages provided under Section 11(5), any person or entity that violates Section 11(1) shall be subject to a civil penalty of up to $500,000 per violation. A marketplace, platform, or manufacturing service that fails to comply with the obligations set forth in Section 11(6) shall be subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,000,000 per violation.
- (5) Any person or entity that fails to comply with Section 12 shall be subject to—
- (a) a civil penalty of up to $50,000 per violation for failure to mark or notify, with each instance of unmarked or unnotified content constituting a separate violation;
- (b) a civil penalty of up to $500,000 per violation for a pattern or practice of noncompliance; and
- (c) in the case of an online platform that fails to comply with Section 12(5), a civil penalty of up to $1,000,000 per violation.
Sec. 14. AI DISPLACEMENT INDEX.
- (1) ESTABLISHMENT.—Not later than one year after enactment, the Bureau of Labor Statistics shall develop and publish a quarterly AI Displacement Index measuring the percentage of the civilian labor force whose unemployment is primarily attributable to the adoption of artificial intelligence systems.
- (2) METHODOLOGY.—The Index shall be calculated using—
- (a) advance notice filings submitted by covered employers under Section 3 of this Act;
- (b) data collected through the Current Population Survey and Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, supplemented with questions designed to identify AI-related displacement;
- (c) employer attestations filed under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) that identify AI adoption as a contributing factor; and
- (d) administrative data from State unemployment insurance programs in which claimants identify AI displacement as the reason for separation.
- (3) PUBLICATION.—The Commissioner of Labor Statistics shall publish the AI Displacement Index not later than 60 days after the end of each calendar quarter, beginning with the first full quarter following the one-year development period.
- (4) INDEPENDENT REVIEW.—The Government Accountability Office shall review the methodology and accuracy of the Index biennially and report its findings to Congress.
Sec. 15. UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME TRIGGER.
- (1) ACTIVATION.—If the AI Displacement Index published under Section 14 exceeds 10 percent of the civilian labor force for two consecutive calendar quarters, the Universal Basic Income program established under this section shall activate automatically on the first day of the month following publication of the second qualifying Index, without further congressional action.
- (2) ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUAL.—Every individual who is—
- (a) a citizen of the United States or a lawful permanent resident;
- (b) aged 18 years or older; and
- (c) not incarcerated in a Federal, State, or local correctional facility
shall be eligible to receive monthly payments under this section.
- (3) PAYMENT AMOUNT.—Each eligible individual shall receive a monthly payment equal to 60 percent of the national median individual wage as most recently published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, divided by 12. The payment amount shall be recalculated annually based on updated median wage data published by the Bureau.
- (4) TAX-EXEMPT STATUS.—Payments received under this section shall not constitute gross income for purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and shall not be subject to Federal, State, or local income tax. Payments shall not be considered income for purposes of determining eligibility for any Federal means-tested benefit program.
- (5) PAYMENT MECHANISM.—The Secretary of the Treasury shall distribute payments by direct deposit to accounts designated by the recipient, or by prepaid debit card for individuals without bank accounts. The Social Security Administration shall administer enrollment and eligibility verification using existing infrastructure.
- (6) DEACTIVATION.—When the AI Displacement Index falls below 7 percent of the civilian labor force for four consecutive calendar quarters, payments shall be phased down as follows—
- (a) reduced to 75 percent of the full amount for the first three months following deactivation;
- (b) reduced to 50 percent for months four through six;
- (c) reduced to 25 percent for months seven through nine; and
- (d) terminated after nine months.
If the Index exceeds 10 percent again during the phase-down period, full payments shall resume immediately.
Sec. 16. UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME FUNDING.
- (1) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established within the Treasury the AI Economic Stabilization Fund, to be administered by the Secretary of the Treasury, for the purpose of financing payments under Section 15.
- (2) DEPOSITS.—The following amounts shall be deposited into the Fund—
- (a) employer contributions collected under Section 5 of this Act;
- (b) civil penalties collected under Section 13 of this Act;
- (c) an automation surcharge equal to 5 percent of gross annual revenue derived from AI systems, assessed on any covered employer that has reduced its workforce by more than 25 percent through AI displacement within any rolling 36-month period, as reported through advance notice filings under Section 3; and
- (d) such sums as may be appropriated by Congress.
- (3) PRE-FUNDING.—Beginning in the first fiscal year after enactment, the Secretary shall invest Fund deposits in United States Treasury securities. The Fund shall accumulate reserves during the period before activation to ensure immediate solvency upon triggering.
- (4) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the Fund such sums as are necessary to ensure full and timely payment of all obligations under Section 15 upon activation.
- (5) ANNUAL REPORT.—The Secretary shall submit to Congress an annual report on Fund receipts, investment returns, projected obligations under various AI displacement scenarios, and recommendations regarding the adequacy of funding levels.
Sec. 17. EFFECTIVE DATE.
- (1) Sections 3 through 6 shall take effect 180 days after enactment.
- (2) Sections 7 through 13 shall take effect one year after enactment.
- (3) Section 14 shall take effect on the date of enactment, with the first AI Displacement Index published not later than 15 months after enactment.
- (4) Sections 15 and 16 shall take effect on the date of enactment, with payments commencing only upon activation under Section 15(1).
Sources
- U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-24-105980, "Artificial Intelligence: Agencies Have Begun Implementation but Need to Complete Key Requirements." https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-105980
- U.S. Copyright Office, "Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, Part 1: Digital Replicas," Report of the Register of Copyrights, July 2024. https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-1-Digital-Replicas-Report.pdf
Firearms Rights and Safety Bill
At a Glance
- Requires secure storage of all firearms when not in the owner's immediate control
- Risk protection orders with full hearing within 48 hours and right to counsel
- Background checks completed in 60 seconds by an independent nonprofit
- Codifies serial number requirements for ghost guns and weapon parts kits
- Removes suppressors from the NFA; regulates them as standard firearms

The right to keep and bear arms is woven into America’s founding and its identity. It is also a right that, like every right enshrined in the Constitution, carries responsibilities and is not without limits. For decades, the firearms debate has been trapped in a false choice: expand rights or improve safety. The result has been partisan gridlock in which neither side achieves its goals and Americans continue to die from preventable gun violence while law-abiding owners face a patchwork of inconsistent regulations. Meaningful legislation must do both—strengthen the rights of responsible gun owners and reduce the circumstances under which firearms cause harm.
This bill starts from the principle that unsecured firearms are the common thread in most preventable gun deaths—accidents involving children, thefts that put weapons in criminal hands, and access by individuals in crisis. All firearms must be stored securely when not in the immediate control of the lawful owner. Any person whose negligence enables an unauthorized individual to access a firearm and cause harm will face felony charges. At the same time, the bill protects due process for gun owners by establishing risk protection orders with robust safeguards: a full adversarial hearing within 48 hours, the right to counsel, and mandatory return of all seized firearms within 48 hours of a favorable ruling—with civil penalties for government agencies that fail to comply.
The background check system will be modernized and transferred to an independent nonprofit organization, removing it from direct government control. Checks will be completed within 60 seconds, eliminating the delays that burden lawful purchasers. Transaction records will be maintained solely for verification purposes, purged after 180 days, and accessible to no government agency without a narrowly scoped subpoena tied to a specific criminal investigation. Firearm suppressors—which function as hearing protection rather than tools of concealment—will be removed from the National Firearms Act and regulated as standard serialized firearms.
To close a growing traceability gap, the bill codifies into statute the requirement that all firearm frames, receivers, and weapon parts kits bear serial numbers and be subject to background checks. Law enforcement agencies recovered over 92,000 unserialized privately made firearms at crime scenes between 2017 and 2023[1], with nearly 1,700 associated with homicides[2]. While the Supreme Court upheld ATF’s serialization rule in Bondi v. VanDerStok[3], that protection exists only as an administrative regulation that a future administration could weaken. Codifying it into law makes the requirement permanent.
Finally, the bill establishes dedicated funding for firearm safety education—including training on secure storage and recognition of individuals at risk of committing violence—and for mental health treatment programs serving at-risk individuals, veterans, and active-duty service members. Prevention, not just enforcement, is essential to reducing gun violence while respecting the rights that Americans hold dear.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
Partisan Gridlock Prevents Meaningful Reform. Gun legislation typically divides along party lines, with proposals seen as either expanding rights or restricting them. This stalemate has prevented passage of measures that could improve public safety while respecting constitutional rights.
Unsecured Firearms Enable Unauthorized Access. Firearms that are not properly stored contribute to accidental shootings, youth access, theft, and misuse by prohibited individuals. Current laws do not consistently require secure storage or hold owners accountable when negligence leads to harm.
Individuals in Crisis Retain Access to Firearms. People experiencing mental health emergencies or demonstrating threatening behavior may still have access to firearms, creating risk to themselves and others. Existing intervention mechanisms are inconsistent across jurisdictions.
Risk of Due Process Violations in Firearm Removal. Red flag laws in some states lack adequate protections for the accused, creating potential for abuse or prolonged deprivation of property without proper judicial review.
Background Check System Causes Delays and Uncertainty. The current system can result in lengthy waits that burden lawful purchasers. System inefficiencies and incomplete records undermine both rights and safety.
Concerns About Government Surveillance of Gun Owners. Many Americans oppose a centralized government registry of firearm transactions, viewing it as a potential tool for future confiscation or government overreach.
Outdated Regulation of Firearm Silencers. Suppressors, which reduce hearing damage for shooters, remain subject to extensive NFA restrictions despite functioning as safety equipment rather than enhancing lethality.
Unserialized Firearms Undermine Law Enforcement. Between 2017 and 2023, law enforcement agencies recovered over 92,000 privately made firearms—commonly known as ghost guns—at crime scenes, with recoveries increasing approximately 1,600 percent over that period[1]. Nearly 1,700 were associated with homicides[2]. These weapons are untraceable because they lack serial numbers, rendering traditional investigative tools useless. While the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives issued a rule in 2022 requiring serialization of firearm parts kits, and the Supreme Court upheld that rule in Bondi v. VanDerStok[3] in March 2025, the protection exists only as an administrative regulation that a future administration could weaken or rescind. Codifying the serialization requirement into statute would make this protection permanent.
Insufficient Investment in Prevention. Resources for firearm safety education, early intervention with at-risk individuals, and mental health treatment remain underfunded, leaving prevention efforts fragmented and inadequate.
Firearms Rights and Safety Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Firearms Rights and Safety Act."
Sec. 2. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act—
- (1) FIREARM.—The term "firearm" has the meaning given that term in section 921(a)(3) of title 18, United States Code.
- (2) SECURE STORAGE.—The term "secure storage" means storage in a locked container, gun safe, vault, or secured room reasonably designed to prevent unauthorized access, or the use of a tamper-resistant locking device that renders the firearm inoperable.
- (3) IMMEDIATE USE.—The term "immediate use" means the firearm is being carried on the person of the lawful owner or is within such close proximity that the owner maintains effective control at all times.
- (4) UNAUTHORIZED PERSON.—The term "unauthorized person" means any individual who is under eighteen years of age (unless supervised), is prohibited from possessing a firearm under Federal or State law, or has not received express authorization of the lawful owner.
- (5) RISK PROTECTION ORDER.—The term "risk protection order" means a court order temporarily prohibiting an individual from purchasing or possessing firearms based upon a judicial finding that the individual poses an imminent danger to self or others.
- (6) DESIGNATED NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION.—The term "designated nonprofit organization" means the independent, nongovernmental entity designated by the Attorney General under Section 6 to administer the National Instant Background Check System.
- (7) PRIVATELY MADE FIREARM.—The term "privately made firearm" means a firearm, including a frame or receiver, that is not marked with a serial number issued by a licensed manufacturer or importer, whether manufactured, assembled, or otherwise produced by a person who is not a licensed manufacturer.
- (8) WEAPON PARTS KIT.—The term "weapon parts kit" means any combination of parts designed and intended to be used to assemble a functional firearm, including any kit, set, or collection of parts from which a firearm may be readily assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.
- (9) FRAME OR RECEIVER.—The term "frame or receiver" means a part of a firearm that, when the complete weapon is assembled, is visible from the exterior and provides housing or a structure for one or more fire control components, even if the part in question may also house or provide a structure for additional components, including any partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional frame or receiver that has reached a stage in manufacture where it may readily be completed, assembled, or converted to function as a frame or receiver.
Sec. 3. SECURE STORAGE REQUIREMENTS.
- (1) REQUIREMENT.—Any person who owns or possesses a firearm shall, when such firearm is not in the immediate use of the lawful owner, store the firearm in secure storage.
- (2) CRIMINAL LIABILITY.—Any person who fails to store a firearm in compliance with paragraph (1) and, as a proximate result, an unauthorized person obtains access and causes bodily injury or death, shall be guilty of a felony and subject to imprisonment for not more than five years, a fine of not more than one hundred fifty thousand dollars, or both.
- (3) LESSER OFFENSE.—Failure to store resulting in unauthorized access without bodily injury or death shall be a misdemeanor subject to a fine of not more than ten thousand dollars.
- (4) AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE.—It shall be an affirmative defense that the firearm was obtained through unlawful entry or that the owner reported the firearm stolen within twenty-four hours.
- (5) TAX CREDIT.—There shall be allowed a credit against Federal income tax equal to the lesser of the cost of a qualifying firearm storage device or five hundred dollars per taxable year.
Sec. 4. RISK PROTECTION ORDERS WITH DUE PROCESS SAFEGUARDS.
- (1) A court may issue a risk protection order upon a finding by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent poses an imminent danger of causing bodily harm through the use of a firearm.
- (2) Petitions may be filed only by a law enforcement officer or agency, or a family or household member of the respondent.
- (3) A temporary ex parte order shall be effective for not more than fourteen days, and a full adversarial hearing shall be held within forty-eight hours after service.
- (4) At the hearing, the respondent shall have the right to counsel (including appointed counsel if indigent), to present evidence, to cross-examine witnesses, and to a written statement of findings.
- (5) An order issued after a full hearing shall be effective for not more than one hundred eighty days and may be renewed only upon a new petition and hearing.
- (6) Upon expiration, dissolution, or favorable adjudication, all seized firearms shall be returned within forty-eight hours. Failure to return firearms shall result in a civil penalty of one thousand dollars per day per firearm.
- (7) Any person who files a petition knowing the allegations to be false shall be guilty of a misdemeanor subject to imprisonment for not more than one year, a fine of not more than twenty-five thousand dollars, or both.
Sec. 5. PROTECTION OF SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS.
Nothing in this Act shall be construed to create a national firearms registry, authorize confiscation of firearms from any person not subject to a lawful court order, impose any burden on the right to keep and bear arms beyond the specific provisions herein, or preempt any State law that provides greater protection for firearms rights.
Sec. 6. SERIALIZATION OF PRIVATELY MADE FIREARMS AND WEAPON PARTS KITS.
- (1) SERIALIZATION REQUIREMENT.—Any person who manufactures, assembles, or otherwise produces a firearm, including a frame or receiver, shall mark the firearm with a serial number issued by or obtained from a licensed manufacturer or the Attorney General before the firearm is sold, offered for sale, transferred, or otherwise disposed of.
- (2) WEAPON PARTS KITS.—Any person engaged in the business of selling, offering for sale, or distributing weapon parts kits shall—
- (a) mark or cause to be marked each frame or receiver included in the kit with a unique serial number before sale or distribution;
- (b) treat each sale or transfer of a weapon parts kit as a sale or transfer of a firearm for purposes of background check requirements under section 922(t) of title 18, United States Code; and
- (c) maintain records of such transactions as required of licensed dealers under section 923 of title 18, United States Code.
- (3) EXISTING PRIVATELY MADE FIREARMS.—Any person who possesses a privately made firearm that is not marked with a serial number as of the date of enactment shall, not later than one year after enactment, have the firearm serialized by a licensed manufacturer, licensed importer, or licensed dealer, or by the Attorney General through a process established by regulation.
- (4) PROHIBITION ON UNSERIALIZED TRANSFER.—No person may sell, offer for sale, transfer, or otherwise dispose of a privately made firearm or frame or receiver that does not bear a serial number.
- (5) PENALTY.—Any person who violates this section shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than ten thousand dollars per firearm for a first violation and not more than twenty-five thousand dollars per firearm for a subsequent violation. A person who knowingly and willfully violates this section shall be subject to criminal penalties under section 924 of title 18, United States Code.
- (6) EXCEPTION FOR PERSONAL USE.—Nothing in this section shall prohibit a person who is not otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm from manufacturing a firearm for personal use, provided the firearm is serialized in accordance with paragraph (1) before manufacture is complete.
Sec. 7. INDEPENDENT INSTANT BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM.
- (1) Not later than two years after enactment, administration of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System shall be transferred from the FBI to a designated nonprofit organization selected by the Attorney General.
- (2) The organization shall complete each background check within sixty seconds. If a determination cannot be made within sixty seconds, a provisional approval shall be issued with final determination within twenty-four hours.
- (3) TRANSACTION RECORDS.—The organization shall maintain a transaction registry solely for verification purposes. No government agency shall have access except pursuant to a subpoena issued upon a showing of probable cause related to a specific criminal investigation. Records shall be purged after one hundred eighty days.
- (4) OVERSIGHT BOARD.—There is established a Background Check System Oversight Board consisting of—
- (a) two members appointed by the Attorney General with experience in law enforcement;
- (b) two members appointed by the Speaker of the House and the President pro tempore of the Senate with experience in civil liberties or privacy advocacy;
- (c) one member appointed by the Attorney General who is a representative of licensed firearms dealers; and
- (d) one member appointed by the Comptroller General with experience in information technology security or auditing.
The Board shall conduct quarterly reviews of the organization's operations, accuracy rates, processing times, data security, and compliance with privacy protections, and shall publish a public report of its findings within thirty days of each review.
- (5) The GAO shall conduct an annual audit of the organization to ensure compliance and protection of personally identifiable information. The audit shall include an assessment of system accuracy, denial rates, appeal outcomes, and data security.
- (6) PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.—The designated nonprofit organization shall maintain a system availability rate of not less than ninety-nine and five-tenths percent, a background check accuracy rate of not less than ninety-nine percent as measured by successful appeals, and shall publish monthly performance metrics on a publicly accessible website.
Sec. 8. DEREGULATION OF SILENCERS.
- (1) Section 5845(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by removing silencers from the definition of "firearm" for purposes of the National Firearms Act.
- (2) Silencers shall be treated as standard firearms subject to serialization and background check requirements.
- (3) Any person who paid the NFA tax on a silencer within two years before enactment shall be entitled to a refund.
Sec. 9. FIREARM SAFETY EDUCATION AND VIOLENCE INTERVENTION FUND.
- (1) There is established within the Treasury the Firearm Safety Education and Violence Intervention Fund, administered by the Attorney General.
- (2) Grants shall be provided for voluntary firearm safety education programs, community-based violence intervention programs, mental health treatment for at-risk individuals, and school-based threat assessment programs.
- (3) There is authorized to be appropriated three hundred million dollars annually for fiscal years 2026 through 2035.
- (4) No funds may be used to create or maintain any registry of firearms or firearms owners.
Sec. 10. MENTAL HEALTH AND AT-RISK INDIVIDUAL TREATMENT.
- (1) The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall establish a grant program to expand mental health treatment access for individuals at elevated risk of firearms violence, including persons subject to risk protection order petitions, veterans, and active-duty service members.
- (2) Participation shall be voluntary, and no record of participation shall be used to disqualify any person from exercising firearms rights unless otherwise required by Federal law.
- (3) There is authorized to be appropriated two hundred million dollars annually for fiscal years 2026 through 2035.
Sec. 11. EFFECTIVE DATE.
- (1) This Act shall take effect one hundred eighty days after enactment, except as otherwise specified.
- (2) Section 6 shall take effect one year after enactment.
- (3) Section 7 shall take effect two years after enactment.
- (4) Section 8 shall take effect ninety days after enactment.
Sources
- Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, "Privately Made Firearms." https://www.atf.gov/firearms/privately-made-firearms
- Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, "National Firearms Commerce and Trafficking Assessment: Crime Guns - Volume Two," January 2025. https://www.atf.gov/firearms/national-firearms-commerce-and-trafficking-assessment-nfcta-crime-guns-volume-two
- Bondi v. VanDerStok, 602 U.S. ___ (2025). https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-852_o7jp.pdf
Affordable Care Improvement Bill
At a Glance
- Makes premium subsidies permanent with no income cliff -- caps costs at 8.5% of income
- Cuts deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums in half over three years
- Creates a public insurance option available in every state and county
- Closes the Medicaid coverage gap in the ten non-expansion states
- Expands Medicare drug price negotiation to 50 drugs by 2030

No American should have to choose between seeing a doctor and paying rent. Yet that is the reality for millions of families who technically have health insurance but cannot afford to use it. A family paying $15,000 a year in premiums only to face a $7,000 deductible before coverage begins is not insured in any meaningful sense—they are paying for the illusion of protection while skipping medications, postponing surgeries, and praying that no one gets seriously sick. The Affordable Care Act expanded coverage to millions who had none, but it left deep structural problems that a decade of experience has made impossible to ignore.
The ACA's subsidy structure was designed with a cliff: families earning above 400 percent of the federal poverty level received no help at all, regardless of how crushing premiums became[1]. A household earning $65,000 could face marketplace premiums exceeding $20,000 with no assistance. Temporary fixes have papered over this flaw, but families cannot plan their lives around year-to-year legislative patches. Meanwhile, in the ten states that refused to expand Medicaid[2], roughly 1.5 to 2 million adults fall into a coverage gap—earning too much for traditional Medicaid, too little for marketplace subsidies, and left with nothing. These are working Americans, many of them parents, punished by geography for a political decision their state government made over a decade ago.
Beneath the coverage problems lies a cost crisis. American healthcare is the most expensive in the world, and nothing in the ACA addressed why. Pharmaceutical companies set prices without meaningful negotiation. Hospital consolidation has created local monopolies that charge whatever the market will bear. Administrative complexity consumes roughly 30 percent of every healthcare dollar. Until these cost drivers are confronted, every expansion of coverage requires larger subsidies, and every family's premiums creep higher regardless of what Washington does at the margins.
This legislation fixes what the ACA left broken. Premium subsidies become permanent with no income cliff—no family pays more than 8.5 percent of income for benchmark coverage. Deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums are cut in half over three years. A federal program closes the Medicaid gap in non-expansion states. A public insurance option, reimbursing providers at Medicare-plus-10-percent rates, enters every market in every state—guaranteeing that no American lives in a county with only one insurer and no competitive pressure on price. Medicare drug price negotiation expands to 50 drugs. And the family coverage loophole—which currently blocks an estimated 5 million Americans from subsidies because their employer offers "affordable" individual coverage while family coverage costs 30 percent of household income[3]—is permanently closed. The goal is simple: health insurance that people can actually afford to buy and actually afford to use.
Problems the Bill Aims to Solve
Premiums That Price Out Middle-Income Families. The original ACA subsidy structure created a cliff at 400% of the federal poverty level[1], above which households received no assistance regardless of how burdensome premiums became relative to income. Families earning $60,000-$100,000 annually often face marketplace premiums of $15,000-$25,000 per year with no financial help, forcing them to choose between unaffordable coverage and going uninsured. While temporary measures have extended subsidies, the lack of a permanent fix leaves millions in financial limbo, uncertain whether assistance will continue from year to year.
High Deductibles That Render Insurance Unusable. The proliferation of high-deductible plans means many Americans with insurance cannot actually afford to use it. A family with a $7,000 deductible may skip necessary care, delay treatment, or face medical debt despite paying thousands annually in premiums. This "underinsurance" problem affects millions of Americans who technically have coverage but face cost barriers to accessing care. Insurance that doesn't provide financial protection when people get sick fails its fundamental purpose.
The Medicaid Coverage Gap. When the Supreme Court made Medicaid expansion optional, it created an unintended gap affecting millions of low-income adults in non-expansion states. These individuals earn too much to qualify for traditional Medicaid but too little to qualify for marketplace subsidies, which begin at 100% of the federal poverty level. In the ten states that have not expanded Medicaid[2], approximately 1.5 to 2 million adults fall into this coverage gap with no affordable options—punished for living in states whose governments rejected federal funding.
Uncontrolled Healthcare Costs Driving Premiums Higher. The ACA expanded coverage but included few mechanisms to control the underlying costs that make American healthcare the most expensive in the world. Pharmaceutical companies set prices without negotiation. Hospital consolidation has eliminated competition in many markets, enabling monopoly pricing. Administrative complexity consumes roughly 30% of healthcare spending. Without addressing these cost drivers, any coverage expansion becomes increasingly unaffordable over time, requiring ever-larger subsidies to maintain access.
Lack of Competition in Insurance Markets. Many Americans, particularly in rural areas, have access to only one insurance company on the marketplace, eliminating competitive pressure on pricing and service quality. Insurers have withdrawn from unprofitable markets, leaving consumers with take-it-or-leave-it options. The absence of a public insurance option means no entity exists whose mission is providing coverage rather than generating shareholder returns, and no competitor can anchor markets where private insurers refuse to participate.
Family Coverage Affordability Loophole. Under current rules, employer-sponsored coverage is deemed "affordable" based solely on the cost of employee-only coverage, ignoring family premium costs. A worker offered individual coverage at 8% of income meets the affordability threshold even if adding a spouse and children would cost 30% of household income. These families are then barred from marketplace subsidies despite facing genuinely unaffordable options, a glitch affecting an estimated 5 million Americans[3].
Narrow Networks Restricting Access to Care. To control costs within the ACA's framework, insurers have increasingly offered plans with severely restricted provider networks. Patients discover their doctors, specialists, or nearby hospitals are out-of-network, forcing them to travel long distances or pay dramatically higher out-of-pocket costs. Network adequacy standards have proven insufficient to ensure meaningful access, particularly for specialty care, mental health services, and rural residents.
Complexity That Discourages Enrollment. The marketplace enrollment process, subsidy calculations, plan comparisons, and tax reconciliation requirements remain confusing for many consumers. Eligible individuals fail to enroll because they don't understand their options or find the process too burdensome. The system's complexity also generates billing errors, surprise coverage denials, and end-of-year tax complications that undermine public confidence in the entire structure.
Exclusion of Immigrant Populations. Current law prohibits undocumented immigrants from purchasing marketplace coverage even using their own money without subsidies. This exclusion pushes millions toward emergency room care as their only option, increasing uncompensated care costs that are ultimately shifted to insured patients and taxpayers. Public health suffers when any population lacks access to preventive care and early treatment.
Affordable Care Improvement Act
120th Congress, 1st Session
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Sec. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Affordable Care Improvement Act."
Sec. 2. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act—
- (1) SECRETARY.—The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Health and Human Services, unless otherwise specified.
- (2) EXCHANGE.—The term "Exchange" means a Health Insurance Exchange established under title I of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18031 et seq.).
- (3) PUBLIC OPTION.—The term "public option" means the public health insurance option established under Section 5 of this Act.
- (4) ESSENTIAL HEALTH BENEFITS.—The term "essential health benefits" has the meaning given that term in section 1302(b) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18022(b)).
- (5) FEDERAL POVERTY LEVEL.—The term "Federal poverty level" means the poverty guidelines published annually by the Department of Health and Human Services under section 673(2) of the Community Services Block Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 9902(2)).
Sec. 3. PERMANENT PREMIUM TAX CREDITS.
- (1) Section 36B of the Internal Revenue Code is amended to make the premium tax credit permanent and eliminate the income cap, effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025.
- (2) The applicable percentage of household income for the benchmark plan shall not exceed 8.5 percent for any household at any income level.
- (3) The credit shall be available on a sliding scale to all households above 100 percent of the Federal poverty level with no upper threshold.
Sec. 4. REDUCTION OF DEDUCTIBLES AND OUT-OF-POCKET MAXIMUMS.
- (1) The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall establish reduced limits phased in as follows:
- (a) For plan year 2027, reduced by not less than 20 percent from 2025 levels.
- (b) For plan year 2028, reduced by not less than 35 percent.
- (c) For plan year 2029 and thereafter, reduced by not less than 50 percent.
- (2) Enhanced premium tax credits shall offset premium impacts of reduced cost-sharing.
Sec. 5. CLOSING THE MEDICAID COVERAGE GAP.
- (1) There is established a Federal program to provide coverage to adults under 65 in non-expansion States with household income not exceeding 138 percent of the Federal poverty level.
- (2) Benefits shall be equivalent to the ACA essential health benefits package.
- (3) Enrollees below 100 percent FPL shall have no premiums, deductibles, or copayments. Those between 100 and 138 percent shall have nominal cost-sharing.
- (4) The Federal Government shall bear 100 percent of costs for 3 years, declining to 90 percent thereafter.
Sec. 6. PUBLIC INSURANCE OPTION.
- (1) The Secretary shall establish a public health insurance option offered on all Exchanges beginning with plan year 2028.
- (2) The public option shall offer essential health benefits, participate in every rating area in every State, and reimburse providers at Medicare rates plus not more than 10 percent.
- (3) Any Medicare provider shall be eligible to participate. Providers receiving more than $10,000,000 annually in Medicare reimbursements shall participate as a condition of continued Medicare participation.
- (4) After an initial start-up period of not more than 3 years, the plan shall be self-sustaining through premiums and tax credits.
Sec. 7. MEDICARE DRUG PRICE NEGOTIATION EXPANSION.
- (1) The number of drugs subject to negotiation shall increase to not fewer than 30 for 2028, 40 for 2029, and 50 for 2030 and each subsequent year.
- (2) Negotiated prices shall be available to Exchange plans and the public option.
- (3) A manufacturer that refuses to negotiate shall be subject to an excise tax of 95 percent of gross U.S. revenues from the applicable drug.
Sec. 8. HOSPITAL MARKET CONSOLIDATION REVIEW.
- (1) The FTC shall conduct a comprehensive review of hospital market consolidation and its effects on prices, quality, and access, completed within 18 months of enactment.
- (2) The FTC shall establish an ongoing hospital merger review program for markets exceeding competitive concentration thresholds.
Sec. 9. FAMILY AFFORDABILITY CORRECTION.
Section 36B(c)(2)(C) of the Internal Revenue Code is amended to assess affordability of employer coverage based on the employee's required contribution for family coverage rather than self-only coverage.
Sec. 10. NETWORK ADEQUACY STANDARDS.
- (1) The Secretary shall promulgate minimum network adequacy standards including maximum travel time and distance, maximum appointment wait times (14 days primary care, 30 days specialty, 48 hours urgent), and minimum provider-to-enrollee ratios.
- (2) Non-compliant plans shall be subject to corrective action, civil penalties up to $100 per affected enrollee per day, and decertification for persistent violations.
Sec. 11. SIMPLIFIED ENROLLMENT.
- (1) The Secretary shall implement automatic eligibility verification using Federal and State data, a standardized application not exceeding 3 pages, and year-round enrollment for qualifying life events.
- (2) Administrative cost reduction targets of not less than 15 percent over 5 years shall be established.
Sec. 12. EFFECTIVE DATE.
- (1) This Act shall take effect on the date of enactment.
- (2) Premium tax credits apply to taxable years after December 31, 2025.
- (3) The public option shall be available beginning plan year 2028.
- (4) The Medicaid gap program shall begin enrollment not later than January 1, 2027.
Sources
- Congressional Research Service, "Health Insurance Premium Tax Credit and Cost-Sharing Reductions," Report R44425. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R44425
- Medicaid.gov, "Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions." https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/program-information/downloads/medicaid-expansion-state-map.pdf
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, "Fixing the Family Glitch." https://www.cms.gov/files/document/family-glitch.pdf
Get Involved
Policy means nothing without participation. The legislation on this platform will never become law unless citizens engage—registering to vote, contacting representatives, showing up at town halls, and holding elected officials accountable. Democracy is not a spectator sport. Here are the tools to get started.
Register to Vote
If you are not registered to vote, start here. If you are registered, verify that your registration is current and your information is correct—registrations can be purged or lapsed without notice.
Vote.gov — The federal government's official voter registration portal. Provides state-by-state registration links, deadlines, and requirements. vote.gov
Can I Vote — Run by the National Association of Secretaries of State. Check your registration status, find your polling place, and look up what's on your ballot. www.nass.org/can-I-vote
Find Your Elected Officials
Know who represents you. Federal policy starts with your members of Congress—two senators and one representative. Contact them directly to voice support for legislation that matters to you.
USA.gov — Find your U.S. senators and representative by address. Includes contact information and links to official websites. www.usa.gov/elected-officials
GovTrack — Track bills in Congress, see how your representatives vote, and follow legislation from introduction to passage. www.govtrack.us
Political Parties
This platform is nonpartisan—the ideas draw from across the political spectrum. Regardless of party affiliation, every American has a role to play. Below are the major national parties:
Democratic National Committee — democrats.org
Republican National Committee — gop.com
Libertarian Party — www.lp.org
Green Party — www.gp.org
Attend a Town Hall
Members of Congress hold town halls and public events in their districts, particularly during congressional recesses. These are your most direct opportunity to ask questions, voice concerns, and make your representative answer to constituents face-to-face. Check your representative's official website for scheduled events.
Town Hall Project — A nonpartisan resource tracking town halls and public events held by members of Congress. townhallproject.com
Contact Congress
A phone call or handwritten letter to your representative's office carries more weight than most people realize. Congressional staff track constituent contacts by issue—when enough people call about the same bill, it moves.
U.S. Capitol Switchboard — Call (202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected to your senator or representative's office.
Run for Office
If the people who represent you don't reflect your values, consider becoming one of them. Local and state offices are where most policy careers begin, and many seats go uncontested for lack of candidates.
Run for Something — A nonpartisan organization that helps first-time candidates run for local and state office, providing training, resources, and support. runforsomething.net
Contact Us
General inquiries — info@forthepeople2028.com
Press and media inquiries — press@forthepeople2028.com
Privacy Policy
For the People 2028 is committed to protecting your privacy. This policy explains what information we collect when you visit our website and how it is used.
Analytics
This site uses Plausible Analytics, a privacy-friendly analytics tool. Plausible does not use cookies, does not collect personal data, and does not track you across websites. It is fully compliant with GDPR, CCPA, and PECR. The analytics data collected is limited to aggregate, anonymous information such as page views, referral sources, browser type, and general geographic region. No individual visitor can be identified from this data.
Personal Information
This website does not collect, store, or process any personal information. We do not use contact forms, email signup lists, user accounts, or any mechanism that would require you to provide personal data. No information is sold, shared, or transferred to third parties.
Cookies
This website does not use cookies of any kind. No first-party cookies, no third-party cookies, and no tracking cookies are set when you visit this site.
Third-Party Services
This site is hosted on Microsoft Azure Static Web Apps. Azure may collect standard server logs (IP addresses, request timestamps) as part of its hosting infrastructure. These logs are governed by Microsoft's privacy policy and are not accessed or used by For the People 2028. Plausible Analytics processes data on servers located in the European Union, governed by EU data protection laws.
External Links
This site contains links to external government and research sources for citation purposes. These external sites have their own privacy policies that we do not control. Clicking a citation link will take you to a third-party website.
Social Sharing
Share buttons on policy pages link to X (Twitter) and Facebook. Clicking a share button opens the respective platform in a new window. No data is sent to these platforms until you actively click a share button. No social media tracking scripts or pixels are embedded on this site.
Changes to This Policy
This privacy policy may be updated if the site adds new features or services. The current version will always be available at this page.
Contact
Questions about this privacy policy may be directed to privacy@forthepeople2028.com.