To advance bipartisan, common sense solutions.
- Sponsor
- Rep. Suozzi, Thomas R. [D-NY-3]
- Committees
- Veterans' Affairs Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Oct 27, 2025
Bottom line
This comprehensive bill proposes a federal carbon tax to fund infrastructure and climate initiatives, alongside a wide array of policy changes spanning public health, government ethics, national security, and social issues, reflecting a broad effort to enact 'bipartisan, common sense solutions.'
What it actually does
This omnibus bill introduces a federal carbon tax on greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels, industrial processes, and certain products, with revenues directed to a new 'RISE Trust Fund' for infrastructure, climate adaptation, and energy worker assistance. It also establishes a National Climate Commission and a National Bipartisan Fiscal Commission, bans stock trading for House members, increases cancer research funding, addresses PFAS contamination, enhances financial industry's role in combating human trafficking, mandates school door safety improvements, requires states to permit unaffiliated voters in primaries while prohibiting non-citizen voting, reviews intelligence sharing with Ukraine, designates Election Day as a federal holiday, supports veteran-owned small businesses, and extends benefits for ALS veterans.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that the bill offers a comprehensive, bipartisan approach to address critical national challenges, including climate change, crumbling infrastructure, fiscal instability, and government ethics. They contend that the carbon tax provides a market-based solution to reduce emissions while generating revenue for vital investments, with provisions to protect low-income households and displaced workers. The inclusion of diverse, popular reforms like banning congressional stock trading and increasing cancer research demonstrates a commitment to responsive governance.
Opponents contend
Critics may argue that the carbon tax could harm the economy, increase energy costs for consumers, and disproportionately impact certain industries, despite proposed offsets. Concerns might also be raised about the federal government's overreach into state election administration, the potential for regulatory burdens on businesses, and the effectiveness of commissions in addressing complex issues. The omnibus nature of the bill could also be criticized for bundling contentious provisions, making it difficult for members to vote against specific unpopular elements.
This is a highly complex and lengthy bill covering numerous distinct policy areas. A thorough understanding requires significant time, likely more than typically afforded for legislative review, especially given the technical nature of the tax and environmental provisions.
Title I, Sec. 10101
Imposition of Tax on Combusted Fossil Fuel Greenhouse Gas Emissions
This section establishes a new federal tax on fossil fuels produced or imported into the United States. The tax rate starts at $35 per metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2027 and increases annually by 5 percentage points plus inflation. It includes mechanisms for rate adjustments based on whether cumulative emission targets are met, and provides exemptions for non-combustive uses and carbon capture and storage.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that a carbon tax is an economically efficient way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, internalizing the cost of pollution and incentivizing cleaner energy and industrial practices. They contend that the predictable, escalating price signal will drive innovation and investment in low-carbon technologies, while the revenue generated can be used to address related societal needs.
Critics contend
Opponents contend that a carbon tax would increase energy costs, disproportionately burdening low-income households and making American industries less competitive globally. They argue it could lead to job losses in fossil fuel-dependent sectors and that the proposed rate increases might be too aggressive, causing economic shock.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions with concerns about economic competitiveness and consumer costs. It attempts to mitigate negative impacts through exemptions for carbon capture and border adjustments, but faces inherent tension between environmental protection and economic burden.
Title I, Sec. 10102
Border Greenhouse Gas Adjustments
This section introduces a border tax adjustment mechanism for greenhouse gas intensive products. It aims to levy a tax on imported goods equivalent to the domestic carbon tax paid in their manufacture and rebate the domestic carbon tax paid on exported goods. This is intended to prevent 'carbon leakage,' where production shifts to countries with weaker environmental regulations, and to encourage global emission reductions.
Title I, Sec. 10202
Appropriations from the RISE Trust Fund
This section dictates how the revenues from the new carbon tax, deposited into the Rebuilding Infrastructure and Solutions for the Environment (RISE) Trust Fund, will be distributed. For fiscal years 2027 through 2036, 70% goes to the Highway Trust Fund, 10% for state grants to low-income households, and the remaining 20% is allocated across various programs including weatherization, displaced energy worker assistance, airport and airway trust funds, abandoned mine reclamation, coastal flooding mitigation, and research and development for carbon capture, energy storage, and reforestation.
Title I, Sec. 10301
Moratorium Against Certain Greenhouse Gas Regulations Under the Clean Air Act
This section imposes a moratorium, until January 1, 2039, on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) authority to issue or enforce new rules limiting greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel combustion or industrial processes under the Clean Air Act, specifically on the basis of their greenhouse gas effects, if those emissions are already subject to the new carbon tax. Exceptions exist for regulations based on other adverse health impacts, monitoring requirements, and specific sources like oil and gas facilities and POTW Treatment Plants. The moratorium can also expire earlier if cumulative emission targets are not met by 2030 or 2034.
Title II, Sec. 202
Increasing NCI Budget for Cancer Research
This section appropriates additional funds to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) for cancer research. For each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030, the NCI will receive an amount equal to 25% of its total appropriation for fiscal year 2024, in addition to its regular funding. These funds are to remain available until expended.
Title IV, Sec. 401
Establishment of National Bipartisan Fiscal Commission
This section establishes a 20-member National Bipartisan Fiscal Commission within the legislative branch. Its duty is to review and recommend a legislative package to Congress aimed at stabilizing long-term deficits and debt. The Commission is required to submit a report with its recommendations within 18 months of establishment, and it is granted subpoena power for its investigations.
Title V, Sec. 501
Restriction of Trading and Ownership of Certain Financial Instruments by Members of the House of Representatives
This section amends the Rules of the House of Representatives to prohibit Members from owning or trading 'covered financial instruments,' which include securities, security futures, commodities, and any economic interest acquired through synthetic means (e.g., derivatives). Exemptions are provided for widely held investment funds (like mutual funds), U.S. Treasury instruments, state/local government bonds, and investments under the Thrift Savings Plan. Members must pledge compliance and provide information to the House Ethics Committee upon request.
Title VI, Sec. 602
Increasing the Role of the Financial Industry in Combating Human Trafficking
This section requires the Financial Institutions Examination Council, in consultation with various stakeholders, to review and enhance training and examination procedures for anti-money laundering (AML) and countering the financing of terrorism (CFT) programs to better detect financial transactions related to human trafficking. It also mandates the Interagency Task Force To Monitor and Combat Trafficking to report to Congress with recommendations for strengthening AML efforts against human trafficking, including changes to policies, training, information sharing, and statutory law.
Title VII, Sec. 702
Installation or Modification of Interior and Exterior Doors in Schools
This section directs the Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) to convene a rulemaking advisory committee within 90 days to develop findings and recommendations for requiring the installation or modification of interior and exterior doors in federally funded primary and secondary schools. The committee, comprising various stakeholders, will consider requirements, performance standards, and implementation challenges. CISA must then issue a final rule within six months of the report and authorizes an additional $100 million annually for ten years through the Homeland Security Grant Program to fund these improvements.
Title VIII, Sec. 802
Requiring States to Permit Unaffiliated Voters to Vote in Primary Elections
This section mandates that states permit unaffiliated voters to participate in any primary election for federal office, with the caveat that they cannot vote in more than one party's primary. It also prohibits states from sharing unaffiliated voter information with political parties or treating them as affiliated with a party based solely on their primary vote. States must certify compliance for both federal and state/local elections to receive federal election administration funds, and transition assistance grants are authorized for states that comply.
Title VIII, Sec. 803
Prohibiting Noncitizens from Voting
This section establishes a policy that no non-citizen shall be permitted to vote in any taxpayer-funded election in the U.S. or any state. It explicitly prohibits states from allowing non-citizens to vote in federal elections. Furthermore, states will not receive federal election administration funds unless they certify that they do not permit non-citizens to vote in any state or local election, or any ballot initiative or referendum.
Title X, Sec. 1002
Designation of Election Day as a Federal Holiday
This section amends title 5, United States Code, to designate 'Election Day' as a federal holiday, inserting it after Columbus Day in the list of public holidays.
Title XII, Sec. 1202
Extension of Increased Dependency and Indemnity Compensation to Surviving Spouses of Veterans Who Die From Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
This section amends title 38, United States Code, to treat veterans who die from Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) as if they had a service-connected disability rated totally disabling for at least 8 years prior to death, regardless of the actual duration of their disease. This makes their surviving spouses eligible for increased Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC). To qualify, the surviving spouse must have been married to the veteran for a continuous period of 8 years or longer prior to the veteran's death. This applies to deaths occurring on or after October 1, 2025.
The collection of the new carbon tax is delayed until one year after the relevant regulations are published by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Sec. 9901(e)(1)(C) and Sec. 9904(e)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to ensure that agencies have sufficient time to develop and finalize complex regulations before a new tax or regulatory regime takes effect. It also provides certainty to regulated entities regarding compliance procedures.
Case for: Supporters argue that this delay is necessary for orderly implementation, allowing for robust public input on regulations and preventing confusion or legal challenges that could arise from rushed rules. It ensures the tax is implemented fairly and effectively.
Case against: Critics might argue that this delay could push back the effective date of the carbon tax, potentially slowing down emission reduction efforts and delaying the generation of revenue for critical programs. It introduces uncertainty regarding the actual start date of the tax.
Estimated impact: Potentially delays the start of carbon tax collection and associated revenue generation and emission reductions by at least one year beyond the stated December 31, 2025, if regulations are not published promptly.
A credit for state payments on greenhouse gas emissions is provided, but it phases out over five years, starting at 100% in the first year and decreasing by 20% each subsequent year until no credit is allowed.
Sec. 9905
Why it matters:This is a standard legislative mechanism for managing transitions when federal policy overlaps with existing state policies, designed to provide temporary relief and allow states to adjust their own programs without immediate federal preemption.
Case for: Supporters argue this phased credit provides a fair transition for states that have already implemented their own carbon pricing mechanisms, preventing double taxation and allowing them time to align their policies with the new federal framework. It encourages states to maintain their climate efforts during the transition.
Case against: Critics might argue that the phase-out is too rapid, potentially disrupting state-level climate programs or creating financial challenges for entities that have invested based on state-specific incentives. Some might also argue that a permanent credit would be more equitable for states with robust existing programs.
Estimated impact: Provides temporary financial relief for entities in states with existing carbon pricing, gradually shifting the full tax burden to the federal level over five years.
The moratorium on EPA's greenhouse gas regulatory authority (established in subsections (a) and (b)) will cease to apply if, by March 30, 2031, total emissions from taxed sources for 2027-2030 exceed the specified 2028 target, or if by March 30, 2035, total emissions for 2027-2034 exceed the specified 2034 target.
Sec. 10301(g)
Why it matters:This is a strategic drafting choice to build in a 'safety valve' or enforcement mechanism for the carbon tax. It allows proponents to argue that the carbon tax is the primary tool, but if it fails to meet emission reduction targets, regulatory authority will be restored. This can be a compromise to gain support from environmental advocates.
Case for: Supporters argue this provides a crucial backstop: if the carbon tax alone proves insufficient to meet climate goals, EPA's regulatory powers will automatically be reinstated. This ensures accountability and maintains pressure for emission reductions, even with the initial moratorium.
Case against: Critics might argue that these triggers are either too lenient (allowing too much time for emissions to exceed targets) or too abrupt, potentially leading to sudden and disruptive regulatory shifts. Environmental groups might prefer immediate EPA authority rather than a delayed trigger.
Estimated impact: Creates a conditional re-establishment of EPA regulatory authority over greenhouse gas emissions, potentially leading to significant new regulations if emission targets are not met.
Requires that all laborers and mechanics employed on projects funded directly or assisted by the Federal Government pursuant to Title I (MARKET CHOICE Act) must be paid prevailing wages in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act.
Sec. 10202(c)
Why it matters:This is a common legislative practice to ensure fair labor standards on federally funded projects. It's often included in omnibus bills as a way to secure support from labor unions and progressive members, without being the primary focus of the bill.
Case for: Proponents argue that this ensures workers on federally funded projects receive fair wages, preventing a race to the bottom in labor costs and supporting local economies. It upholds established labor protections for significant public investments.
Case against: Opponents sometimes argue that prevailing wage requirements can increase project costs and administrative burdens, potentially limiting the number of projects that can be undertaken or making them less efficient. They might contend it restricts competition among contractors.
Estimated impact: Increases labor costs for federally funded infrastructure and climate projects under Title I, ensuring higher wages for construction and related workers.
Establishes an expedited legislative process for Congress to consider the recommendations of the National Bipartisan Fiscal Commission. Within 60 days of the Commission's report, the President must transmit a proposed joint resolution implementing the recommendations. This joint resolution is then subject to special rules in both the House and Senate, including limited debate, no amendments, and a guaranteed vote.
Sec. 402
Why it matters:This is a tactical maneuver to increase the likelihood of politically difficult fiscal reforms being enacted. By creating a fast-track, unamendable process, it aims to overcome legislative inertia and partisan opposition that would typically block such measures if they went through regular order.
Case for: Supporters argue that this expedited process is necessary because the nation's fiscal challenges are too severe to be addressed through normal, often gridlocked, legislative channels. They contend it forces Congress to confront the recommendations of a bipartisan body and take decisive action.
Case against: Critics argue that such expedited, unamendable processes undermine democratic deliberation and accountability. They contend it limits the ability of individual members to represent their constituents' interests, potentially forcing votes on unpopular or flawed proposals without proper debate or modification.
Estimated impact: Significantly increases the probability that the Fiscal Commission's recommendations, potentially including politically sensitive tax increases or spending cuts, will receive a direct up-or-down vote in Congress.