American Affordability & Abundance Mission

Establish a White House-led affordability initiative coordinated with the Office of Management and Budget and relevant agencies.

Within the first 60 days, executive departments would identify federal rules and procedures affecting basic living costs.

• Unnecessary regulatory barriers.
• Permitting delays and infrastructure bottlenecks.
• Duplicative or obsolete federal programs.
• Policies unnecessarily restricting supply or competition.
• Federal assets with potentially better lawful uses.
• Changes requiring congressional action.

American Energy Abundance

Review federal policy affecting energy production, infrastructure, and reliability.

• Oil and natural gas production.
• Refineries, pipelines, and fuel distribution.
• Nuclear power and existing reactor upgrades.
• Advanced reactors and small modular reactors.
• Domestic uranium and nuclear fuel.
• Geothermal and hydroelectric power.
• Electrical transmission and grid reliability.
• Renewable energy where practical.
• Critical energy manufacturing.

Safety and environmental requirements would remain applicable. Independent regulators and state authorities would retain their lawful roles.

Refinery, Pipeline & Fuel Infrastructure

Assess vulnerabilities in refining capacity, pipelines, fuel terminals, storage facilities, and distribution networks.

The objective is to identify where greater capacity or redundancy could reduce the effects of disruptions.

Proposed changes to federal motor-fuel taxes would go to Congress. State fuel taxes remain matters of state law.

American Housing Abundance Initiative

HUD, USDA, VA, Treasury, and relevant agencies would review federal programs and barriers affecting housing construction and ownership.

• Starter homes and affordable construction.
• Manufactured and modular housing.
• Rehabilitation of vacant or abandoned homes.
• Rural housing and ownership.
• Suitable commercial-to-residential conversions.
• Construction and housing finance.
• First-time homeownership.

The federal government would examine suitable surplus property under existing disposal and transfer laws.

Local zoning remains primarily a state and local responsibility. New federal incentives requiring legislation would go to Congress.

Food Safety, Transparency & Competition

FDA and USDA would review food chemicals, additives, safety standards, and disclosure requirements using available scientific evidence.

• Transparent scientific evaluation.
• Periodic reassessment when evidence changes.
• Clear public information.
• Enforcement of applicable safety standards.
• Review of barriers facing independent food businesses.

Healthcare Cost & Competition

Enforce existing federal hospital price-transparency requirements and examine ways to make published pricing information more accurate and useful.

• Prescription-drug competition.
• Generic medicines and biosimilars.
• Telemedicine access.
• Provider competition.
• Healthcare consolidation.
• Billing transparency.

Emergency care differs from scheduled care. For services that can be planned, meaningful price comparison should be easier.

School-to-Career Pathways

Review and strengthen federal workforce programs supporting apprenticeships, technical training, and skilled employment alongside traditional college pathways.

• Electrical work, plumbing, and HVAC.
• Welding and construction.
• Automotive repair and machining.
• Advanced manufacturing and robotics.
• Nuclear technology.
• Healthcare technical occupations.
• Agriculture and other skilled professions.

Review the Federal Rulebook

Review significant regulations affecting basic living costs, domestic production, and competition.

• What problem does the rule address?
• Does evidence show it works?
• What does compliance cost?
• Could a simpler approach achieve the same purpose?
• Does the rule unnecessarily disadvantage smaller firms?

Changes requiring formal rulemaking would follow the applicable legal procedures.

Federal Spending Review

OMB would review duplicative programs, unused property, administrative waste, improper payments, and unnecessary contracting.

Funds already appropriated would be administered according to law. Permanent cancellations requiring congressional approval would be proposed through lawful procedures.

American Cost-of-Living Scoreboard

Develop a public dashboard comparing basic living costs with typical earnings.

Measures would seek to show how many working hours are required to afford:

• Rent and starter-home mortgage payments.
• Basic groceries.
• Electricity and gasoline.
• Healthcare and childcare.
• Basic transportation.

Publish data sources, methodology, and assumptions so the figures can be checked.

First Legislative Package

Prepare proposed legislation for changes that executive action alone cannot accomplish.

• American Affordability Act: Household costs, taxes, and benefit structures.
• American Energy & Infrastructure Act: Permitting, infrastructure, nuclear modernization, and grid policy.
• American Housing & Ownership Act: Housing supply, rehabilitation, rural ownership, and financing.
• American Food, Health & Competition Act: Food oversight, healthcare transparency, and competitive markets.

Eligibility for budget reconciliation would depend on final legislative language and congressional rules.

Implementation & Accountability

Establish a White House process for tracking major initiatives.

• Responsible official.
• Legal authority.
• Implementation deadline.
• Budget requirement.
• Congressional requirements.
• Litigation risks.
• Measurable results.
• Public status updates.

Officials requiring Senate confirmation would remain subject to that process.

Legal Review Before Action

Major executive actions would undergo legal review before issuance.

The central question: What constitutional or statutory authority permits this action?

If Congress must act, the proposal would be submitted to Congress instead of being represented as something an executive order can accomplish alone.

Big-Box Retail & Local Businesses

Large retailers such as Walmart have purchasing, logistics, and operating advantages that smaller stores often cannot match.

Lower consumer prices and new jobs can be benefits. Local business closures and reduced long-term competition can also be consequences worth studying.

The federal review would examine whether unlawful exclusionary practices or government-created barriers prevent smaller businesses from competing.

Large-company success alone would not be treated as a violation.

Online Marketplaces & Technology Platforms

Companies such as Amazon can operate marketplaces while also competing with businesses that sell through those marketplaces.

That structure can create questions about marketplace access, fees, seller information, ranking practices, and conflicts of interest.

The proposal would support evidence-based examination of potentially unlawful exclusionary conduct while preserving legitimate innovation and competition.

Health Insurance & Healthcare

Insurance choices vary by state, county, coverage type, and eligibility.

In some markets, limited insurer participation, narrow provider networks, and healthcare consolidation can reduce consumer options.

A federal review would examine:

• Regional insurer concentration.
• Barriers to responsible new market entrants.
• Provider network competition.
• Hospital and insurer consolidation.
• Transparency and switching difficulties.
• Coordination with state insurance regulators.

This proposal does not assume insurers can charge whatever they wish. Premiums and coverage are subject to different federal and state requirements.

Banking, Lending & Payment Systems

Examine whether market concentration, access to financial infrastructure, or unnecessary regulatory barriers affect smaller banks, credit unions, lenders, and payment businesses.

Consumer protection, financial stability, deposit safety, and lawful prudential supervision would remain essential.

Telecommunications & Internet Access

Some communities have only a limited number of realistic broadband or communications providers.

Review lawful ways to reduce unnecessary deployment barriers, encourage infrastructure competition, and improve consumer information.

Federal, state, and local jurisdiction would need to be respected.

Film, Music & Digital Entertainment

Independent creators can depend on a limited number of distributors, streaming platforms, studios, labels, and other intermediaries to reach audiences.

Review potentially anticompetitive distribution arrangements where evidence supports investigation.

Government would not select artists, decide which productions deserve success, or control creative content.

Farming, Food Processing & Distribution

Farmers and independent food businesses may have limited options among processors, buyers, distributors, and suppliers.

Examine barriers to new processing and distribution businesses while maintaining food safety and other applicable standards.

Transportation, Housing & Other Markets

The review would not be limited to named industries.

Freight, shipping, transportation services, construction materials, housing-related markets, and other sectors would be examined where credible evidence indicates concentration or entry barriers may be harming competition.

Review Concentrated Markets

Coordinate an executive-branch review of markets where limited competition may affect prices, consumer choices, suppliers, or new business formation.

Use existing public data and lawful agency authority. Independent enforcement agencies would retain their statutory responsibilities and decision-making.

The review would distinguish high market concentration from proven unlawful conduct.

Identify Barriers to New Competitors

Examine federal licensing, permitting, compliance, procurement, and administrative requirements that may unnecessarily discourage market entry.

Legitimate consumer, worker, environmental, financial, and public-safety protections would remain part of the evaluation.

Examine Government-Created Advantages

Review federal subsidies, procurement structures, grants, contracting rules, and other policies that may provide unjustified advantages to established companies.

Publish findings using lawful disclosure procedures and protect confidential information where required.

Enforce Existing Competition Laws

Support lawful, evidence-based antitrust enforcement through the agencies responsible for applying federal law.

Potential concerns include unlawful monopolization, exclusionary conduct, anticompetitive mergers, and prohibited agreements among competitors.

The Administration would not predetermine the outcome of individual investigations.

Improve Small-Business Access

Review barriers preventing qualified smaller businesses from competing for federal contracts and entering markets affected by federal rules.

Improve access to understandable procurement information and evaluate unnecessary administrative burdens.

Measure Consumer Choice

Develop publicly available measurements, using reliable data, that examine:

• Local and regional provider choices.
• Market concentration.
• Barriers to switching providers.
• New business entry.
• Price and service trends.
• Small-business participation.

Published reports would identify their methods and limitations.

Prepare Legislative Reforms

Where reviews identify gaps that existing law cannot address, prepare targeted legislation for congressional consideration.

Proposals would include definitions, legal safeguards, implementation costs, and assessments of unintended consequences.

Remove Remaining Federal Criminal Time Limits for Specified Serious Offenses

Direct DOJ to identify serious federal sexual offenses, child-exploitation offenses, trafficking offenses, and other specifically defined violent crimes that still have prosecution deadlines. Ask Congress to eliminate remaining limits where constitutionally permissible.

Federal law already removes time limits for many federal sexual offenses and child-exploitation crimes, including offenses covered by 18 U.S.C. § 3299. The purpose is to identify actual gaps, not imply these protections do not exist.

Changes could apply prospectively and, where constitutionally permissible, to offenses whose limitation periods have not yet expired. A new law generally cannot revive an already-time-barred criminal prosecution under Stogner v. California (2003).

Historical Abuse & Survivor Justice Review

Ask DOJ to establish lawful review procedures for credible historical allegations involving sexual violence, trafficking, child exploitation, and possible institutional wrongdoing within federal jurisdiction.

• Identify offenses that remain prosecutable under applicable law.
• Examine whether a separate offense or legally applicable tolling rule is relevant.
• Preserve lawfully obtainable evidence and refer matters to the appropriate jurisdiction.
• Identify civil remedies that may still be available.
• Examine potential obstruction, retaliation, or evidence destruction as separate matters where facts and law support it.

No allegation would be presumed true, and an investigation would not guarantee charges or a particular outcome.

Epstein-Related & Other Historical Exploitation Cases

Include legally authorized review of outstanding leads and available records in historical sexual exploitation and trafficking matters, including Epstein-related cases. Review would focus on potential offenses still prosecutable, independent wrongdoing, victim assistance, and lawful disclosure of documented institutional failures.

• Evaluate witness statements and relevant records lawfully available to investigators.
• Consider possible trafficking, coercion, witness intimidation, obstruction, or evidence destruction when supported by evidence.
• Protect victim identities, sealed records, and confidential material.
• Respect independent investigative and prosecutorial decisions.

Being named in an address book, photograph, flight record, or investigative file does not itself establish wrongdoing.

Documented Historical Misconduct & Public Accountability

Examine legally authorized public reporting on substantiated historical misconduct and documented failures by institutions or public officials. Reports could summarize final judgments, officially established findings eligible for disclosure, and verified institutional practices.

A government-run public registry naming people who were never convicted would not be created automatically. Any proposal for individualized public findings would require a separate constitutional and statutory assessment, clear evidence standards, notice, an opportunity to contest findings, independent review, corrections, and privacy protections.

Where individual identification is not lawful, appropriately redacted institutional accountability reports could still be considered.

Review Penalties for Serious Violence & Exploitation

Review federal sentencing provisions for serious sexual violence, aggravated violence, trafficking, and child exploitation. Where the evidence supports changes, propose proportionate statutory increases to Congress.

Assess repeat offenses, coercion, violence, victim age, organized exploitation, and abuse of trust. Courts would retain their sentencing responsibilities and defendants their legal rights.

No automatic maximum sentence: punishment must comply with federal law, constitutional proportionality requirements, and applicable sentencing procedures. New harsher criminal penalties cannot be applied retroactively in violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause.

Expand Lawful Civil Justice for Survivors

Review existing federal civil claims and barriers affecting survivors of serious sexual violence, trafficking, and exploitation. Identify opportunities for constitutionally permissible changes to filing deadlines, remedies, evidence access, and protection against retaliation.

Federal law already removes time limits for certain child-sex-abuse civil claims under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, as amended in 2022. That change did not automatically revive every previously expired civil claim.

Encourage states to consider their own lawful civil remedies, including historical claims, while respecting state law and constitutional limits.

Equal Pay & Fair Employment Opportunities

Prioritize enforcement of existing federal sex-discrimination and equal-pay protections through agencies acting within their statutory roles, including the EEOC and Department of Labor.

• Review discrimination involving base pay, bonuses, benefits, and promotion opportunities.
• Improve understandable information about compensation rights.
• Protect workers from unlawful retaliation for asserting their rights.
• Consider targeted legislation if enforcement reviews identify gaps.

Existing law already protects equal pay for substantially equal work, subject to legally recognized reasons for pay differences. This proposal concerns enforcement and possible improvements, not the creation of an entirely new right.

Clear Workplace Sexual Harassment Standards

Support clear employer guidance, accessible reporting, lawful investigations, and protection against retaliation. Distinguish ordinary respectful interaction from conduct that violates workplace protections.

• A single respectful compliment is not automatically unlawful sexual harassment.
• Demanding sexual favors in exchange for employment, promotion, or pay is prohibited conduct.
• Unwanted sexual touching, grabbing, or slapping can be serious misconduct and may also violate criminal law.
• Repeated unwelcome sexual comments, or a single sufficiently severe incident, may create unlawful harassment depending on the circumstances.
• Retaliation for legally protected reporting is prohibited.

Context, whether conduct is unwelcome, severity, and the applicable legal standard matter. The proposal would not create a blanket exemption for comments described as flirting.

Institutional Cover-Ups, Obstruction & Retaliation

Examine cases in which an employer, school, organization, or public institution may have unlawfully concealed abuse, destroyed evidence, obstructed investigations, or retaliated against complainants.

Distinguish conduct that constitutes a federal crime from civil violations, regulatory breaches, and failures of institutional policy. Investigations would require jurisdiction and evidence; not every inadequate response is a criminal offense.

Child Protection & Exploitation Prevention

Review federal prevention, investigative coordination, and victim-support practices relating to child abuse, exploitation, and trafficking.

• Lawful online exploitation investigations and interagency referrals.
• Forensic evidence handling and preservation.
• Training for professionals within relevant programs.
• Referral pathways to qualified victim services.
• Coordination with state and local child-protection authorities.
• Protection of children’s identities and sensitive records.

Survivor Reporting, Evidence Preservation & Support

Review federal practices to make reporting options understandable and evidence preservation more reliable, including when abuse is disclosed years later.

• Clear explanations of reporting and referral options.
• Trauma-informed investigative training.
• Appropriate forensic testing and record preservation.
• Confidentiality and lawful privacy safeguards.
• Access to qualified legal and victim-support referrals.
• Interstate and federal-state coordination when jurisdiction overlaps.

No survivor would be promised prosecution or a specific court result.

Implementation & Public Accountability

First 30 days: Ask relevant executive agencies to identify current authority, remaining legal gaps, evidence-preservation needs, and enforcement priorities.

First 90 days: Prepare initial findings on federal criminal limitation periods, civil remedies, agency coordination, and survivor-service barriers.

First 180 days: Develop administrative recommendations and proposed statutory reforms.

First year: Submit legislation where required, pursue authorized administrative changes, and publish appropriate progress reports.

Annually: Report available implementation measures while protecting victim privacy and confidential investigations.

These are proposed administrative targets, not guarantees that Congress will pass a bill or that a court will rule in a particular way.

End Routine Foreign Military Financing

Seek an end to routine U.S. taxpayer-funded military financing for foreign governments, including longstanding partners such as Israel. No country should assume that American taxpayers will indefinitely pay for its military equipment or defense responsibilities.

Review existing appropriations, agreements, contracts, and statutory obligations. Propose lawful reductions, terminations, or nonrenewals to Congress where required. The President cannot simply disregard funds Congress has directed to be spent.

Foreign governments could still purchase lawful U.S. defense products with their own funds, subject to export controls, sanctions, and national-security review.

Reevaluate Routine Foreign Assistance

Review discretionary foreign economic, development, and security assistance for cost, results, legal obligations, and relevance to American interests. Seek to end routine assistance that cannot be justified under those standards.

Distinguish recurring foreign aid from narrowly defined responses to humanitarian disasters, evacuations of Americans, and extraordinary emergencies. Any taxpayer-funded response would require lawful authority and available appropriations.

We will not promise to cancel binding commitments by executive declaration or treat humanitarian suffering as irrelevant.

No Interference in Foreign Elections or Routine Regime Change

Establish a policy against discretionary covert efforts by executive agencies to manipulate foreign elections, install favored political leaders, or pursue regime change merely because another government disagrees with Washington.

Continue lawful intelligence collection, counterterrorism, counterintelligence, and defensive operations necessary to protect Americans. Intelligence gathering is not the same thing as manipulating another country’s political process.

Defend U.S. elections against foreign interference while respecting the sovereignty of other nations.

Reject Open-Ended Foreign Wars

Make nonintervention the default response to conflicts that do not threaten American security or present an extraordinary humanitarian emergency. Military operations must have a clear purpose, a lawful basis, an assessment of civilian and American casualties, an estimated cost, and a realistic end condition.

Respect Congress’s constitutional war powers and applicable statutes governing military action. No foreign government will receive an automatic promise of American military intervention.

A Limited Humanitarian Defense Exception

When a powerful state attacks a smaller sovereign nation and credible evidence indicates genocide, mass atrocities, or deliberate attacks on civilians, the United States will consider diplomatic action, international mediation, lawful sanctions, investigations, and cooperation with regional partners first.

If those steps are insufficient, limited assistance or military action may be considered as a last resort—but only with a valid basis under U.S. constitutional law and applicable international law. Atrocities alone do not automatically authorize U.S. missile strikes against another sovereign state.

Our strong preference is to avoid deploying American ground combat forces into foreign wars. Air or missile operations would not be presumed safe or legally authorized: they can cause civilian casualties and dangerous escalation. Any operation must meet applicable laws of armed conflict and have a defined objective and exit strategy.

Put American Defense First

Prioritize the defense of U.S. territory, citizens, service members, critical infrastructure, cyber systems, and strategic deterrence. Strengthen readiness, domestic defense production, logistics, and protection against emerging threats.

Review overseas bases and deployments for strategic necessity, costs, treaties, operational safety, and alternatives. Pursue lawful changes without abandoning American personnel or ignoring existing obligations.

Fair Trade: Zero Tariffs for Zero Tariffs

Offer trading partners reciprocal tariff elimination: when a country removes tariffs on American goods, the United States will seek a corresponding agreement to remove tariffs on its goods.

Negotiations must also address unfair subsidies, dumping, discriminatory rules, market access, product safety, intellectual property, and national security. A nominal zero tariff does not mean fair trade if hidden barriers remain.

Congress holds constitutional authority over tariffs and foreign commerce. Changes would be pursued through valid existing trade authority and legislation where necessary. Agreements require willing partners; no result can be guaranteed unilaterally.

Rebuild Essential American Manufacturing Capacity

Identify dangerous dependencies in essential medicines, defense components, critical minerals, semiconductors, energy equipment, agricultural inputs, and infrastructure materials. Examine lawful ways to reduce unnecessary barriers to domestic investment, production, permitting, and workforce training.

America should have reliable domestic capacity for strategically essential goods. That does not mean every product must be made here, or that domestic production is always cheaper. It means trade should not leave the country unable to meet critical needs.

Reduce Deficits and Confront the National Debt

Seek savings from reduced overseas commitments and use those savings to reduce federal borrowing rather than automatically redirecting them to new spending.

Foreign assistance alone is a small portion of the federal budget and cannot pay off the national debt. A credible debt strategy must address spending, revenues, interest costs, economic growth, and the long-term budget outlook.

Publish a multiyear deficit-reduction proposal for Congress, with transparent assumptions and annual progress reporting. A debt-reduction pledge will be measured by actual fiscal results, not simply by announced program cuts.

Respect Alliances Without Blank Checks

Review treaties, security partnerships, and cost-sharing arrangements. Seek greater responsibility from allies for their own defense while honoring U.S. legal obligations unless they are lawfully changed.

Cooperation does not require unlimited financing. Any adjustment to treaty commitments would follow applicable constitutional and diplomatic procedures.

Diplomacy Before Military Force

Engage diplomatically with allies, neutral states, and competitors when doing so protects American interests or helps prevent war. Negotiation does not mean approving another government’s conduct.

Favor mediation, verifiable agreements, and peaceful conflict resolution. Preserve lawful national defense and carefully limited responses to extraordinary threats.

Transparency, Oversight & Accountability

Seek clearer public reporting on foreign military and economic assistance, overseas deployments, operation costs, alliance cost-sharing, and fiscal outcomes, while protecting classified information and operational security.

Identify legal authority, responsible officials, budget implications, and congressional requirements for major proposed changes.