Overview
Title
To establish a commission to study the relocation of certain agencies outside of the Washington, DC metropolitan area, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H. R. 10410 wants to set up a special group to think about moving some government office jobs from Washington, DC, to other places in the country to save money and make things work better. This group will write a report about what they find that will help decide the best places for the offices to go.
Summary AI
H. R. 10410 aims to create a commission responsible for studying the relocation of certain federal agencies from the Washington, DC metropolitan area to different parts of the United States. The commission will include various government officials and will report to Congress within a year. The report will focus on factors such as financial efficiency, infrastructure availability, local industries related to the agency’s mission, and the prevalence of teleworking in the agency. The goal is to improve efficiency and possibly relocate these agencies to areas with a lower cost of living and robust local support.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The proposed legislation, titled the “Commission to Relocate the Federal Bureaucracy Act,” aims to establish a commission dedicated to evaluating the potential relocation of certain federal agencies from the Washington, DC metropolitan area to other parts of the United States. The Commission's primary objective is to recommend relocations that would distribute federal agency presence more broadly across different regions, guided by a consideration of economic and practical factors like cost of living, regional infrastructure, and telework capabilities. This effort represents an attempt to decentralize federal operations from their traditional hub.
General Summary of the Bill
At its core, the bill seeks to set up a commission composed of representatives from multiple government departments and agencies. These include figures such as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, various Secretaries of key departments like Education and Transportation, and agency heads like the Commissioner of Food and Drugs. The Commission will study and offer recommendations for relocating agencies that are not deemed security-related, basing their decisions on a set of factors that suggest financial and operational efficiencies could be gained from such changes.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several significant issues with the bill have been identified:
Ambiguity in Defining 'Covered Agencies': The term "covered agency" is decided by the President, which could lead to inconsistencies since different administrations might have varying criteria. This might result in lack of clarity about which agencies are subject to relocation.
Financial Concerns: While relocating agencies might suggest cost savings, this bill lacks specific budgetary guidelines. The involvement of high-ranking officials could entail considerable costs, questioning financial efficiency.
Regional Bias: The criteria for relocation sites could inadvertently favor certain regions over others. Metrics such as cost of living and infrastructure might unintentionally exclude deserving areas, risking perceptions of bias.
Lack of Public Input: The decision-making process does not presently account for opinions from communities potentially affected by these relocations. This raises ethical concerns regarding transparency and the inclusion of community voices.
Vague Language: The language describing 'existing industries relating to the business of a covered agency' is not clear, leading to potential confusion in determining appropriate relocation sites.
Complex Language: The lengthy listing of Commission members could hinder clarity and accessibility, making it difficult for the public to understand who is involved, thereby potentially affecting accountability.
Impact on the Public
The bill has the potential to redistribute federal jobs across the country, potentially benefiting regions that gain new agencies through job creation and economic stimulation. However, there might also be disruptions for employees required to relocate and for Washington, DC’s local economy, which currently benefits from the concentration of federal agencies.
Impact on Stakeholders
Positive Impacts: - Regional Economies: Local economies outside the DC area could see boosts from incoming federal jobs, affecting local businesses and increasing regional development. - Employees in Affordable Areas: Employees moving to areas with a lower cost of living could experience an improved quality of life and reduced living expenses.
Negative Impacts: - Current Employees: Federal employees might face relocation challenges, potentially disrupting personal lives and employment terms. - Washington, DC Region: The area could experience a decrease in economic activity due to reduced federal presence, affecting local businesses and housing markets.
Overall, the bill presents both opportunities and challenges. While it attempts to promote economic efficiency and regional development, it must navigate significant issues regarding execution, fairness, and accountability to generate its intended benefits without imposing undue burdens.
Issues
The determination of what constitutes a 'covered agency' is made by the President. This could lead to ambiguity and inconsistency, especially if criteria change with different administrations. This is critical for ensuring transparency and fairness in the application of the law (Section 2.(a)(3)).
The establishment of the Commission includes high-ranking officials from many departments, potentially leading to significant costs. The bill does not specify budgetary constraints, resource allocation, or expected cost savings, raising concerns about financial accountability and efficiency (Section 2.(b) and 2.(c)).
The criteria for selecting relocation sites, such as cost of living and infrastructure, may inadvertently benefit or exclude specific regions. This could lead to perceptions of bias or favoritism, affecting regional economies and potentially fueling political disputes (Section 2.(d)(2)(A)-(C)).
There is no mention of public input or opinions from the communities affected by potential relocations, raising ethical concerns about transparency and community involvement in decisions that may significantly affect them (Section 2).
The vague language used to describe 'existing industries relating to the business of a covered agency' could lead to confusion and diverse interpretations, potentially complicating the identification of suitable relocation sites (Section 2.(d)(2)(C)).
The complex and lengthy language used in subsection (c) to list the Commission's members may hinder understanding and accessibility for the public and policymakers, potentially obscuring accountability (Section 2.(c)).
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of this Act officially names the legislation as the “Commission to Relocate the Federal Bureaucracy Act”.
2. Agency relocation commission Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill establishes a Commission to explore relocating certain government agencies from the Washington, DC area to other places in the U.S. The Commission, comprising various government officials, will consider factors like cost of living, infrastructure, local industry presence, and past telework participation before providing relocation recommendations to Congress.