Overview
Title
To condition the disbursement of Federal funds to any State on such State establishing a department, agency, or commission of government efficiency, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The bill says that states can only get money from the government if they have a special team to make sure the money is used wisely and not wasted. This team has to include people from both major political parties in the state.
Summary AI
H. R. 2523 is a bill that proposes withholding federal funds from any state unless the state forms a department, agency, or commission to enhance government efficiency. This bill requires states to evaluate their administration of federal funds, minimize waste, and provide annual reports with their findings and suggestions. The proposed entities must be bipartisan, including members from both the majority and minority parties in the state legislature. The goal is to ensure taxpayer funds are used effectively and to encourage states to adopt practices that reduce fraud and inefficiency.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The proposed legislation, known as the “State-Level Departments of Government Efficiency Establishment Act” or the "State-Level DOGE Establishment Act," seeks to tie the disbursement of certain federal funds to states' establishment of new governmental entities. These entities, dubbed departments, agencies, or commissions of government efficiency, are designed to oversee the effective use of federal funds by states. Starting in fiscal year 2026, no state will receive discretionary federal appropriations unless it creates such an entity. These new bodies must have bipartisan membership and are tasked with publishing annual reports detailing efforts to reduce inefficiencies and fraud in state administration of federal funds.
Summary of Significant Issues
The bill brings forth several significant issues. Primarily, it imposes a strict condition tying federal funds to the creation of new state entities, which could disrupt funding for vital state programs that rely heavily on federal assistance. There is also ambiguity in the exception clause related to the "security category," which could lead to varied interpretations and inconsistent application across states.
Moreover, the bill's requirement for states to establish new entities poses potential financial burdens. States may find themselves duplicating efforts if existing agencies can perform similar oversight functions. The political stipulation for balanced party representation within these entities may also prove contentious in states with notable partisan imbalances, complicating their formation and operation. Lastly, the use of the acronym "DOGE" for the Act may risk trivializing the seriousness of the legislation due to its association with internet culture and cryptocurrencies.
Impact on the Public
If passed, the bill could have wide-ranging impacts. On a broad scale, it’s designed to ensure better management and oversight of federal funds, theoretically leading to more efficient and effective state programs. The goal of reducing waste and fraud serves public interest by potentially saving taxpayer dollars and increasing trust in governmental operations.
However, if the bill's conditions are considered too stringent, states might face significant challenges. Vital state programs may experience disruption if they fail to meet the requirements to receive discretionary federal funds. The ambiguity around the "security category" could lead to confusion and differing interpretations among states, causing legal and administrative complications.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
State governments stand to be directly affected by the bill. While the creation of new bureaucratic entities could lead to improved oversight and administration of federal funds, the requirement could strain state resources, particularly in those already facing fiscal constraints. The formation of bipartisan entities might encourage collaboration but could also invoke political strife in states with predominant party majorities.
For taxpayers, the potential for less wastage and higher efficiency in the use of federal funds is a positive outcome. However, the bill's strict enforcement could disrupt services in states unable to comply promptly, inadvertently affecting those reliant on such services.
In summary, while the bill aims to improve the efficiency of federal fund utilization, it presents challenges that demand careful consideration. Balancing the enforcement of federal oversight with the operational flexibility of states is crucial to mitigate negative impacts while promoting the bill’s intended benefits.
Issues
The requirement in Section 2 for withholding discretionary appropriations from states that do not establish a department, agency, or commission of government efficiency might be overly strict and risks disrupting essential state programs reliant on federal assistance.
The ambiguity in the exception for discretionary appropriations within the 'security category' in Section 2 could lead to inconsistent application across different states due to a lack of clear definition, potentially resulting in legal challenges.
The establishment of new state-level departments, agencies, or commissions as mandated in Section 2(b) might place additional financial burdens on states. This could result in inefficient resource utilization or redundancy when existing agencies might suit similar purposes.
The political requirement for an equal number of majority and minority party members in the state legislature's department, agency, or commission as stated in Section 2(b)(2) may be contentious in states where there is significant partisan imbalance, complicating formation and operation.
The lack of clarity on actions beyond the withholding of federal funds if a state fails to comply, as noted in Section 2, could create complex legal and administrative challenges for enforcement.
The use of the acronym 'DOGE' in the Act's short title in Section 1 might lead to misunderstandings due to its association with internet culture and cryptocurrencies, potentially undermining the bill's perceived seriousness.
The term 'discretionary appropriations' in Section 2(a) is a complex budgetary term and may not be well understood by all stakeholders, highlighting the need for further clarification or a more detailed definition within the bill's text.
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 the Act gives it its official name: the "State-Level Departments of Government Efficiency Establishment Act" or simply the "State-Level DOGE Establishment Act".
2. Condition on Federal funding to States Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In fiscal year 2026 and beyond, states will not receive certain federal funds unless they create a government agency to check the use of federal money and reduce waste and fraud. This agency must have a balanced mix of political members, consist of 10 to 20 people, and publish annual reports on their findings and suggestions for improving government spending.