Overview

Title

To prohibit the Executive branch from engaging in any reorganization of the Department of State without congressional consultation and approval.

ELI5 AI

This bill says that people in charge can't change the Department of State without asking Congress first, and they need to show a plan for the changes, or else they won't get money for the changes.

Summary AI

H. R. 2602 aims to stop the Executive branch from reorganizing the Department of State without first getting approval and input from Congress. The bill outlines specific conditions that must be met before any changes can occur. This includes getting a law passed to authorize it and having the Secretary of State submit a detailed plan to Congress. If these conditions aren't met, federal funds for the reorganization and official travel by politically appointed officials might be restricted.

Published

2025-04-02
Congress: 119
Session: 1
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Introduced in House
Date: 2025-04-02
Package ID: BILLS-119hr2602ih

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
4
Words:
1,055
Pages:
6
Sentences:
28

Language

Nouns: 338
Verbs: 71
Adjectives: 76
Adverbs: 12
Numbers: 22
Entities: 90

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.73
Average Sentence Length:
37.68
Token Entropy:
5.05
Readability (ARI):
23.25

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

The proposed legislation, titled the "Defending American Diplomacy Act," aims to limit the Executive branch's ability to reorganize the Department of State without prior congressional consultation and approval. Under this act, any changes to the organization of the Department of State must have specific statutory authorization and be accompanied by a detailed plan submitted to certain congressional committees. The bill emphasizes the need for transparency and accountability by requiring detailed explanations and justifications for any proposed reorganization, covering aspects of operations, foreign policy impact, and workforce changes.

Summary of Significant Issues

The bill raises several significant concerns. One major issue is the enforcement of compliance with the act's requirements, particularly in managing the consequences if a reorganization proceeds without specific congressional authorization. This could create bureaucratic disruptions and funding restrictions that might affect the Department's efficiency.

Furthermore, the bill mandates a "detailed implementation plan and timeline" for any proposed reorganization but lacks clear criteria for what level of detail is necessary. This could lead to subjective interpretations and possible disagreements over the adequacy of submissions to Congress. Similarly, the requirement for an assurance that "no Federal laws or regulations will be violated" does not specify guidelines to ensure compliance, potentially leading to vague interpretations.

Another issue is the specificity in defining "appropriate congressional committees," which might exclude other relevant groups from oversight, thus limiting comprehensive legislative input.

Potential Impact on the Public

For the general public, the bill could have indirect impacts. The Department of State plays a crucial role in executing U.S. foreign policy, so clarity and stability in its organization are essential. By requiring congressional consultation and approval for reorganizations, this bill aims to ensure that changes are carefully considered and in line with broader policy goals. This could lead to more measured and transparent foreign policy actions, potentially boosting public confidence in diplomatic initiatives.

Nevertheless, if the enforcement of these rules leads to bureaucratic gridlocks or disruption in the Department's operations, it might slow down the Department's ability to quickly adapt to international challenges, which could affect the timely delivery of consular services to the public.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

Key stakeholders likely to be affected by this legislation include the Department of State personnel and policymakers. For the Department staff, the requirement for comprehensive reorganization plans promises better transparency and predictability in their roles. However, if reorganization efforts are hindered by the bill's requirements, it could result in uncertainties and delays in career advancement or shifts in job responsibilities.

Policymakers and those involved in foreign policy strategy could benefit from knowing that organizational changes undergo rigorous scrutiny and alignment with statutory guidance. However, the rigidity introduced by the need for congressional approval could hinder the ability to react swiftly to geopolitical developments, potentially affecting the efficacy of foreign policy execution.

Ultimately, those engaged in specific diplomatic missions or initiatives may find both benefits and drawbacks in this legislation based on how strictly and effectively its provisions are enforced and interpreted.

Issues

  • The prohibition on implementing any reorganization of the Department of State without specific statutory authorization (Section 2) raises significant legal and administrative challenges, particularly in enforcing compliance and managing the bureaucratic consequences of noncompliance. This includes potential issues with funding restrictions impacting the Department's operations.

  • The requirement for submission of detailed plans (Section 3) lacks financial constraints or information on how the plans will be funded, leading to concerns about potential wasteful spending and budgeting issues.

  • There is ambiguity in the requirement for a 'detailed implementation plan and timeline' (Section 3), which could lead to subjective interpretations and disagreements over the adequacy of the details provided.

  • The section requiring certification that 'no Federal laws or regulations will be violated' (Section 3) does not provide specific measures or guidelines to ensure compliance, leading to potential vagueness in its interpretation.

  • The definition of 'appropriate congressional committees' (Section 4) is overly specific and may exclude other relevant committees, potentially limiting comprehensive legislative oversight.

  • The document lacks context or clarity on the definition of 'reorganization' and its implications, particularly related to prior consultation and notification requirements under Public Law 118-47 (Section 4).

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 specifies that it can be referred to as the “Defending American Diplomacy Act.”

2. Prohibition on implementation absent specific statutory authorization Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section states that the Department of State cannot undergo any reorganization unless there is a specific law allowing it and a detailed plan is submitted to Congress. If these conditions are not met and a reorganization happens anyway, no federal funds will be provided for related activities, and no money can be spent on travel for politically appointed officials.

3. Requirement for submission of detailed plans Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The Secretary of State must submit a detailed plan to Congress if there is a reorganization of the Department of State. This plan should include descriptions of the changes, new responsibilities, potential impacts on foreign policy, and an analysis of risks. It should also cover how the changes will improve the department's operations, any risks or unintended consequences, and plans for workforce impacts and employee rights protection.

4. Definitions Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section defines two terms used in the act: "appropriate congressional committees," which refers to specific committees within the House of Representatives and Senate that deal with foreign affairs and appropriations, and "reorganization," which describes actions needing prior consultation, as specified by a certain public law provision.