Overview
Title
To require Executive agencies to limit the use of special Government employees to 130 days, to require the maintenance of a public database of certain special Government employees, to require the release of financial disclosures filed by certain special Government employees, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The bill is like a rule saying special helpers in the government can only work for a little while, up to 130 days a year, and their details must be available for everyone to see so we know who they are and what they do. It also makes sure we can see their money dealings, so everything is fair and honest.
Summary AI
S. 1196, the "Special Government Employees Transparency Act of 2025," aims to increase transparency and regulation of special Government employees (SGEs) in the executive branch of the United States Government. It mandates that SGEs can only serve for up to 130 days within a year and requires a public database with detailed information on certain SGEs, including their names, positions, and pay rates. The bill also ensures financial disclosures of covered SGEs are made publicly available, enhancing accountability and oversight.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The "Special Government Employees Transparency Act of 2025" is a piece of legislation designed to create more transparency within the federal government regarding the employment and activities of special Government employees. These employees are individuals who serve in government roles on a limited basis, capped at 130 days per year. The bill mandates the creation of a publicly accessible database to track these employees, their positions, and their employment details to enhance accountability and transparency. Additionally, it requires the release of certain financial disclosures of these employees while excluding those reports containing sensitive national defense information.
Significant Issues in the Bill
There are several significant issues identified within this bill:
Definition Ambiguity: The definition of "special Government employee" presents potential confusion due to a lack of specific examples and a broader contextual understanding of who qualifies. This could lead to inconsistent application across various federal bodies.
Transparency Exceptions: The bill excludes certain organizations like the United States DOGE Service from transparency requirements, which could undermine the bill's objective of increased governmental transparency.
Oversight and Accountability: The requirement for just a single report, three years after the bill's enactment, might not be sufficient for ongoing oversight. An absence of timely reports may slow necessary improvements and adjustments to the database, potentially compromising the bill's effectiveness.
Executive Agency Definition: By including the Executive Office of the President within its scope, the bill could potentially raise constitutional issues concerning the separation of powers and executive privilege. This inclusion might pose a challenge to established governmental checks and balances.
Financial Disclosures Limitations: Omitting financial disclosures containing "national defense information" without clear definitions could lead to over-classification and reduced transparency.
Impact on the Public
Public impact might largely be positive, as the bill aims to enhance transparency and accountability in government operations. For the general taxpayer, such legislation could bring more confidence in how government roles are utilized and ensure that public service is indeed public-oriented. However, the mentioned ambiguities and exceptions could lead to skepticism if unclear definitions or insufficient transparency persist.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Government Employees: Special Government employees and their employing agencies might experience increased administrative demands, as they need to adhere to new tracking and reporting requirements. This might entail more rigorous oversight and possibly cause some disruption as roles transition when the 130-day limit is reached.
Agencies: The agencies involved would need to allocate resources and implement systems to meet these transparency requirements. The lack of defined consequences for non-compliance might lead to varying levels of adherence, affecting how different agencies respond.
Advocates for Transparency: For many advocating for government accountability, this bill is a step in the right direction. However, without proper definitions and strong oversight provisions, the bill's potential to fully achieve its transparency goals may be limited.
In conclusion, while the "Special Government Employees Transparency Act of 2025" is poised to increase government transparency, addressing the noted issues is essential to ensure its effectiveness and achieve balanced oversight. The specific applications and exceptions in the bill will need close scrutiny to prevent any nullification of its intended objectives.
Issues
The definition of 'special Government employee' in Section 2 could lead to confusion as it lacks clarity in terms of detailed examples or a broader context, which could result in ambiguity in understanding the scope of who it applies to, especially with complex federal employment regulations.
Section 3 allows certain organizations like the United States DOGE Service to be exempt from the transparency expectations set for advisory committees, potentially obscuring transparency and accountability in these entities, which could be seen as undermining transparency efforts.
There is concern in Section 3 over the inclusion of the Executive Office of the President in the term 'Executive agency,' which could raise legal and constitutional issues related to separation of powers and executive privilege, impacting checks and balances.
The bill, in Section 3, mandates a report to Congress only once, three years after the bill's enactment, limiting ongoing oversight and timely improvements to the SGE Database, thus potentially hindering effective government transparency.
The exclusion of financial disclosures containing 'national defense information' from public availability, as mentioned in Section 3, could limit transparency without clear boundaries on what qualifies as such information, possibly leading to overreach in classification usage.
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 states its official name, which is the "Special Government Employees Transparency Act of 2025".
2. Limitation on the use of special Government employees Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In this section, a "special Government employee" is defined, and it establishes that such an individual can only serve in that role for up to 130 days within a year. If they exceed this limit, the employer must reclassify their job position, following federal personnel guidelines, and notify the employee accordingly. Days of service are counted based on certain administrative activities or compensated work.
3. Transparency for special Government employees Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section of the bill outlines the creation of a public database for information about special Government employees. It defines who these employees are and mandates that the database be accessible online, include details such as employee names, titles, and agencies, and ensure up-to-date and accurate information through regular audits and reports to Congress.