Sponsors (23)
Introduced March 18, 2026 by Shontel M. Brown · Last progress March 18, 2026
The bill prioritizes modest federal savings and reduced administrative complexity by rescinding unobligated balances and restoring prior law, at the cost of removing expected funding and creating uncertainty for governments, beneficiaries, and contractors.
Taxpayers: Federal spending is modestly reduced because unobligated balances from the repealed provisions are rescinded, lowering projected outlays.
Federal and state agencies (and stakeholders who interact with them): Returning to prior law removes statutory changes that created new administrative burdens, restoring familiar rules and reducing implementation complexity.
State governments, service providers, and taxpayers: Rescinding unobligated balances and repealing enacted provisions will remove expected funding and likely reduce services or programs that had been planned under Public Law 119–21.
Federal employees, state governments, beneficiaries, and contractors: Restoring prior law could create legal or operational uncertainty for parties who relied on the now-repealed changes, complicating contracts and implementation.
Based on analysis of 2 sections of legislative text.
Repeals specified provisions of Public Law 119–21, rescinds related unobligated balances, and restores amended statutory text to its pre-enactment form.
Repeals specified provisions of Public Law 119–21, rescinds any unobligated balances tied to those repealed provisions as they existed the day before enactment, and restores the statutory text that a repealed subtitle had amended back to its pre-enactment form as if that subtitle had never been enacted. The bill does not create new programs or appropriate new funds; it removes selected authorities and withdraws available but unspent money related to those authorities.