Sponsors (16)
Want my take on what this bill would do?
This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Adds a new clause (iv) to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) requiring that, if a rule relates to a reduction in force at a Federal agency authorized under subchapter I of chapter 35, the rule include a detailed justification covering: (I) the specific reasons for the reduction in force; (II) the anticipated impact on employees and operations; (III) any alternatives considered and reasons for rejection; (IV) a summary of consultations the Federal agency has held; and (V) a summary of how the reduction will impact employees who are veterans.
Revises the definition of 'rule' in 5 U.S.C. 804(3) to (A) adopt the meaning given in section 551 and (B) explicitly include: (i) any rule or order relating to a reduction in force at a Federal agency authorized under subchapter I of chapter 35; and (ii) any significant action by a Federal agency that substantially affects the rights or obligations of non-Federal agency parties, such as workforce restructuring, office closure, or other action that has a material impact on employees or operations.
Requires federal agencies to give Congress a more detailed written justification when a rule relates to a reduction in force (RIF) under subchapter I of chapter 35. It also expands the statutory definition of “rule” to expressly cover RIFs and other major workforce or office actions, so those actions trigger the new information requirements.
Amend title 5, chapter 8 (section 801(a)(1)(A)) by editing existing clause punctuation: strike “and” at the end of clause (ii).
Amend title 5, chapter 8 (section 801(a)(1)(A)) by editing existing clause punctuation: strike the period at the end of clause (iii) and insert “; and”.
Add a new clause (iv) to section 801(a)(1)(A) requiring that, if a rule relates to a reduction in force at a Federal agency authorized under subchapter I of chapter 35, the agency must provide a detailed justification for the reduction in force.
Under the new clause (iv): require the justification to state the specific reasons for the reduction in force.
Under the new clause (iv): require the justification to describe the anticipated impact of the reduction in force on the employees and operations of the Federal agency.
Who is affected and how:
Federal agencies: Must prepare and transmit expanded written justifications to Congress when a rule relates to a RIF or a major workforce/office action. That increases administrative workload for legal, HR, and policy offices and may require closer coordination among program, budget, and personnel staffs.
Federal employees (including those potentially subject to RIFs): Benefit from increased transparency about the basis, scope, and expected timeline of workforce reductions and reorganizations; agencies may be required to document alternatives and mitigation steps.
Members of Congress and congressional committees: Gain clearer, standardized information to evaluate and question agency workforce decisions and to exercise oversight.
Labor organizations and employee representatives: Will likely use the expanded disclosures in bargaining, representation, or advocacy related to workforce reductions.
Agency supervisors and HR managers: Will need to produce and review more detailed analyses before proceeding with RIF-related rules, potentially affecting scheduling and implementation.
Overall effects: The amendment increases oversight and transparency of major personnel actions at the potential cost of additional paperwork, slower decision timelines, and tighter external scrutiny of workforce and office-change decisions. The change is procedural (reporting/definition) and does not itself provide funding or new program authorities.
Expand sections to see detailed analysis
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced May 1, 2025 by Maxine Waters · Last progress May 1, 2025
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House