State-Level DOGE Establishment Act

Bill Number

H.R. 2523

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Government Operations and Politics

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-03-31: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Last Updated

2025-05-09T17:40:20Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The legislation aims to promote accountability and efficiency in how states manage federal funds by requiring each state to create a dedicated government efficiency entity. It ties the receipt of certain federal funds to the establishment of this entity, with the goal of reducing waste, fraud, and abuse in the administration of taxpayer dollars.

Key Provisions

• Condition on Federal Funding: Starting in fiscal year 2026, states cannot receive discretionary federal appropriations (non-mandatory spending decided by Congress) unless they establish and maintain a department, agency, or commission focused on government efficiency. This does not apply to funds in the "security category" (defense and related security spending, as defined under the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985).
• Requirements for the State Entity:
• The entity must review how effectively the state administers federal funding and work to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse.
• It must have between 10 and 20 members, with an equal number from the state's majority and minority legislative parties to ensure bipartisanship.
• The entity must produce an annual report detailing its reviews, efforts to cut inefficiencies, and recommendations for improving federal fund spending. This report must be posted on the state's public website and submitted to the Department of Government Efficiency within the Executive Office of the President.
• Scope: Applies to all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Introduces a new federal mandate on states by conditioning discretionary funding on the creation of a specific oversight body, overriding other laws that govern federal fund distribution.
• References and relies on the existence of a federal "Department of Government Efficiency" (not established by this bill), which would receive state reports, potentially integrating this into broader federal efficiency efforts.
• Exempts security-related funds, preserving existing protections for national defense spending without alteration.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: State governments would need to allocate resources to create and operate these entities, potentially straining budgets. Federal agencies disbursing funds (e.g., through grants or programs) may face administrative delays or reduced distributions if states fail to comply, leading to more oversight in fund allocation.
• On Citizens: Taxpayers could benefit from reduced waste in federal programs run by states, such as education, healthcare, or infrastructure grants, potentially leading to more efficient public services. However, non-compliant states might lose funding for essential programs, affecting residents' access to services.
• On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, as the bill focuses on domestic federal-state funding; it does not address foreign aid or international obligations.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• States and Local Governments: Primary targets, required to establish and fund the efficiency entities; legislatures must appoint bipartisan members.
• Federal Government: Agencies like the Department of Government Efficiency (assumed to exist) will receive reports and influence efficiency recommendations; Congress and the Executive Office may see indirect benefits in oversight.
• Taxpayers and Citizens: Indirectly affected through potential savings or disruptions in state-administered federal programs.
• Political Parties: State majority and minority parties must equally represent the entities, promoting balanced oversight but possibly complicating appointments.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: The bill uses federal funding as leverage to enforce state actions, a common but scrutinized tactic under the Spending Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 8), which allows Congress to attach conditions to grants. It could face challenges if seen as overly coercive (e.g., similar to past cases like NFIB v. Sebelius on Medicaid expansion).
• Constitutional: Raises federalism concerns by dictating state government structures, potentially infringing on states' rights to organize their administrations without federal interference.
• Political: Encourages bipartisan state-level review of federal spending, which could foster cross-party collaboration on efficiency but also spark partisan debates over implementation or the creation of the referenced federal department. The playful acronym "DOGE" (referencing a meme) may add a lighthearted but unconventional tone to the bill's branding.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Tenney, Claudia [R-NY-24]

Recent Actions

• 2025-03-31: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
• 2025-03-31: Introduced in House
• 2025-03-31: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• State-Level Departments of Government Efficiency Establishment Act — issued 2025-03-31 — PDF (3 pages)