PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Edwards, Chuck [R-NC-11] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 11, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1119 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1119 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1119 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1119 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-07 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Unemployment Integrity Act of 2025 would make eligibility for regular unemployment benefits depend on responding to requests connected to possible work, including interviews, reemployment services, and reasonable requests for drug testing or skill assessments. It would let prospective employers report noncompliance to states. It would also condition certain unemployment fund transfers on state compliance and require a federal study that could lead to more random audits.
This Act may be cited as the Unemployment Integrity Act of 2025.
A requirement that, as a condition of eligibility for regular compensation for any week, a claimant must, if requested, in relation to work that may be available— (A) respond to requests; (B) schedule and attend an interview and participate in reemployment services at an agreed upon time; and (C) comply with any other reasonable request, including any request that an individual undergo drug testing or skill assessments.
A method by which a person with whom a claimant is seeking employment may voluntarily report to the State the failure of a claimant to comply with the State law provisions described in paragraphs (12) and (13).
Amounts in the extended unemployment compensation account may not be transferred to a State account for the purposes of any unemployment compensation law unless the Secretary of Labor certifies that the State law under which such unemployment compensation will be administered includes the provisions required by paragraphs (13) and (14) of section 303(a).
the Secretary of Labor shall conduct a study on the effect of increasing the number of random audits
the Secretary shall prescribe regulations to increase the number of such audits in accordance with such report.
Section 2 would add weekly eligibility conditions for regular unemployment benefits. When requested in connection with work that may be available, claimants would have to respond, schedule and attend an interview, and participate in services to help them return to work at an agreed time.
A requirement that, as a condition of eligibility for regular compensation for any week, a claimant must, if requested, in relation to work that may be available— (A) respond to requests; (B) schedule and attend an interview and participate in reemployment services at an agreed upon time;
Claimants would also have to comply with other reasonable requests connected to possible work, including drug testing or skill assessments. This is a requirement to comply when requested, rather than a requirement that every claimant undergo testing.
a claimant must, if requested, in relation to work that may be available
(C) comply with any other reasonable request, including any request that an individual undergo drug testing or skill assessments.
States would have to provide a way for a person with whom a claimant is seeking employment to voluntarily report noncompliance. Reports could concern the new requirements in paragraph (13) or existing requirements referenced in paragraph (12), whose text is not supplied.
Section 303(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 503(a)), as amended by paragraph (1), is further amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph: (14) A method by which a person with whom a claimant is seeking employment may voluntarily report to the State the failure of a claimant to comply with the State law provisions described in paragraphs (12) and (13).
Within two years after enactment, the Secretary of Labor would have to study how increasing random audits under the program called the “Beneficiary Accuracy Management program” in this paragraph would affect administration of state unemployment compensation laws.
Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall conduct a study on the effect of increasing the number of random audits under the Beneficiary Accuracy Management program on the administration of State unemployment compensation laws.
If the report indicates that more random audits would improve administration, the Secretary would have to issue regulations increasing audits in accordance with the report within one year after submitting it. This paragraph calls the program the “Benefit Accuracy Measurement program” and also covers a successor audit program.
Not later than 1 year after submitting the report required under paragraph (1), if such report indicates that increasing the number of random audits under the Benefit Accuracy Measurement program (or any successor audit program) will improve the administration of State unemployment compensation laws, the Secretary shall prescribe regulations to increase the number of such audits in accordance with such report.
Section 2 says its amendments would generally apply to benefit weeks beginning after the first anniversary of enactment. For a state whose legislature does not meet during that first year, they would instead apply to weeks beginning after the end of the legislature’s first session that begins after enactment.
Subject to subparagraph (B), the amendments made by subsections (a) and (b) shall, with respect to a State, apply to weeks beginning after the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.
In the case of a State whose legislature is not in session during the 1-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the amendments made by subsections (a) and (b) shall, with respect to such State, apply to weeks beginning after the end of the first session of the State legislature which begins after the date of enactment of this Act.
Section 3 would prohibit transfers from the extended unemployment compensation account to a state account for unemployment compensation unless the Secretary of Labor certifies that the administering state law includes the new claimant requirements and voluntary reporting method.
Amounts in the extended unemployment compensation account may not be transferred to a State account for the purposes of any unemployment compensation law unless the Secretary of Labor certifies that the State law under which such unemployment compensation will be administered includes the provisions required by paragraphs (13) and (14) of section 303(a).
The proposed transfer restriction says it would apply despite provisions of laws enacted later, unless those later provisions specifically cite this subsection.
The provisions of this subsection shall apply notwithstanding any other provision of law enacted after the date of enactment of the Unemployment Integrity Act of 2025, unless such other provision of law specifically cites this subsection.
Section 3’s transfer amendments would generally apply to weeks beginning after the first anniversary of enactment. A state whose legislature does not meet during that first year would have until the end of its first legislative session beginning after enactment; the amendments would apply to weeks beginning after that session ends.
Subject to paragraph (2), the amendments made by subsection (a) shall, with respect to a State, apply to weeks beginning after the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.
In the case of a State whose legislature is not in session during the 1-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the amendments made by subsection (a) shall, with respect to such State, apply to weeks beginning after the end of the first session of the State legislature which begins after the date of enactment of this Act.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated June 11, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Ways and Means on February 7, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2026-06-11T23:26:38Z. 2025-02-07: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. 2025-02-07: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-07. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; formal earmark status in accompanying materials cannot be established from this source set.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential benefit or special exemption was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Jun 11, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI