PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Davidson, Warren [R-OH-8] · R–OH
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 Oversight and Government Reform.
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: May 12, 2025. 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.1460 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.1460 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.1460 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.1460 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 · 2025-02-21 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 Drain the Swamp Act of 2025 would require covered federal executive agencies to move their headquarters outside the bill’s defined Washington metropolitan area by September 30, 2030. Their relocation plans would have to leave no more than 10 percent of each agency’s employees based in that area, seek potential cost savings, and consider national security implications. The Executive Office of the President would be exempt.
This Act may be cited as the Drain the Swamp Act of 2025.
identify a location for a new headquarters outside of the Washington metropolitan area; (B) maximize any potential cost savings associated with the relocation; (C) provide that, upon implementation of the plan, no more than 10 percent of the employees of the agency are based in the Washington metropolitan area; and (D) consider any potential national security implications of the relocation.
Not later than September 30, 2030, the head of each executive agency shall implement the plan for such agency submitted under paragraph (1).
the term does not include the Executive Office of the President.
The bill would repeal section 72 of title 4 of the United States Code. It labels this a repeal of a headquarters location requirement, but does not reproduce the existing law.
(a) Repeal of headquarters location requirement Section 72 of title 4, United States Code, is repealed.
Each covered agency head would have to develop and submit a headquarters relocation plan to Congress by September 30, 2026. The plan must identify a new headquarters location outside the defined Washington metropolitan area.
Not later than September 30, 2026, the head of each executive agency shall develop and submit to Congress a plan for the relocation of the headquarters of that agency outside of the Washington metropolitan area.
(A) identify a location for a new headquarters outside of the Washington metropolitan area;
Each plan would have to maximize any potential relocation cost savings and consider potential national security implications. These are planning requirements, not evidence that relocation would save money or improve security.
(B) maximize any potential cost savings associated with the relocation;
(D) consider any potential national security implications of the relocation.
Each plan would have to provide that, once implemented, no more than 10 percent of the agency’s employees are based in the defined Washington metropolitan area. This requirement refers to agency employees generally, not just headquarters staff.
(C) provide that, upon implementation of the plan, no more than 10 percent of the employees of the agency are based in the Washington metropolitan area;
Before a plan is submitted to Congress, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the Administrator of General Services would have to certify its compliance if it meets the listed planning requirements.
Prior to the submission of a plan under paragraph (1), the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the Administrator of General Services shall certify the compliance of the plan with the provisions of this section if the plan meets the requirements described in paragraph (2).
Each covered agency head would have to implement the submitted relocation plan by September 30, 2030.
Not later than September 30, 2030, the head of each executive agency shall implement the plan for such agency submitted under paragraph (1).
Coverage would use the definition of executive agency in section 105 of title 5 of the United States Code, with an explicit exception for the Executive Office of the President. The referenced definition is not reproduced in the bill.
The term executive agency has the meaning given the term Executive agency in section 105 of title 5, United States Code, except that the term does not include the Executive Office of the President.
The bill defines the Washington metropolitan area as the District of Columbia; Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties in Maryland; and Arlington, Fairfax, Loudon, and Prince William Counties and the City of Alexandria in Virginia.
The term Washington metropolitan area means the geographic area located within the boundaries of— (A) the District of Columbia; (B) Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties in the State of Maryland; and (C) Arlington, Fairfax, Loudon, and Prince William Counties and the City of Alexandria in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated May 12, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on February 21, 2025. This snapshot does not establish subsequent legislative action or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2025-05-12T14:47:41Z. 2025-02-21: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 2025-02-21: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-21. 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 provision unrelated to the headquarters-relocation policy was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish what other versions or accompanying materials contain.
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; accompanying materials needed to assess formal earmark status are not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied text contains a narrow institutional exemption from its main policy. This classification does not establish whether the exemption is justified.
The Executive Office of the President would be excluded from the definition of covered executive agencies, exempting it from the relocation-planning and implementation duties imposed on covered agencies.
The term executive agency has the meaning given the term Executive agency in section 105 of title 5, United States Code, except that the term does not include the Executive Office of the President.
Not later than September 30, 2026, the head of each executive agency shall develop and submit to Congress a plan for the relocation of the headquarters of that agency outside of the Washington metropolitan area.
Not later than September 30, 2030, the head of each executive agency shall implement the plan for such agency submitted under paragraph (1).
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: May 12, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI