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. Subramanyam, Suhas [D-VA-10] · D–VA
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: Jul 17, 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.1544 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.1544 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.1544 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.1544 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 · 2025-02-24 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.
This proposal would require the United States DOGE Service, commonly called the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), to disclose employee information to Congress and explain its activities in closed committee meetings. A public website would show staffing and federal funding changes. Agency employees serving on DOGE teams would also be covered. Missing the March 31, 2025 deadline would restrict DOGE funds to activities initiated before January 20, 2025, and bar federal funding for DOGE Agency Teams. The text expressly attaches an end condition to the Agency Team funding ban: completion of the required report, meetings, and website. It does not separately state an end condition for the restriction on DOGE funds.
The head of the United States DOGE Service (commonly referred to as the Department of Government Efficiency or DOGE) shall submit a report
shall appear at a closed meeting of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives and a closed meeting of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate to present information on the activities carried out by the Department as of the date of the meeting and on the activities the Department intends to carry out after such date.
The head of DOGE shall establish and operate a public website through which members of the public may obtain the following information in human-readable form:
(B) The number of employees laid off and put on administrative leave within each office of the Federal Government. (C) A list of programs and activities within each office of the Government for which funding has been reduced, and the amount by which such funding has been reduced.
For purposes of this Act, an employee of an agency who serves on the DOGE Agency Team of the agency in accordance with section 3(c) of Executive Order 14158 shall be considered an employee of DOGE.
Not later than March 31, 2025, the head of DOGE shall submit the report required under section 2(a), appear at meetings under section 2(b), and operate the public website under section 2(c).
If the head of DOGE fails to comply with subsection (a)— (1) any funds appropriated or otherwise made available for the Department of Government Efficiency, including amounts previously available for the United States Digital Service, may be used only to carry out activities initiated prior to January 20, 2025; and (2) no Federal funds may be used for any DOGE Agency Team established in accordance with section 3(c) of Executive Order 14158, until the head of DOGE submits the report required under section 2(a), appears at meetings under section 2(b), and operates the public website under section 2(c).
Section 1 would name the proposal the Legislative Enforcement Against Setbacks from Harmful DOGE Actions Act, or LEASH DOGE Act.
This Act may be cited as the Legislative Enforcement Against Setbacks from Harmful DOGE Actions Act or the LEASH DOGE Act.
The DOGE head would have to report to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The report would list all DOGE employees, including special Government employees, and their roles, plus all Executive Office of the President employees whose duties include advising the President on DOGE operations.
The head of the United States DOGE Service (commonly referred to as the Department of Government Efficiency or DOGE) shall submit a report to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate containing the following information: (1) A list of— (A) all employees of the Department, including special Government employees, and a description of each employee’s role; and (B) all employees of the Executive Office of the President, including any individual serving as a Senior Advisor to the President, whose duties include advising the President on the operations of the Department.
For each employee covered by the report, DOGE would have to disclose whether a background check occurred and its results, whether the employee has a security clearance, and any conflicts of interest. If applicable, it would also describe the employee's plan to address those conflicts and identify the person with whom the employee entered into that plan.
(2) For each such employee, a statement of whether the employee has undergone a background check and, if so, the results of the background check. (3) For each such employee, a statement of whether the employee has a security clearance. (4) For each such employee, a statement disclosing any conflict of interest held by the employee, including (if applicable) a description of a plan entered into by the employee to address such conflicts and the person with whom the employee entered into the plan.
The DOGE head and any Senior Advisor to the President covered by the reporting requirement would have to attend closed meetings of both named committees. They would explain DOGE's activities through the meeting date and its planned future activities.
The head of DOGE and any Senior Advisor to the President described in subsection (a)(1)(B) shall appear at a closed meeting of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives and a closed meeting of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate to present information on the activities carried out by the Department as of the date of the meeting and on the activities the Department intends to carry out after such date.
At those meetings, the officials would also have to describe DOGE employees' access to federal computer systems and the types of personally identifiable information contained in the systems they accessed.
The head of DOGE and any Senior Advisor to the President described in subsection (a)(1)(B) shall include in the information presented at a meeting under this subsection a description of the extent to which employees of DOGE have obtained access to computer systems of the Federal Government, along with a description of the types of personally identifiable information contained in such systems for which such employees have obtained access.
DOGE would have to operate a public website with information in a form people can read. It would list DOGE employees, including special Government employees, their titles and roles, and the numbers of employees laid off and placed on administrative leave within each federal office.
The head of DOGE shall establish and operate a public website through which members of the public may obtain the following information in human-readable form: (A) A list of employees of DOGE, include special Government employees, their titles, and a description of their role in DOGE. (B) The number of employees laid off and put on administrative leave within each office of the Federal Government.
The website would list programs and activities in each government office whose funding had been reduced, paused, or eliminated. For reductions, it would state the amount; for pauses, it would give a timeline for a final funding decision.
(C) A list of programs and activities within each office of the Government for which funding has been reduced, and the amount by which such funding has been reduced. (D) A list of programs and activities within each office of the Government for which funding has been paused, and a timeline on when a final decision will be made regarding that funding. (E) A list of programs and activities within each office of the Government for which funding has been eliminated.
The website would list individuals and their contact information for questions about the status of federal personnel and federal financial assistance. Federal employees, assistance recipients, and the public could use those contacts. DOGE would have to update the website information at least weekly.
(F) A list of individuals, including their contact information, whom Federal employees, recipients of Federal financial assistance, and members of the public may contact with questions about the status of Federal personnel and Federal financial assistance. (2) Updates The head of DOGE shall update the information provided on the website under this subsection not less frequently than once per week.
For this proposal's requirements, agency employees serving on DOGE Agency Teams under section 3(c) of Executive Order 14158 would count as DOGE employees. Heads of agencies with those teams would have to provide the DOGE head with information needed to meet the bill's requirements.
For purposes of this Act, an employee of an agency who serves on the DOGE Agency Team of the agency in accordance with section 3(c) of Executive Order 14158 shall be considered an employee of DOGE.
The head of each agency for which a DOGE Agency Team has been established in accordance with such Executive Order shall provide the head of DOGE with such information as may be necessary for the head of DOGE to carry out the requirements of this Act.
The proposal sets March 31, 2025 as the deadline for the DOGE head to submit the report, appear at the committee meetings, and operate the public website.
Not later than March 31, 2025, the head of DOGE shall submit the report required under section 2(a), appear at meetings under section 2(b), and operate the public website under section 2(c).
If the DOGE head missed that deadline, DOGE funds—including funds previously available to the United States Digital Service—could be used only for activities begun before January 20, 2025. Federal funding for DOGE Agency Teams established under the cited executive order would be barred until the DOGE head submitted the report, appeared at the meetings, and operated the website. The text places that end condition in the Agency Team funding provision; it does not separately specify when the restriction on DOGE funds would end.
If the head of DOGE fails to comply with subsection (a)— (1) any funds appropriated or otherwise made available for the Department of Government Efficiency, including amounts previously available for the United States Digital Service, may be used only to carry out activities initiated prior to January 20, 2025; and (2) no Federal funds may be used for any DOGE Agency Team established in accordance with section 3(c) of Executive Order 14158, until the head of DOGE submits the report required under section 2(a), appears at meetings under section 2(b), and operates the public website under section 2(c).
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated July 17, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on February 24, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-07-17T19:29:53Z. 2025-02-24: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 2025-02-24: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-24. 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 rider attached to appropriations was identified after reviewing the supplied complete 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 after reviewing the supplied complete introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; it does not establish formal earmark status or absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
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 warranting a finding was identified after reviewing the supplied complete 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: Jul 17, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI