PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 3, 2025
Federal Freeze Act
This bill bars pay raises for federal employees for one year and requires reductions in the number of employees at each federal agency.
The bill prohibits agencies from increasing the basic pay of any employee for one year after enactment. Also in that first year, the bill prohibits each federal agency from increasing the number of its employees beyond the number employed on the date of the bill's enactment, except that the agency may increase such number when making appointments to positions related to law enforcement, public safety, or national security.
Additionally, the bill requires reductions in force such that within three years of the bill's enactment the number of employees at each agency is 5% lower than it was on the date of the bill's enactment.
People & committees
Rep. Tenney, Claudia [R-NY-24] · R–NY
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.
Source last updated: May 5, 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.200 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.200 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.200 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.200 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 · 2025-01-03 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 Federal Freeze Act would limit covered federal agencies to their staffing levels at enactment and freeze employees’ annual basic pay for one year. Agency heads could exceed the staffing limit for law enforcement, public safety, or national security appointments. Agencies would also have to reduce staffing below the enactment baseline by 2 percent after two years and 5 percent after three years.
This Act may be cited as the Federal Freeze Act.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law or regulation, during the 1-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the following shall apply:
Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the head of an agency may not increase the number of employees employed by the agency beyond the baseline number.
if the agency head determines that making that appointment serves the interest of law enforcement, public safety, or the national security of the United States.
The annual rate of basic pay of an employee, as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act, may not be increased.
(1) as of the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the number of employees employed by the agency is 2 percent less than the baseline number; and (2) as of the date that is 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the number of employees employed by the agency is 5 percent less than the baseline number.
Coverage would depend on the definition of “agency” in an existing federal statute. The bill defines an employee as an employee of such an agency; the referenced agency definition is not reproduced in the supplied text.
The term agency has the meaning given the term in section 551 of title 5, United States Code.
The term employee means an employee of an agency.
Each agency’s staffing baseline would be its employee count on the enactment date. The definition expressly includes people occupying full-time equivalent positions, a staffing measure expressed in full-time workloads.
The term baseline number means, with respect to an agency, the number of employees employed by the agency (including individuals occupying full-time equivalent positions in the agency), as of the date of enactment of this Act.
For one year beginning at enactment, agency heads generally could not increase staffing above that baseline, regardless of conflicting laws or regulations. This is a staffing ceiling, rather than a prohibition on every appointment.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law or regulation, during the 1-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the following shall apply: (1) (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the head of an agency may not increase the number of employees employed by the agency beyond the baseline number.
During that year, an agency head could approve an appointment above the staffing ceiling if the head determined that it served law enforcement, public safety, or U.S. national security. The exception permits such appointments but does not require them.
During the 1-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the head of an agency may appoint an individual to a position within the agency, even if appointing that individual would increase the number of employees employed by the agency beyond the baseline number, if the agency head determines that making that appointment serves the interest of law enforcement, public safety, or the national security of the United States.
The one-year restriction would also prevent increases to an employee’s annual basic pay rate in effect at enactment. The pay provision does not contain the appointment exception.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law or regulation, during the 1-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the following shall apply:
(2) The annual rate of basic pay of an employee, as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act, may not be increased.
Agency heads would have to take measures to make staffing 2 percent below the original baseline at the two-year mark and 5 percent below it at the three-year mark. Both reductions use the same original baseline. This duty would apply without regard to other laws or regulations; the reduction subsection states no exception or particular method for achieving the targets.
(c) Reduction in force The head of each agency shall take such measures, without regard to any other provision of law or regulation, to ensure that— (1) as of the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the number of employees employed by the agency is 2 percent less than the baseline number; and (2) as of the date that is 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the number of employees employed by the agency is 5 percent less than the baseline number.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated May 5, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on January 3, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-05-05T16:19:23Z. 2025-01-03: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 2025-01-03: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-01-03. 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; accompanying disclosure and legislative materials are not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential benefit meeting the review definition 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: May 5, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI