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. Barrett, Tom [R-MI-7] · R–MI
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: Apr 3, 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.2169 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.2169 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.2169 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.2169 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 · 2025-03-18 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.
H.R. 2169 proposes changing the legal public holiday for Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday when Inauguration Day would be observed on that same holiday. In those years, the King holiday would move to the Tuesday after January’s third Monday. This would change the holiday date under federal law.
(d) Notwithstanding subsection (a), if by operation of subsection (c) Inauguration Day will be observed on the legal public holiday for the Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr., then the date for the Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. under such subsection (a) shall be the Tuesday following the third Monday in January.
The proposal would insert this holiday rule as a new subsection (d) in section 6103 of title 5 of the United States Code and relabel the existing subsection (d) as subsection (e).
Section 6103 of title 5, United States Code, is amended— (1) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and (2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
The supplied actions snapshot, updated April 3, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on March 18, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-04-03T11:43:50Z. 2025-03-18: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 2025-03-18: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-18. 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 earmark disclosures and committee materials were not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential treatment 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: Apr 3, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI