PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-432, Part I.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 15, 2025
Direct Hire To Fight Fires
This bill provides permanent direct-hire authority to the Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of the Interior to fill wildland firefighter and firefighting support positions in the Forest Service and Interior agencies.
The bill also requires USDA and Interior to implement policies to recruit and retain wildland firefighters and related personnel, such as by streamlining the hiring process and reducing barriers for firefighters transferring between agencies.
Further, the bill requires USDA and Interior to annually report related data to Congress, including the number of firefighters needed for the coming year, the number of firefighting vacancies in each state, and existing barriers to filling such vacancies. The report must also be made available on a public website.
People & committees
Rep. Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-432, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-432, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the Subcommittee on Forestry and Horticulture.
Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committees on Natural Resources, and Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committees on Natural Resources, and Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committees on Natural Resources, and Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Oct 31, 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.435 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.435 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.435 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.435 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.