PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 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.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 9, 2025
This bill revises the procedures for appointing and removing the Librarian of Congress, the Director of the Government Publishing Office (GPO), and the Comptroller General by giving Congress the sole authority to appoint and remove these positions.
Specifically, the bill requires the Librarian and the Director of GPO to each be selected by a bipartisan congressional commission (as established by the bill) and appointed by Congress through the adoption of a concurrent resolution. (Currently, these positions are appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.) The Librarian and the Director of GPO may only be removed from office by an affirmative three-fifths vote in each chamber.
Additionally, the bill revises the appointment process for the Comptroller General. (Currently, the Comptroller General is appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. A bipartisan congressional commission recommends at least three individuals to the President, who may ask the commission to recommend additional individuals.) This bill instead requires the bipartisan congressional commission to recommend one individual to Congress, and Congress may ask the commission to recommend additional individuals. Congress must then appoint the selected individual through the adoption of a concurrent resolution.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Further, the bill revises the removal process for the Comptroller General. (Currently, the Comptroller General may be removed from office by impeachment or by joint resolution of Congress.) This bill changes the removal process so the individual may only be removed by impeachment or by concurrent (instead of joint) resolution of Congress.
People & committees
Rep. Case, Ed [D-HI-1] · D–HI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 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 House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 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: May 22, 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.6517 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.6517 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.6517 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.6517 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.