PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 23, 2021
Congressional Oversight to Secure Transparency of Relocations Act or the COST of Relocations Act
This bill requires a federal agency seeking to relocate more than 5% of its employees or more than 100 employees to conduct and make public a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of the proposed change.
Specifically, the agency must conduct such analysis and submit it to the agency's office of inspector general for review and submission to Congress.
The report must include
the anticipated outcomes and improvements that will result from the proposed relocation,
the metrics for measuring whether the proposed relocation results in the anticipated outcomes and improvements,
a timeline of past and future engagements with stakeholders regarding the proposed relocation,
a comprehensive strategy for accomplishing the proposed relocation, and
an assessment of the short- and long-term effects of the proposed relocation on the agency's mission.
People & committees
Sen. Van Hollen, Chris [D-MD] · D–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 14, 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 S.392 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 S.392 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 S.392 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 S.392 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.