U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

89–010 

" ! SENATE 115TH CONGRESS

2d Session 

REPORT

2018

115–381 

Calendar No. 667 

REFORMING GOVERNMENT ACT OF 2018 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

TO ACCOMPANY

S. 3137 

TO PROVIDE FOR REFORMING AGENCIES OF THE FEDERAL 

GOVERNMENT TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS 

NOVEMBER 26, 2018.—Ordered to be printed 


E:\Seals\Congress.#13
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin, Chairman 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

GARY C. PETERS, Michigan 

MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire 

KAMALA D. HARRIS, California 

DOUG JONES, Alabama 

CHRISTOPHER R. HIXON, Staff Director 

GABRIELLE D’ADAMO SINGER, Chief Counsel 

COURTNEY J. ALLEN, Deputy Chief Counsel for Governmental Affairs 

MARGARET E. DAUM, Minority Staff Director 

CHARLES A. MOSKOWITZ, Minority Senior Legislative Counsel 

THOMAS J.R. RICHARDS, Minority Professional Staff Member 

LAURA W. KILBRIDE, Chief Clerk 

Calendar No. 667 

115TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 115–381 

REFORMING GOVERNMENT ACT OF 2018 

NOVEMBER 26, 2018.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. JOHNSON, from the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 3137] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 

to which was referred the bill (S. 3137) to provide for reforming 

agencies of the Federal Government to improve efficiency and effectiveness, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon 

with amendments and recommends that the bill, as amended, do 

pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Purpose and Summary .................................................................................. 1 

II. Background and the Need for Legislation ................................................... 2 

III. Legislative History ......................................................................................... 7 

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis .......................................................................... 9 

V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact .................................................................. 10 

VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ................................................ 10 

VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................... 11 

I. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

The purpose of S. 3137 is to provide authority for the President 

to submit government reorganization proposals to Congress for expedited consideration. This bill provides the expedited reorganization authority for up to two years upon enactment and requires 

that the President provide certain information to Congress as a 

condition before Congress can use the expedited authority to consider the proposal. 

2 

1 Exec. Order No. 13781, 82 Fed. Reg. 50, 13959 (Mar. 16, 2017). 

2 Exec. Order No. 13781, 82 Fed. Reg. 50, 13959 (Mar. 16, 2017). 

3Memorandum from Mick Mulvaney, Director, Off. of Mgmt. and Budget, Comprehensive Plan 

for Reforming the Federal Government and Reducing the Federal Civilian Workforce, M–17–22 

(Apr. 12, 2017). 4 Exec. Order No. 13781, 82 Fed. Reg. 50, 13959 (Mar. 16, 2017). 

5 Exec. Order No. 13781, 82 Fed. Reg. 50, 13959 (Mar. 16, 2017). 

II. BACKGROUND AND THE NEED FOR LEGISLATION

On March 13, 2017, President Donald Trump signed Executive 

Order 13781 ‘‘to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability of the executive branch by directing the Director of the Office of Management and Budget [(OMB)] to propose a plan to reorganize governmental functions and eliminate unnecessary agencies 

. . . components of agencies, and agency programs.’’ 1 To help inform the Federal Government reorganization plan, the Executive 

Order directed the head of each Federal agency to submit to OMB 

a plan to reorganize its agency to maximize efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability.2 OMB directed agencies to submit plans 

that meet the following objectives: 

[c]reate a lean, accountable, and more efficient government 

that works for the American people; [f]ocus the Federal 

government on effectively and efficiently delivering those 

programs that are the highest needs to citizens and where 

there is a unique Federal role rather than assuming current programs are optimally designed or even needed; 

[a]lign the Federal workforce to meet the needs of today 

and the future rather than the requirements of the past; 

and [s]trengthen agencies by removing barriers that 

hinder front-line employees from delivering results.3

The Executive Order directed OMB to issue a notice in the Federal Register soliciting public comments for suggestions on the individual agency plans and to consider these public comments when 

developing the Federal Government reorganization plan.4 The Executive Order instructed OMB to consider: 

whether some or all of the functions of an agency, a component, or a program are appropriate for the Federal Government or would be better left to State or local governments or to the private sector through free enterprise; (ii) 

whether some or all of the functions of an agency, a component, or a program are redundant, including with those 

of another agency, component, or program; (iii) whether 

certain administrative capabilities necessary for operating 

an agency, a component, or a program are redundant with 

those of another agency, component, or program; (iv) 

whether the costs of continuing to operate an agency, a 

component, or a program are justified by the public benefits it provides; and (v) the costs of shutting down or merging agencies, components, or programs, including the costs 

of addressing the equities of affected agency staff.5

On June 21, 2018, OMB issued its Federal Government reorganization plan, entitled, ‘‘Delivering Government Solutions in the 

3 

6Off. of Mgmt. and Budget, Exec. Office of the President, Delivering Government Solutions 

in the 21st Century: Reform Plan and Reorganization Recommendations (June 21, 2018), available at https://www.performance.gov/GovReform/Reform-and-Reorg-Plan-Final.pdf. 7Off. of Mgmt. and Budget, Exec. Office of the President, Delivering Government Solutions 

in the 21st Century: Reform Plan and Reorganization Recommendations, 4 (June 21, 2018) (citing Pew Research Center, Public Trust in Government: 1958–2017 (Dec. 2017) and Pew Research Center, Government Gets Lower Ratings for Handling Health Care, Environment and 

Disaster Response (Dec. 2017)). 8Off. of Mgmt. and Budget, Exec. Office of the President, Delivering Government Solutions 

in the 21st Century: Reform Plan and Reorganization Recommendations (June 21, 2018), available at https://www.performance.gov/GovReform/Reform-and-Reorg-Plan-Final.pdf. 9Off. of Mgmt. and Budget, Exec. Office of the President, Delivering Government Solutions 

in the 21st Century: Reform Plan and Reorganization Recommendations (June 21, 2018), available at https://www.performance.gov/GovReform/Reform-and-Reorg-Plan-Final.pdf. 10 Reviewing the Administration’s Government Reorganization Proposal: Hearing Before the S. 

Comm. on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 115th Cong. (2018). 11 Reviewing the Administration’s Government Reorganization Proposal: Hearing Before the S. 

Comm. on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 115th Cong. (2018) (statement of Margaret Weichert, Deputy Director for Management, Off. of Mgmt. and Budget), available at 

https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Testimony-Weichert-2018–07–18.pdf. 12The Challenges and Opportunities of the Proposed Government Reorganization on OPM and 

GSA: Hearing Before the Subcomm. On Regulatory Affairs and Fed. Mgmt. of the S. Comm. on 

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 115th Cong. (2018). 

21st Century: Reform Plan and Reorganization Recommendations.’’ 6 In the report, OMB noted: 

[T]he public still believes that the Federal Government 

serves critical roles, and in some areas performs them 

well. However, public trust in the Federal Government has 

declined over the last decade, calling into question how 

well the current organizational constructs of Government 

are aligned to meet Americans’ needs in the digital age.7

OMB also noted that this reorganization plan serves as ‘‘a cornerstone to build productive, bipartisan dialogue around realigning the 

Federal Government mission delivery model to make sense in the 

21st Century.’’ 8 In this plan, the Trump Administration offered 32 

cross-agency ideas for reorganizing the Federal Government and 50 

agency-specific proposals to achieve more efficient and effective 

government operations for the public.9

The Committee held a hearing on July 18, 2018, to examine the 

Administration’s reorganization plan with OMB Deputy Director 

for Management Margaret Weichert.10 Ms. Weichert noted in her 

testimony that the reform proposal is a ‘‘starting point for public 

dialogue’’ and further testified: 

At its core, reorganization aims to increase the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability of how government 

serves its people. It’s not uncommon to see a large company change and realign its business model to respond to 

evolving technologies and customer needs. Even though its 

mission and priorities are different, the Federal government should be similarly responsive to changing customer 

expectations and technology-enabled opportunities to enhance mission delivery.11

On July 26, 2018, the Committee’s Subcommittee on Regulatory 

Affairs and Federal Management held a hearing that focused on 

one of the ideas in the plan to reorganize the Office of Personnel 

Management (OPM) by transferring the agency’s human resources 

transactional services to the General Services Administration 

(GSA).12 Then-OPM Director Dr. Jeff Pon testified at the hearing 

[m]erging certain OPM provided services with GSA functions will 

provide increased economies of scale and creates opportunity for 

4 

13 Id. (statement of Dr. Jeff Pon, Director, Off. of Personnel Mgmt.). 14 Id. (statement of Emily Murphy, Administrator, Gen. Serv. Admin.) 15 Id. (statement of Dr. Jeff Pon, Director, Off. of Personnel Mgmt.). 16 U.S. Const. art I. 17 Henry Hogue, Cong. Research Serv., R42852, Presidential Reorganization Authority: History, Recent Initiatives, and Options for Congress 5 (Dec. 11, 2012). 18Legislative Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1933, Pub. L. No. 72–212, §§ 401, 403, 47 

Stat. 413 (1933). 19Legislative Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1933, Pub. L. No. 72–212, §§ 403, 407, 47 

Stat. 413, 414–15 (1933). 20 Henry Hogue, Cong. Research Serv., R42852, Presidential Reorganization Authority: History, Recent Initiatives, and Options for Congress 4 (Dec. 11, 2012). 21 Reorganization Act Amendments of 1984, Pub. L. No. 98–614, 98 Stat. 3192 (1984); Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha, 419 U.S. 919 (1983) (holding the exercise of the 

legislative veto by Congress is unconstitutional). 22 5 U.S.C. § 903(a). The President was not authorized to propose a reorganization plan that 

would create a new executive department, rename an existing executive department, abolish or 

transfer an executive department or independent regulatory agency, or consolidate two or more 

executive departments or two or more independent regulatory agencies. 5 U.S.C. § 905. 

significant cost-avoidance based on reductions in contract and IT 

duplication, as well as increased data sharing and availability.’’ 13

GSA Administrator Emily Murphy added ‘‘[c]entralizing the transaction processing and IT for administrative functions in GSA, 

where it is our mission to provide excellent mission-support services, will allow for OPM to focus on their core strategic mission.’’ 14

Dr. Pon echoed that this reorganization proposal ‘‘is an opportunity 

to elevate the Federal workforce management function and maximize the operational efficiency of human capital services.’’ 15

Although the U.S. Constitution vests in Congress the authority 

to organize the Executive Branch,16 former presidential administrations have asked Congress to grant expedited government reorganization authority to allow it to execute cross-agency government 

reorganizations more efficiently. President Herbert Hoover first requested government reorganization authority, and Congress granted this request in 1932.17 The government reorganization authority 

allowed the President to: transfer independent executive agencies 

and/or their components to another executive department or executive agency; transfer executive agencies from one executive department to another executive department; consolidate or redistribute 

the functions of an executive department or of an executive agency, 

and designate and change the names and functions of any consolidated activity or agency.18 The statute authorized the President to 

issue an executive order directing any of these reorganization activities on his own, and required Congress to issue a resolution of 

disapproval within 60 days before the executive order became effective if it wanted to nullify any provision.19

From this first statute statutory grant in 1932 through the modifications made in 1984, Congress amended, extended, narrowed, or 

reactivated this government reorganization authority 16 times 

under both Republican and Democratic administrations.20

The most recent version of the authority, amended in 1984 pursuant to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Immigration and 

Naturalization Service v. Chadha,21 authorized the President to 

propose a reorganization plan to Congress that: transfers an agency 

or an agency component to another executive agency; abolishes all 

or part of the functions of an agency; consolidates or coordinates 

part of an agency or its functions with another part of the same 

agency; authorizes an officer to delegate any functions; or abolishes 

an agency or an agency component if it would no longer have any 

functions after effectuating the reorganization plan.22 The PresiVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:17 Nov 30, 2018 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR381.XXX SR381
5 

23 5 U.S.C. § 903(b). 24 5 U.S.C. § 903(b). 25 5 U.S.C. § 909–910. 26 5 U.S.C. § 911. 27 5 U.S.C. § 912(a). 28 5 U.S.C. § 912(b). 29 5 U.S.C. § 912(c) 30 5 U.S.C. § 906(a). 31 5 U.S.C. § 908. 32 Henry Hogue, Cong. Research Serv., R42852, Presidential Reorganization Authority: History, Recent Initiatives, and Options for Congress 4 (Dec. 11, 2012). 33 Exec. Order No. 8248, 4 Fed. Reg. 3864 (Sept. 9, 1939). See also Reorganization Plan No. 

1 of 1939, 53 Stat. 1423, (1939) and Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1939, 53 Stat. 1431 (1939). 34 Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1962, 76 Stat. 1253 (1962). 35 Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086 (1970). 36 Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2090 (1970). 37 Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1973, 87 Stat. 1091 (1973). 38 Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 92 Stat. 3788 (1978). 39 Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1978, 92 Stat. 3783 (1978). See also Civil Service Reform Act 

of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95–454, 92 Stat. 1111 (1978). 

dent was required to submit the reorganization plan to Congress 

for approval, along with detailed information about implementation 

of the plan and estimates of expenditures or cost savings for the 

plan; 23 no more than three reorganizations plans could be pending 

before the Congress at any one time.24

Once a plan was submitted to Congress, the House Committee on 

Government Operations and the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs would have 75 calendar days of continuous session 

of Congress to approve or disapprove of the resolution.25 If the committees did not act within this 75-day period, then the resolution 

would be discharged from the committee and placed on the calendar of the House or Senate.26 Once there, any Member of the 

House or Senate could move to proceed to consideration of the bill, 

with the motion not being debatable.27 If the motion was agreed to, 

debate on the resolution was limited to ten hours,28 after which 

time a vote on final passage of the resolution must occur.29 If Congress did not vote on a resolution within 90 days of the plan being 

submitted to Congress, or if Congress voted against the resolution, 

then the resolution was considered to be disapproved by Congress, 

and the President could not implement the reorganization plan 

under the expedited government reorganization authority.30 The 

authority for Congress to receive and consider reorganization plans 

under this expedited congressional procedure expired on December 

31, 1984.31

Between 1932 and 1984, presidents submitted 126 reorganization 

proposals to Congress, of which 93 were implemented and 33 were 

affirmatively rejected by Congress.32 Outcomes of the implemented 

reorganizations included the creation of the Executive Office of the 

President,33 the Office of Science and Technology Policy in the Executive Office of the President,34 the Environmental Protection 

Agency,35 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in 

the Department of Commerce,36 the Drug Enforcement Administration in the Department of Justice,37 the Federal Emergency Management Agency,38 the Office of Personnel Management, the Merit 

Systems Protection Board, and the Federal Labor Relations Authority (in conjunction with the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978),39

and the transfer of international trade policy coordination and neVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:17 Nov 30, 2018 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR381.XXX SR381
6 

40 Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1979, 93 Stat. 1381 (1979). See also Henry Hogue, Cong. Research Serv., R42852, Presidential Reorganization Authority: History, Recent Initiatives, and 

Options for Congress 37 (Dec. 11, 2012) (citing Remarks on Government Reform, 2012 Daily 

Comp. Pres. Doc. 1 (Jan. 13, 2012). 41Press Release, President Barack Obama, President Obama Announces Proposal to Reform, 

Reorganize, and Consolidate Government (Jan. 13, 2012). 42 Henry Hogue, Cong. Research Serv., R42852, Presidential Reorganization Authority: History, Recent Initiatives, and Options for Congress 37 (Dec. 11, 2012) (citing Remarks on Government Reform, 2012 Daily Comp. Pres. Doc. 1 (Jan. 13, 2012). 43Press Release, President Barack Obama, President Obama Announces Proposal to Reform, 

Reorganize, and Consolidate Government (Jan. 13, 2012) 44S. 2129, 112th Cong. (2012). 45S. 2129, 112th Cong., § 2 (2012). 46 Retooling Government for the 21st Century: The President’s Reorganization Plan and Reducing Duplication; Hearing Before the S. Comm. on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 

112th Cong. 112–531 (2012). 

gotiations to the U.S. Trade Representative in the Executive Office 

of the President.40

President Obama asked Congress to reauthorize the government 

reorganization authority in 2012,41 and lamented the absence of 

the authority: 

In 1984 . . . Congress stopped granting [reorganization 

authority]. And when this process was left to follow the 

usual congressional pace and procedures, not surprisingly, 

it bogged down. So congressional committees fought to protect their turf and lobbyists fought to keep things the way 

they were because they were the only ones who could navigate the confusion. And because it’s always easier to add 

than subtract in Washington, inertia prevented any real 

reform from happening. Layers kept getting added on and 

added on and added on.42

As part of his request for the legislation to be reauthorized, 

President Obama indicated that his first reorganization proposal 

submitted to Congress would include consolidating six business and 

trade agencies.43 Senators Joseph Lieberman and Mark Warner introduced legislation one month later in response to President 

Obama’s request for reorganization authority.44 The bill sought to 

reauthorize the 1984 government reorganization authority for a period of two years with a few modifications: it would permit the 

abolishment or transfer of an independent regulatory agency or 

consolidation of two or more independent regulatory agencies, and 

add a requirement that all reorganization proposals submitted to 

Congress by the President either result in a decrease in the number of Federal agencies or in cost savings in performing agency 

functions.45

The Committee held a hearing in March 2012 to discuss the bill 

and President Obama’s reorganization proposal, but the Committee 

never brought the bill to a vote.46

Like the 2012 proposal, S. 3137 would reauthorize the 1984 reorganization authority for a period of two years and require that all 

reorganization proposals submitted either result in a decrease in 

the number of Federal agencies or in cost savings in performing 

agency functions. In addition, it would require the President to provide more information to Congress with a reorganization proposal, 

and would modify the conditions for congressional approval of a reorganization proposal. 

Specifically, S. 3137 would allow the President to submit to Congress a reorganization proposal that includes the creation of a new 

7 

agency that is not part of an existing executive department or 

agency. The bill requires the President to consult with the agencies 

affected by a reorganization proposal, to respond within 30 days to 

any congressional request for background information of a proposal, and to submit to Congress, for oversight purposes, any reorganization plan that the President intends to implement with an 

independent statutory authority rather than reorganization authority. 

The bill prevents a Committee from discharging a proposal or a 

member to move to approve a proposal for 45 days unless the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) submits a cost estimate. It also 

clarifies that the 75-day window for committee consideration of a 

reorganization proposal does not begin until the expiration of this 

45-day period or the issuance of a CBO cost estimate, whichever occurs earlier. 

S. 3137 would extend the debate time on a reorganization proposal once the Senate or House has moved to approve the proposal 

to 30 hours, and prohibits any motion to limit debate. 

As amended, the bill also requires a three-fifths vote in the Senate for approval, unless the resolution for the proposal is co-sponsored by five members of each political party, or independent members who caucus with one of the two parties, in which case the proposal can be approved with a simple majority vote. 

Should Congress approve a reorganization proposal submitted 

under this authority, this bill requires the President to report to 

Congress within one year of approval on the implementation of the 

proposal and any performance improvements, costs, cost savings 

achieved that year, and projected cost savings over the subsequent 

five and ten-year periods. 

III. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 3137 was introduced on June 26, 2018, by Senators Ron Johnson (R–WI) and James Lankford (R–OK). The bill was referred to 

the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on 

June 26, 2018. Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D–ND) was added as a cosponsor to the bill on September 27, 2018. 

The Committee considered S. 3137 at a business meeting on September 26, 2018. Senator Heidi Heitkamp offered an amendment 

that would: prohibit the consideration of any reorganization plan 

until CBO issued a cost estimate for the plan; require OMB to report on the implementation of the reorganization proposal within 

one year of its approval by Congress; require OMB to submit to 

Congress, for oversight purposes, any reorganization plan that the 

President would implement with an independent statutory authority and an explanation of that independent statutory authority; require the President to respond within 30 days to a request from 

Congress for information about a plan; prohibit the consideration 

of a plan if the President had not completely responded to a request from Congress for background information about the plan; 

and require OMB to submit to Congress any alternative reorganization proposals that the President decided not to pursue in a reorganization plan. The amendment would also require three-fifths 

of the members of the Senate to vote for passage of the resolution. 

Senator Heitkamp modified her amendment to: no longer prohibit congressional consideration of a reorganization plan if a reVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:17 Nov 30, 2018 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR381.XXX SR381
8 

47 Business Meeting, S. Comm. on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 115th Cong. 

(Sept. 26, 2018) (statement of Senator Heidi Heitkamp). 48 Business Meeting, S. Comm. on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 115th Cong. 

(Sept. 26, 2018) (statement of Senator Michael Enzi). 49 Business Meeting, S. Comm. on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 115th Cong. 

(Sept. 26, 2018) (statement of James Lankford). 

quest from Congress for background information was outstanding; 

no longer require submission of alternative reorganization proposals; and allow consideration of a reorganization plan upon the 

earlier of either the issuance of a CBO cost estimate or 45 days 

after submission of the plan to Congress. 

At the business meeting, Committee members debated Senator 

Heitkamp’s proposal to require a three-fifths, or 60-vote, threshold. 

Senator Heitkamp argued that a higher vote threshold would require that the proposals be bipartisan: 

I think it is a matter of whether we want to get something done and what we do has permanency . . . . We 

need to sit down in a bipartisan way and com[e] to a conclusion on how we are going to structure and oversee and 

provide the critical kind of permanency—not permanency, 

but the critical stability that we can for State agencies.47

Senators Johnson, Lankford, and Enzi spoke in support of a simple majority threshold. Senator Enzi explained further: 

I have tried to do a number of reorganizations, and there 

is usually bipartisan opposition to a great extent, which 

means there is also bipartisan support to a great extent. 

And I do not think there is anything tougher than making 

some kind of a change that affects perhaps chairmanships 

and jurisdiction, and . . . where the whole committee 

might vote against it because it is infringing on a small 

part of their jurisdiction. You can pass it if you get 51 

votes. I would rather see an amendment that says it has 

to be a bipartisan 51 votes. That might solve the problem 

rather than going to the 60 votes and maybe never being 

able to get any reorganization done.48

After further discussion on the issue, Senator Heitkamp proposed 

modifying her amendment to require that a reorganization plan 

have a 60-vote threshold on the Senate floor, unless the plan is 

sponsored by at least five members from the majority party and 

five members from the minority party; in that case, the plan would 

need a simple majority vote on the Senate floor. 

Senator Lankford concurred with this proposal, noting it was a 

‘‘way to be able to make sure [reorganization] is bipartisan.’’ 49

The Heitkamp amendment, as modified, was adopted favorably 

by voice vote with Senators Johnson, Portman, Lankford, Enzi, 

Hoeven, McCaskill, Heitkamp, Peters, Hassan, Harris, and Jones 

present. The legislation, as amended, was passed by voice vote with 

Senators Johnson, Portman, Lankford, Enzi, Hoeven, McCaskill, 

Heitkamp, Peters, Hassan, Harris, and Jones present. Senator 

Harris voted ‘‘no’’ for the record. 

9 

IV. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE BILL, AS REPORTED

Section 1. Short title 

This section establishes the short title of the bill as the ‘‘Reforming Government Act of 2018.’’ 

Section 2. Providing consolidation authority 

Subsection (a) defines the term ‘‘efficiency-enhancing plan’’ and 

adds ‘‘creation’’ to the definition of ‘‘reorganization.’’ 

Subsection (b) allows reorganization plans to create a new Executive Branch department, abolish, transfer or rename an existing 

Executive Branch department, consolidate two or more Executive 

Branch departments, or create a new Executive Branch agency 

that is not part of an existing Executive Branch or independent 

agency. 

Subsection (b) amends the current reorganization authority statute to require the President to consult with agencies that would be 

affected by a reorganization plan and, in its proposal submitted to 

Congress, to describe how OMB will measure the performance of 

implementation of the reorganization plan. 

Section 3. Duration and scope of authority 

Subsection (a) provides the President with reorganization authority for up to two years after enactment of this bill and requires that 

any plan submitted to Congress must be certified by the OMB Director as likely to result in a reduction in the number of agencies 

or cost savings. Any reorganization proposal submitted to Congress 

will be subject to the congressional approval process under the reorganization authority. The President will also be required to provide to Congress, for oversight purposes, any reorganization plan 

that the President will implement under an independent statutory 

authority and an explanation of that independent statutory authority. 

Subsection (b) requires the President to submit to Congress a report on the implementation of a reorganization plan within one 

year after receiving Congressional approval. This report must describe the steps taken for implementation, any performance improvements that have occurred as a result, the costs expended for 

implementation, and any cost savings achieved as a result. The report must also include five and ten-year projections of cost expenditures for implementation and savings to be achieved. 

Subsection (c) reactivates the statutory rules of the Senate and 

the House of Representatives for consideration of reorganization 

plans for up to two years after enactment of this bill. 

Subsection (d) removes the reference to the 20th century in the 

date for the terms to be used in the joint resolution of a reorganization plan. 

Subsection (e) updates the names of the Committee on Homeland 

Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives in 5 U.S.C. § 910. This subsection also requires CBO 

to conduct a financial analysis of the reorganization proposal, during which the 75-day period for congressional consideration will be 

suspended. Congress may move to discharge the resolution if CBO 

10 

issues a score or if 45 days have passed since the resolution was 

referred to the committee. 

Subsection (f) extends the period of debate for a resolution from 

10 hours to 30 hours and bars any motion to limit debate. Under 

this subsection, if a resolution has 5 cosponsors from the Senate 

majority party and 5 cosponsors from the Senate minority party, or 

independent members who caucus with one of the two parties, then 

a simple majority is needed for passage. If a resolution has any 

fewer than five cosponsors from either party, then three-fifths of 

the members of the Senate must vote for passage. 

Section 4. Severability 

This section provides that, in the event any provision or application of a provision of this bill is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this bill shall not be affected. 

V. EVALUATION OF REGULATORY IMPACT

Pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of 

the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has considered 

the regulatory impact of this bill and determined that the bill will 

have no regulatory impact within the meaning of the rules. The 

Committee agrees with the Congressional Budget Office’s statement that the bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 

mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

VI. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

U.S. CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, Washington, DC, October 22, 2018. 

Hon. RON JOHNSON, 

Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 3137, the Reforming Government Act of 2018. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew Pickford. 

Sincerely, 

KEITH HALL, 

Director. 

Enclosure. 

S. 3137—Reforming Government Act of 2018 

S. 3137 would amend federal law concerning the authority of the 

President to reorganize the federal government. Specifically, the 

bill would authorize the President to develop a plan to reorganize 

the federal government and to present that plan to the Congress 

under an expedited legislative procedure. The new authority would 

last for two years after enactment. The Administration would need 

to report regularly to the Congress on the status, costs, and savings 

of any resulting reorganization. Finally, the Congressional Budget 

11 

Office would be required to prepare a financial analysis of any reorganization plan submitted to the Congress under S. 3137. 

CBO has no basis to estimate the number of government reorganizations that may be proposed under the bill. Executive Order 

13781 required the Office of Management Budget to develop a plan 

to reorganize the executive branch. That plan was released in June 

2018. Any significant budgetary effects from implementing government reorganization plans would depend on future legislation. 

Thus, CBO estimates that implementing S. 3137 would have no 

significant effect on the federal budget because it would not expand 

the duties of executive agencies. 

Enacting S. 3137 would not affect direct spending or revenues; 

therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. 

CBO estimates that enacting S. 3137 would not significantly increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four 

consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2029. 

S. 3137 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Matthew Pickford. The 

estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant 

Director for Budget Analysis. 

VII. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill, as 

reported, are shown as follows: (existing law proposed to be omitted 

is enclosed in brackets, new matter is printed in italic, and existing 

law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

UNITED STATES CODE 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE 5—GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND 

EMPLOYEES 

* * * * * * * 

PART I—THE AGENCIES GENERALLY 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 9—EXECUTIVE REORGANIZATION 

* * * * * * * 

Table of Sections. 

Sec. 901. * * * 

Sec. 902. * * * 

Sec. 903. øReorganization plans¿ Reorganization plans; permissible actions. 

Sec. 904. øAdditional contents of the reorganization plan¿ Contents of reorganization 

plans; amendment procedures. 

* * * * * * * 

Sec. 902. Definitions. 

* * * * * * * 

12 

(1) * * * 

ø(2) ‘‘reorganization’’ means a transfer, consolidation, coordination, authorization, or abolition, referred to in section 903 of 

this title; and¿ (2) ‘‘efficiency-enhancing plan’’ means a reorganization plan that the Director of the Office of Management and 

Budget determines will result in, or is likely to result in— (A) a decrease in the number of agencies; or 

(B) cost savings in performing the functions that are the 

subject of that plan;’’ 

(3) ‘‘officer’’ is not limited by section 2104 of this title ø.¿; 

and 

(4) ‘‘reorganization’’ means a transfer, consolidation, coordination, authorization, abolition, or creation, referred to in section 903 of this title. 

Sec. 903. Reorganization plans; permissible actions. 

ø(a) Whenever¿ Whenever the President, after investigation, 

finds that changes in the organization of agencies are necessary to 

carry out any policy set forth in section 901(a) of this title, he shall 

prepare a reorganization plan specifying the reorganizations he 

finds are necessary. Any plan may provide for— 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(5) the authorization of an officer to delegate any of his functions; øor¿ 

(6) the abolition of the whole or a part of an agency which 

agency or part does not have, or on the taking effect of the reorganization plan will not have, any functions ø.¿; or 

(7) the creation of a new agency that is not a component or 

part of an existing executive department or independent agency. 

øThe President shall transmit the plan (bearing an identification number) to the Congress together with a declaration 

that, with respect to each reorganization included in the plan, 

he has found that the reorganization is necessary to carry out 

any policy set forth in section 901(a) of this title.¿ 

ø(b) The President shall have a reorganization plan delivered to 

both Houses on the same day and to each House while it is in session, except that no more than three plans may be pending before 

the Congress at one time. In his message transmitting a reorganization plan, the President shall specify with respect to each abolition of a function included in the plan the statutory authority for 

the exercise of the function. The message shall also estimate any 

reduction or increase in expenditures (itemized so far as practicable), and describe any improvements in management, delivery 

of Federal services, execution of the laws, and increases in efficiency of Government operations, which it is expected will be realized as a result of the reorganizations included in the plan. In addition, the President’s message shall include an implementation section which shall (1) describe in detail (A) the actions necessary or 

planned to complete the reorganization, (B) the anticipated nature 

and substance of any orders, directives, and other administrative 

and operational actions which are expected to be required for completing or implementing the reorganization, and (C) any preliminary actions which have been taken in the implementation process, 

and (2) contain a projected timetable for completion of the impleVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:17 Nov 30, 2018 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR381.XXX SR381
13 

mentation process. The President shall also submit such further 

background or other information as the Congress may require for 

its consideration of the plan. 

ø(c) Any time during the period of 60 calendar days of continuous 

session of Congress after the date on which the plan is transmitted 

to it, but before any resolution described in section 909 has been 

ordered reported in either House, the President may make amendments or modifications to the plan, consistent with sections 903– 

905 of this title, which modifications or revisions shall thereafter 

be treated as part of the reorganization plan originally transmitted 

and shall not affect in any way the time limits otherwise provided 

for in this chapter. The President may withdraw the plan any time 

prior to the conclusion of 90 calendar days of continuous session of 

Congress following the date on which the plan is submitted to Congress.¿ 

Sec. 904. øAdditional contents of reorganization plans¿ Contents of reorganization plans; amendment procedures. 

øA reorganization plan transmitted by the President under section 903 of this title—¿ 

(a) A reorganization plan prepared by the President under section 

903— 

ø(1) may, subject to section 905, change, in such cases as the 

President considers necessary, the name of an agency affected 

by a reorganization and the title of its head, and shall designate the name of an agency resulting from a reorganization 

and the title of its head; 

ø(2) may provide for the appointment and pay of the head 

and one or more officers of any agency (including an agency resulting from a consolidation or other types of reorganization) if 

the President finds, and in his message transmitting the plan 

declares, that by reason of a reorganization made by the plan 

the provisions are necessary; 

ø(3) shall provide for the transfer or other disposition of the 

records, property, and personnel affected by a reorganization; 

ø(4) shall provide for the transfer of such unexpended balances of appropriations, and of other funds, available for use 

in connection with a function or agency affected by a reorganization, as the President considers necessary by reason of the 

reorganization for use in connection with the functions affected 

by the reorganization, or for the use of the agency which shall 

have the functions after the reorganization plan is effective; 

and 

(5) shall provide for terminating the affairs of an agency 

abolished.¿ 

(1) shall be transmitted by the President (bearing an identification number) to Congress together with a declaration that, 

with respect to each reorganization included in the plan, the 

President has found, in consultation with the affected agencies, 

that the reorganization is necessary to carry out a policy set 

forth in section 901(a); 

(2) shall be delivered to both Houses on the same day and to 

each House while it is in session; 

(3) shall specify, with respect to each transfer, consolidation, 

coordination, authorization, abolition, or creation of a function 

14 

included in the plan, the statutory authority for the exercise of 

the function; 

(4) shall— 

(A) provide a financial analysis estimating any reduction 

or increase in expenditures (itemized so far as practicable) 

associated with maximizing the net benefits of implementation of the plan, using both quantitative and qualitative 

measures, according to cost-benefit analysis practices set by 

Executive orders and the Office of Management and Budget; and 

(B) describe any improvements in management, delivery 

of Federal services, or execution of the laws and any increases in efficiency of Government operations that are expected to be realized as a result of the reorganizations included in the plan; 

(5) shall include an implementation section that shall— 

(A) describe in detail— 

(i) the actions necessary or planned to complete the 

reorganization; 

(ii) the anticipated nature and substance of any orders, directives, or other administrative or operational 

actions that are expected to be required for completing 

or implementing the reorganization; and 

(iii) any preliminary actions that have been taken in 

the implementation process; 

(B) contain a projected timetable for completion of the 

implementation process; and 

(C) describe how the affected agencies and the Office of 

Management and Budget will measure performance of the 

implementation of the reorganization plan; 

(6) shall provide for the transfer or other disposition of the 

records, property, and personnel affected by a reorganization; 

(7) shall provide for the transfer of unexpended balances of 

appropriations, and of other funds, available for use in connection with a function or agency affected by a reorganization, to 

the extent— 

(A) with respect to unexpended balances, the balances 

will be used for the purposes for which the appropriation 

was originally made; and 

(B) the President considers necessary by reason of the reorganization for use in connection with the functions affected by the reorganization, or for the use of the agency 

which shall have the functions after the reorganization 

plan is effective; 

(8) shall provide for terminating the affairs of an agency 

abolished; 

(9) may, subject to section 905, change, in such cases as the 

President considers necessary, the name of an agency affected 

by a reorganization and the title of its head, and shall designate the name of an agency resulting from a reorganization 

and the title of its head; and 

(10) may provide for the appointment and pay of the head 

and one or more officers of any agency (including an agency resulting from a consolidation or other types of reorganization) if 

the President finds, and in his message transmitting the plan 

15 

declares, that by reason of a reorganization made by the plan 

the provisions are necessary. 

øA reorganization plan transmitted by the President containing 

provisions authorized by paragraph (2) of this section may provide 

that the head of the agency be an individual or a commission or 

board with more than one member. In the case of an appointment 

of the head of such an agency, the term of office may not be fixed 

at more than four years, the pay may not be at a rate in excess 

of that found by the President to be applicable to comparable officers in the executive branch, and if the appointment is not to a position in the competitive service, it shall be by the President, by 

and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Any reorganization 

plan transmitted by the President containing provisions required 

by paragraph (4) of this section shall provide for the transfer of unexpended balances only if such balances are used for the purposes 

for which the appropriation was originally made.¿ 

(b) Not later than 30 days after the date of the request, the President shall submit to Congress any background or other information 

requested by Congress in connection with its consideration of a reorganization plan. 

(c) Any time during the period of 60 calendar days of continuous 

session of Congress after the date on which a reorganization plan 

is transmitted to Congress, unless a resolution described in section 

909 relating to the plan has been ordered reported in either House, 

the President may make amendments or modifications to the plan, 

consistent with sections 903 and 905 and this section, which modifications or revisions shall thereafter be treated as part of the reorganization plan originally transmitted and shall not affect the time 

limits otherwise provided for in this chapter. The President may 

withdraw the plan any time before the end of the period of 90 calendar days of continuous session of Congress following the date on 

which the plan is submitted to Congress. 

(d) A reorganization plan transmitted by the President in accordance with subsection (a)(10)— 

(1) may not eliminate an enforcement function or statutory 

program; 

(2) may provide that the head of any agency be an individual 

or a commission or board with more than 1 member; and 

(3) in the case of an appointment of the head of such an agency— 

(A) may not fix the term of office at more than 4 years; 

(B) may not fix the rate of basic pay to be in excess of the 

amount found by the President to be applicable to comparable officers in the executive branch; and 

(C) if the appointment is not to a position in the competitive service, shall require appointment to the position to be 

by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the 

Senate. 

(e) Not more than 3 reorganization plans may be pending before 

Congress at 1 time. 

Sec. 905. Limitation on powers. 

(a) * * * 

(1) øcreating a new executive department or renaming an existing executive department,¿ abolishing or transferring an 

øexecutive department or¿ independent regulatory agency, or 

16 

all the functions thereof, or consolidating øtwo or more executive departments or two¿ 2 or more independent regulatory 

agencies, or all the functions thereof; 

* * * * * * * 

ø(5) creating a new agency which is not a component or part 

of an existing executive department or independent agency;¿ 

ø(6)¿ (5) increasing the term of an office beyond that provided by law for the office; or 

ø(7)¿ (6) dealing with more than one logically consistent subject matter. 

(b) A provision contained in the reorganization plan may take effect only øif the plan is transmitted to Congress (in accordance 

with section 903(b)) on or before December 31, 1984.¿ if the plan 

is— 

(1) transmitted to Congress (in accordance with section 904 

on or before the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment 

of the Reforming Government Act of 2018; and 

(2) an efficiency enhancing plan. 

(c) Any reorganization plan prepared by the President (in accordance with section 903 and subsection (a) of this section) that purports to advance the policies described in section 901(a) shall be 

subject to the approval process under this chapter, absent an independent statutory authority to implement the plan. If the President 

implements a reorganization plan that advances policies described 

in section 901(a) and relies on an independent statutory authority, 

the President shall transmit to Congress an explanation of the plan 

and its independent statutory authority consistent with the requirement of section 903 and 904 and this section, which Congress may 

use, at its discretion, to conduct oversight of the reorganization plan 

for any purpose consistent with the mandates of Congress under Article I of the Constitution of the United States. 

Sec. 906. Effective date and publication of reorganization plans. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(e) Not later than 1 year after the date on which a reorganization 

plan takes effect, and upon request by any Member of Congress, the 

President shall transmit to Congress a report describing in detail— 

(1) the steps taken to implements the reorganization plan; 

(2) any improvements to performance that occurred as a result of implementation of the reorganization plan; 

(3) the costs expended and amounts saved during the period 

beginning on the date on which the reorganization plan took effect and ending on the date on which the report is submitted; 

and 

(4) the costs projected to be expended and amounts projected 

to be saved during— 

(A) the period beginning on the date on which the reorganization plan took effect and ending on the date that is 5 

years after that effective date; and 

(B) the period beginning on the date on which the reorganization plan took effect and ending on the date that is 10 

years after that effective date. 

* * * * * * * 

17 

Sec. 908. Rules of the Senate and House of Representatives on reorganization plans. 

Sections 909 through 912 of this title are enacted by Congress— 

(1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate and 

the House of Representatives, respectively, and as such they 

are deemed a part of the rules of each House, respectively, but 

applicable only with respect to the procedure to be followed in 

that House in the case of resolutions with respect to any reorganization plans transmitted to Congress (in accordance with 

øsection 903(b) of this chapter) on or before December 31, 

1984¿ section 904) on or before the date that is 2 years after the 

date of enactment of the Reforming Government Act of 2018. 

* * * * * * * 

Sec. 909. Terms of resolution. 

For the purpose of sections 908 through 912 of this title, ‘‘resolution’’ means only a joint resolution of the Congress, øthe matter 

after the resolving clause of which is as follows: ‘‘That the Congress 

approves the reorganization plan numbered transmitted to 

the Congress by the President on , 19 .’’, and includes 

such modifications¿ the matter after the resolving clause of which 

is as follows: ‘‘That the Congress approves the reorganization plan 

numbered ll transmitted to the Congress by the President on 

ll, .’’, and includes such modifications and revisions as are submitted by the President under øsection 903(c) of this chapter¿ section 904(c). The blank spaces are to be filled appropriately. The 

term does not include a resolution which specifies more than one 

reorganization plan. 

* * * * * * * 

Sec. 910. Introduction and reference of resolution. 

(a) No later than the first day of session following the day on 

which a reorganization plan is transmitted to the House of Representatives and the Senate under section ø903¿ 904, a resolution, 

as defined in section 909, shall be introduced (by request) in the 

House by the chairman of the øGovernment Operations Committee 

of the House¿ Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of 

the House of Representatives, or by a Member or Members of the 

House designated by such chairman; and shall be introduced (by 

request) in the Senate by the chairman of the øGovernmental Affairs Committee of the Senate¿ Committee on Homeland Security 

and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, or by a Member of Members of the Senate designated by such chairman. 

(b) A resolution with respect to a reorganization plan shall be referred to the øCommittee on Governmental Affairs of the Senate 

and the Committee on Government Operations of the House¿ Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the 

House of Representatives, as the case may be. The committee shall 

make its recommendations to the House of Representatives or the 

Senate, respectively, within 75 calendar days of continuous session 

of Congress following the date of such resolution’s introduction. 

(c)(1) After a resolution with respect to a reorganization plan is 

referred to committee under subsection (b), the Congressional BudgVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:17 Nov 30, 2018 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR381.XXX SR381
18 

et Office shall perform a financial analysis of the reorganization 

plan. 

(2) The 75-day period under subsection (b) and section 911 shall 

be tolled and it shall not be in order in the Senate or House of Representatives for a committee to report or for a Member to move to 

discharge a resolution until the earlier of— 

(A) 45 days after the date on which the resolution was referred to the committee; or 

(B) the date on which the committee receives the financial 

analysis of the Congressional Budget Office. 

* * * * * * * 

Sec. 912. Procedure after report or discharge of committee; debate; vote on 

final passage. 

(a) * * * 

(b) Debate on the resolution, and on all debatable motions and 

appeals in connection therewith, shall be limited to not more than 

øten¿ 30 hours, which shall be divided equally between individuals 

favoring and individuals opposing the resolution. A motion to further limit debate øis in order and not debatable¿ is not in order. 

An amendment to, or a motion to postpone, or a motion to proceed 

to the consideration of other business, or a motion to recommit the 

resolution is not in order. A motion to reconsider the vote by which 

the resolution is passed or rejected shall not be in order. 

ø(c) Immediately following the conclusion of the debate on the 

resolution with respect to a reorganization plan, and a single 

quorum call at the conclusion of the debate if requested in accordance with the rules of the appropriate House, the vote on final passage of the resolution shall occur.¿ 

(c)(1)(A) In the Senate, immediately following the conclusion of 

the period of debate on a resolution relating to a reorganization 

plan under subsection (b), including any debate on any motions and 

appeals, and a single quorum call at the conclusion of the debate, 

if requested in accordance with the rules of the Senate, the Senate 

shall vote on passage of the resolution. 

(B) A vote under subparagraph (A) shall be agreed to only upon 

the affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members, duly chosen and 

sworn, unless the resolution is cosponsored by not less than 5 Senators who are members of, or caucus with, the party in the minority 

in the Senate and by not less than 5 Senators who are members of, 

or caucus with, the party in the majority in the Senate, in which 

case the resolution shall be agreed to upon an affirmative vote of a 

majority of those voting, a quorum being present. 

(2) In the House of Representatives, immediately following the 

conclusion of the debate on the resolution with respect to a reorganization plan, and a single quorum call at the conclusion of the debate if requested in accordance with the rules of the House of Representatives, the House of Representatives shall vote on passage of 

the resolution. 

Æ