Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management.
The bill ("Stop Wasteful Allocations of Money for Pelosi Act" or "SWAMP Act") directs the General Services Administration (GSA) to dispose of the federally owned property at 90 7th St, San Francisco (the Speaker Nancy Pelosi Federal Building). The Administrator must either dispose of the property under the statutory disposal process or, if that is infeasible, sell it at fair market value for highest and best use, with a deadline of May 31, 2025.
Progressives view this as politicized sell-off; conservatives see fiscal accountability.
Narrow administrative bill could pass a supportive House majority, but partisan naming and symbolic intent reduce bipartisan support.
The bill ("Stop Wasteful Allocations of Money for Pelosi Act" or "SWAMP Act") directs the General Services Administration (GSA) to dispose of the federally owned property at 90 7th St, San Francisco (the Speaker Nancy Pelosi Federal Building).
The Administrator must either dispose of the property under the statutory disposal process or, if that is infeasible, sell it at fair market value for highest and best use, with a deadline of May 31, 2025.
Very low: administratively simple but politically symbolic; unlikely to attract the broad consensus needed for final enactment.
How solid the drafting looks.
Progressives view this as politicized sell-off; conservatives see fiscal accountability.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives view this as politicized sell-off; conservatives see fiscal accountability.
Likely views the bill as a politically motivated targeting of a building named for a prominent Democratic leader and as an unnecessary sell-off of public assets.
Concerns will focus on potential loss of federal services, community impact, and precedent for politically driven disposals.
Approaches the bill pragmatically: asset disposition can be reasonable if legally and fiscally prudent, but the tight deadline and political framing raise concerns.
Wants adherence to established disposal rules and protections for continuity of services.
Likely supports the bill as a way to shrink federal footprint, recover funds, and remove a building named after a political opponent.
Sees it as fiscally sensible and symbolically appropriate.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Very low: administratively simple but politically symbolic; unlikely to attract the broad consensus needed for final enactment.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives view this as politicized sell-off; conservatives see fiscal accountability.
Very low: administratively simple but politically symbolic; unlikely to attract the broad consensus needed for final enactment.
Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for SWAMP Act.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.