- Potential benefitMaintains legislative branch funding, supporting staff and contractor employment across congressional operations.
- Potential benefitIncreases Capitol Police and security funding, potentially strengthening protection for Members and visitors.
- Potential benefitProvides funds for CBO technical upgrades, improving transparency and availability of budget models and data.
Making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027, and for other purposes.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 580.
This bill is the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2027, allocating funds for the House of Representatives, Capitol Police, Library of Congress, Government Publishing Office, Government Accountability Office, Congressional Budget Office, Architect of the Capitol, and other legislative branch entities. It specifies dollar amounts for salaries, operations, capital projects, and accounts, and includes policy riders restricting certain procurements (notably from specified Chinese-linked entities), capping some member vehicle lease reimbursements, pausing a Congressional COLA for 2027, requiring in-person workplace training for Members under public ethical investigation, and other administrative conditions and limitations.
Security spending scale: liberal reservations vs conservative support
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-specified appropriations measure that clearly allocates funds, integrates with existing statutes, and includes targeted operational restrictions and conditions.
This bill is the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2027, allocating funds for the House of Representatives, Capitol Police, Library of Congress, Government Publishing Office, Government Accountability Office, Congressional Budget Office, Architect of the Capitol, and other legislative branch entities.
It specifies dollar amounts for salaries, operations, capital projects, and accounts, and includes policy riders restricting certain procurements (notably from specified Chinese-linked entities), capping some member vehicle lease reimbursements, pausing a Congressional COLA for 2027, requiring in-person workplace training for Members under public ethical investigation, and other administrative conditions and limitations.
Routine annual Legislative Branch funding has a modestly high chance, but nontechnical policy riders raise likelihood of negotiation or modification before final enactment.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-specified appropriations measure that clearly allocates funds, integrates with existing statutes, and includes targeted operational restrictions and conditions.
Security spending scale: liberal reservations vs conservative support
Who stands to gain, and who may push back.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
- Potential burdenProcurement bans narrow vendor choices, which may increase acquisition costs or complicate replacements.
- Potential burdenRequiring in-person workplace-misconduct training for investigated Members could create scheduling burdens and complian…
- Potential burdenCapping vehicle lease payments at $1,000 per month limits Member flexibility and could shift costs.
Why the argument around this bill splits.
Security spending scale: liberal reservations vs conservative support
Likely supportive of funding for libraries, CBO, GAO, and intern programs, while cautious about expanded security spending and procurement restrictions that could impede access or services.
Will view some riders (e.g., procurement bans) as defensible on national security grounds but want protections for civil liberties and labor.
May be concerned that austerity riders (no COLA, vehicle lease caps) are symbolic rather than substantive savings.
Generally favorable: funds key legislative functions, oversight, and security while including fiscally sensible riders.
Sees procurement restrictions as appropriate risk-management but wants clear implementation guidance.
Balances support for member services with modest cost controls like lease caps and COLA pause.
Likely supportive overall: funds security, oversight, and core operations while advancing priorities on China-related procurement limits, fiscal restraint measures, and limits on contractor incentives.
Views vehicle lease cap and COLA freeze as prudent.
May push for even tighter spending or more explicit anti-China language.
The path through Congress.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Routine annual Legislative Branch funding has a modestly high chance, but nontechnical policy riders raise likelihood of negotiation or modification before final enactment.
- Whether controversial riders will be retained in final negotiations
- How Senate amendment process will change funding or riders
Recent votes on the bill.
No vote history yet
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Go deeper than the headline read.
Security spending scale: liberal reservations vs conservative support
Routine annual Legislative Branch funding has a modestly high chance, but nontechnical policy riders raise likelihood of negotiation or mod…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-specified appropriations measure that clearly allocates funds, integrates with existing statutes, and includes targeted operational restrictions and conditi…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.