S. 22 (119th)Bill Overview

SWAMP Act

Government Operations and Politics|Building constructionDistrict of Columbia
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Jan 7, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

The SWAMP Act bars Executive agency headquarters from being located in the Washington metropolitan area, with a limited grandfathering exception for agencies already located there. It requires the GSA to create a competitive process for states or subdivisions to bid to host relocated headquarters, using criteria like economic impact, mission expertise, and national security.

Why people may split

Liberals stress workforce protections and service continuity.

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly scoped administrative measure that places new constraints on where Executive agency headquarters may be located and directs the Administrator of General Services to create a competitive solicitation process for relocations.

The SWAMP Act bars Executive agency headquarters from being located in the Washington metropolitan area, with a limited grandfathering exception for agencies already located there.

It requires the GSA to create a competitive process for states or subdivisions to bid to host relocated headquarters, using criteria like economic impact, mission expertise, and national security.

The bill allows GSA to use proceeds from Federal property sales to offset relocation costs and forbids new appropriations for implementation.

Passage30/100

Sweeping relocation mandate, local opposition, fiscal and implementation uncertainties, and procedural hurdles make enactment unlikely absent major changes.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly scoped administrative measure that places new constraints on where Executive agency headquarters may be located and directs the Administrator of General Services to create a competitive solicitation process for relocations. It specifies some substantive mechanics and funding limits but leaves considerable implementation detail to GSA rulemaking or later action.

Contention65/100

Liberals stress workforce protections and service continuity.

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Local governments · Federal agenciesFederal agencies

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Local governmentsWinning states could gain jobs and local economic activity from relocated headquarters.
  • Federal agenciesThe law could reduce federal workforce concentration in the Washington area, increasing geographic equity.
  • Federal agenciesRelocations may lower overall federal office and lease costs through sales and cheaper regional rents.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesRelocation may disrupt agency operations and reduce interagency coordination centered in Washington.
  • Potential burdenAgencies could lose timely access to Congress, stakeholders, and policy networks located in DC.
  • Potential burdenRecruitment and retention of specialized staff could worsen if employees decline relocation.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Liberals stress workforce protections and service continuity.
Progressive60%

Mainstream progressives would view the bill as having potential for positive geographic economic redistribution but worry about worker impacts and mission disruption.

They would support decentralizing federal economic benefits if relocation safeguards protect employees, collective bargaining rights, and service continuity.

Concerns include loss of institutional knowledge, access to Congress and stakeholders, and insufficient funding or worker protections in the text.

Split reaction
Centrist55%

A moderate would see pragmatic reasons for decentralization but want clearer cost, security, and operational analyses.

They would appreciate competitive bidding and public comment, while pressing for rigorous cost-benefit studies, timelines, and contingency plans to avoid mission impairment.

The centrist view emphasizes careful implementation, transparency, and protecting national security and workforce continuity.

Split reaction
Conservative85%

Mainstream conservatives are likely to favor the bill for decentralizing federal presence and curbing Washington-centric influence.

They will view competitive bidding as a market-oriented approach to site selection and praise the sale-offset provision to avoid new spending.

Some conservatives may still seek stronger limits on federal bureaucracy or more aggressive property sales.

Leans supportive
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood30/100

Sweeping relocation mandate, local opposition, fiscal and implementation uncertainties, and procedural hurdles make enactment unlikely absent major changes.

Scope and complexity
86%
Scopesweeping
52%
Complexitymedium
Why this could stall
  • No cost estimate or GAO/CBO analysis included
  • Level of interest from States to host HQs
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Liberals stress workforce protections and service continuity.

Sweeping relocation mandate, local opposition, fiscal and implementation uncertainties, and procedural hurdles make enactment unlikely abse…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly scoped administrative measure that places new constraints on where Executive agency headquarters may be located and directs the Administrator of General…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis