Tag Archive for: Congressional Oversight

New Bill Gives Trump the Legal Power to ‘Reform Our Government and Drain the Swamp’

Two congressional conservatives have introduced a bill that would give legal authorization for President Donald Trump to slash the federal workforce, stop harmful government programs, and even close entire executive departments without fear an activist judge will stop his money-saving reforms by judicial fiat.

Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) introduced the Reorganizing Government Act of 2025 in the House of Representatives (H.R. 1295), while Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) introduced the companion bill in the Senate (S.583). The bill would give the president a freer hand to shuffle, pare back, or eliminate tasks inside the federal bureaucracy until December 31, 2026.

“Americans elected [President Trump] to reform our government and drain the Swamp,” announced Lee Wednesday afternoon on X, retweeting a video of Comer’s appearance on “Washington Watch” originally posted by host Tony Perkins. “Our bill gives him even more tools to do so.”

The measure — which passed the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s markup hearing on March 25 by a 23-20 party-line vote — further gives the president the authority to order “the elimination of operations determined to be unnecessary for the execution of constitutional duties.” The president may also act “to reduce the number of federal employees”; eliminate unnecessary and burdensome rules, regulations, and other requirements”; or close “executive departments” as necessary “to eliminate government operations that do not serve the public interest.”

“President Trump campaigned on reorganizing the federal government. We want to get rid of some agencies that have become obsolete. We want to return power and decision-making back to the states and local governments, especially with respect to education. And what my bill does will codify the law,” Comer told “Washington Watch” the day before the bill cleared committee. “It’s very important that this gets passed into law so that some judge doesn’t try to kick [President Trump’s plans] out — or the next administration, whoever that might be, doesn’t try to end the executive orders. We want this to be the law of the land. We believe that we have the votes in Congress to do that.”

The Trump administration’s foes have targeted the administration by filing lawsuits in liberal jurisdictions and then extracting national injunctions against the administration’s policies. The controversial tactic has led constitutionalists to call for the prudent use of judicial impeachments.

“We know that any member of Congress [who] would oppose this reorganization is opposing the mandate that President Trump received,” Comer assessed.

Presidents have a long history of receiving, or requesting, legislation to remake the federal workforce. “This type of presidential reorganization has been employed 16 different times between 1932 and 1981 and has been granted to nine presidents, including John F. KennedyRonald Reagan and Richard Nixon,” according to Deseret News, based in Lee’s home state of Utah. “Reagan was the last president granted the Congress-approved reorganization authority” in 1984, “and he used it to dismantle the Community Services Administration and change the U.S.

Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama requested authorization to reorganize the government without success.

“Between 1932 and 1984, presidents submitted more than 100 plans under this authority,” reported GovExec.com.

If the bill passes, President Trump would have to submit his plan for government reorganization for congressional approval within 90 days. However, the Senate would not be able to filibuster the plan, allowing its cost-saving efficiencies to clear the closely divided chamber with a majority vote, rather than the 60 votes necessary for cloture.

However, Senate Democrats can filibuster the Reorganizing Government Act itself, preventing it from reaching the Oval Office for President Trump’s signature.

“This legislation allows the president to use his constitutional authority as chief executive to reorganize federal agencies, eliminate weaponization, and right-size the government to better serve the American people. Congress cannot afford to sit on its hands in this fight,” insisted Senator Lee. “Reauthorizing presidential reorganization authority is the most comprehensive tool that the president can use to restore good governance to Washington.”

“With a federal budget that has grown from $3.6 billion to $7.3 trillion and over 400 executive agencies, streamlining government operations is essential for cost savings and improved service delivery,” announced the House Oversight Committee.

Despite the passing of the COVID lockdowns, Congress has continued record-breaking COVID-era levels of federal spending. The national debt now tops $36 trillion, and the government paid an unprecedented $1.2 trillion in interest on the debt alone.

“I don’t think anyone with any common sense would think that we can continue to spend $2 trillion a year more than we take in. We have to reduce unnecessary and wasteful spending,” said Comer. “We can do that by reducing the unneeded bureaucracies in America. And I think that that that’s what [The Reorganizing Government Act] will do. And hopefully, this bill has the blessing of President Trump and his entire Cabinet. It’s something that needs to happen.”

His colleague, Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), has proposed one of the most ambitious proposals: cutting $2.5 trillion from the federal budget over 10 years. Comer lamented, “The Democrats think that you solve every problem in America by creating another government agency.”

Comer predicted, in the end, every competent member of the federal workforce would line up behind his legislative initiative. “If I were a federal employee who actually went to work every day and worked hard on the front lines, I would be applauding these changes,” said Comer. “We’re going to restore some common sense into some of the federal government decision-making that happens on the front lines in America every day.”

“I hope in the next two or three weeks it will be on the House floor,” Comer anticipated.

“You’ll see: There won’t be a single Democrat vote for it,” he said.

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Biden Admin. Stonewalls Congressional Investigation into Assassination Attempt

The Biden administration has intervened to prevent the Secret Service from briefing a House committee investigating the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump, a member of the committee told Family Research Council.

“After the Secret Service agreed to brief members of the House Oversight Committee on Tuesday, the Department of Homeland Security took over communications with the committee and has since refused to confirm a briefing time,” said a statement from the Oversight Committee emailed to FRC from Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.). “The Oversight Committee has a long record of bipartisan oversight of the Secret Service, and the unprofessionalism we are witnessing from the current DHS leadership is unacceptable.”

“We were scheduled for a first briefing today,” confirmed Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas), but “DHS has stepped in between the communications now of the Secret Service and the Oversight Committee, and are now trying to control the communication between the two committees.”

“Already they’re obfuscating, it would seem,” said Cloud.

The briefing to the House Oversight Committee would precede a full committee hearing on the Trump assassination attempt with the director of the Secret Service, Kim Cheatle, next Monday, July 22, at 10 a.m. Cloud noted that Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) has issued subpoenas to assure Cheatle shows up.

At least three congressional committees are now investigating the near-fatal shooting in Butler, Pa. last Saturday. In addition to the House Oversight Committee hearing, Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) announced the House Judiciary Committee plans to question FBI Director Christopher Wray next Wednesday. And the House Committee on Homeland Security, led by Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.), will interview the leaders of the DHS, FBI, and Secret Service.

“The United States Secret Service has a no-fail mission, yet it failed on Saturday when a madman attempted to assassinate President Trump, killed an innocent victim, and harmed others. … [Q]uestions remain about how a rooftop within proximity to President Trump was left unsecure,” said Comer. “Americans demand answers from Director Kimberly Cheatle about these security lapses and how we can prevent this from happening again.”

Several questions hang over the Secret Service’s handling of the near-fatal shooting by 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks, who fired eight shots from the top of the AGR International Inc. factory.

Tim Miller, a former Secret Service agent and founder of Lionheart International Services Group, told Perkins, “One of the first things you start with as a site agent, and we learned this in November of 1963,” is to ask, “‘Where are the high places where someone with a rifle could shoot and kill the president?’”

“Unfortunately, the biggest thing that we look at from day one was missed,” said Miller.

Cheatle admitted she placed agents inside the building from which the shooter staged his attempted murder instead of on top of it, because the structure had a sloped roof. Apparently, the Secret Service inside the building could not hear the shooter climbing the side of the business and walking on the roof above them.

Numerous eyewitnesses alerted law enforcement to the presence of a man on the roof with a rifle.

A policeman from the Beaver County Emergency Services Unit took a picture of Crooks and called in a suspicious presence at 5:45 p.m., 28 minutes before the shooting, according to local reporter Nicole Ford of WPXI.

Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.) told CNN Tuesday morning that the Secret Service’s serial failures were so amateurish that authorities must investigate whether they were “intentional,” or merely incompetence. “The amount of negligence, the amount of mistakes that were made here, I have a very difficult time not leading myself towards [thinking] this was intentional instead of fecklessness.” He called for Congress to establish a “J-13 commission,” apparently similar to the January 6 Committee.

“These are not difficult advances,” said Mills, a former military sniper. “This is not a political thing,” he said. The American people need “a proper investigation on all levels to ensure this doesn’t happen again and our president can be safe.”

“I’ve been making my own calls to Secret Service agents that I know that are willing to talk to me off the record. And there are a lot of severe problems,” revealed Biggs on “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” Tuesday. “I would like to find out who is the lead agent who got there and ran the advance. I want to see what the agent asked for as far as material, manpower, etc., and whether he was denied some of that. The other thing I would like to know is where [were] the counter snipers? Were they green-lighted, or were they told that they were going to have to hold? And if they were told they were going to have to hold, I want to know who the supervisor was who made the determination to hold. And when they saw the actual shooter.”

Like many others, Biggs blamed a politically correct culture focused on “equity” rather than quality in hiring Secret Service agents.

“Cheatle has put a focus on DEI,” said Biggs. Cheatle announced she aimed to assure that 30% of Secret Service agents are female by 2030. In 2021, more women than men graduated from the service’s training classes. “This is all about DEI,” said Biggs. He charged Cheatle with laying aside “merit-based hirings” and becoming “willing to take anybody that she thinks” meets “her diversity goals.”

“That’s not the way their mission is designed,” said Biggs. “The DEI hires are so bad.”

Several female Secret Service agents appeared unable to cover Trump’s head on Saturday evening, or even to holster their pistols safely.

Miller said, due to the director’s laser-like focus on DEI — which the Biden-Harris administration has made a whole-of-government undertaking — members of preferred classes “are not being evaluated” thoroughly before being hired. “They’re actually saying, ‘Oh, well, you’re this particular group, so come on in.’ And I think that will compromise the mission.”

“There are a lot of problems and challenges,” said Miller. “And it starts with saying, ‘We’re not going to hire the brightest and the best. We’re only going to hire’” members of specified demographic groups.

These groups tend to vote overwhelmingly for the Democratic Party.

The Biden administration doubled down on its decision to elevate accidents of birth in the hiring process. “Our strength comes from our diversity,” stated Secret Service Chief of Communications Anthony Guglielmi.

The Biden administration has strongly supported Cheatle, who spent 27 years in the Secret Service, including several years on then-Vice President Biden’s security detail, insisting her leadership is not to blame. “I have 100% confidence in the director of the United States Secret Service, a dedicated, career-long law enforcement officer,” DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas told NPR.

But Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) said he posed probing questions to Mayorkas “within hours” of the shooting. “He didn’t have a lot of those answers,” said Johnson, who called the impeached secretary’s responses “concerning.”

President Trump’s security team transformed dramatically between his shooting and the moment he entered the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee. On Monday evening, Trump strode into the Fiserv Forum to the strains of Lee Greenwood’s “God Bless the USA,” flanked by at least 10 male Secret Service agents and one female.

Critics say the Biden administration has a history of treating the American people as enemies, unworthy of knowing the inner workings of their own government. “This is coming from the same administration who was labeling Catholics as terrorists, people who go to school board meetings as terrorists, yet they fail to protect a former president of the United States and a political opponent. We’ve seen this administration target political opponents before,” said Cloud.

A Senate committee is set to receive a briefing on Wednesday. “It’ll be just the tip of the iceberg,” Senator Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) told “Mornings with Maria” Wednesday morning.

Next Monday’s House Oversight Committee hearing will be livestreamed on the committee’s website, oversight.house.gov.

Biggs acknowledged the heroism and how “the first agent hops up on that podium right away [and] doesn’t look towards where the shot came from. He’s going in to provide cover,” he recounted, even at the potential cost of his life. Comer also saluted “the brave Secret Service members who put their lives at risk to protect President Trump and for the American patriots in the audience who helped innocent victims.”

“There was good, bad, and ugly in this incident with Donald Trump,” said Biggs.

But the bad and the ugly leave disturbing questions House Republicans promise to investigate until the end.

“What we saw play out on Saturday night is the greatest indicator that we have a problem that we are refusing to look in the eye and deal with,” said Miller, “and that’s going to lead to nothing but danger and destruction down the road.”

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

An ‘Affirmation of the Gift of Life’: A Christian Response to the Assassination Attempt

‘Divine Intervention’: Trump’s Survival Proves ‘Thoughts and Prayers’ Do Matter

After the Party in Milwaukee, an Avalanche of Appropriations Await

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

5 Biblical Reasons for Skepticism on UFO Testimony to Congress

Scores of people lined up early to get a seat for today’s UFO hearing in the House Oversight Committee’s National Security Subcommittee. Lawmakers from both parties plied three former military officials, including whistleblower David Grusch, a former Air Force intelligence officer, on the nature of known UAP (unidentified aerial phenomena, the technical jargon for UFO) sightings and direction on how they could dig deeper. There was also bipartisan agreement on the “pressing demand for government transparency and accountability” regarding UAP reports.

The witnesses testified to seeing or hearing reports of colleagues seeing objects that appeared as a “dark gray or black cube inside a clear sphere,” with the cube’s corners touching the sphere, or red cubes the size of multiple football fields, which accelerated at uncanny rates. They alleged the military had conducted a multi-decade program for UAP crash retrieval and reverse engineering, which was funded without Congress’s knowledge or authorization.

Unfortunately for the curious public, Grusch and the other witnesses often declined to present new evidence of their claims to lawmakers outside a secure and confidential setting. Grusch complained that he and others faced “administrative terrorism” for speaking up about the UAP sightings and said he feared for his life at times because of the “brutal” treatment, making him afraid to disclose classified information.

Some of the whistleblowers’ sensational claims could be true — some people already believe them — but many people won’t be persuaded until the long-promised evidence has actually been presented. Some people naturally prefer to stick to the facts, while others have adopted a more cautious attitude in light of the proliferation of brazen hoaxes. Some people will credit some of the claims (such as the military running a secret UFO investigation program) more than others (such as the military recovering the deceased remains of extraterrestrial lifeforms). And others will write the whole business off as a fiasco dreamed up by paranoid conspiracy theorists.

Now, I enjoy intergalactic science fiction as much (possibly more) than the next guy — “Star Trek,” “Star Wars,” “Doctor Who,” etc. Perhaps a part of me could even wish that Vulcans, lightsabers, and spatially anomalous phone booths were real.

But a biblical worldview cautions against making more of these daydreams than what they really are — fiction. Granted, the Bible nowhere explicitly states that there are not living, intelligent creatures on other worlds, nor does it state that life on other planets is insupportable.

Nevertheless, there are solid, biblical reasons to doubt the existence of extraterrestrial life (spiritual beings excluded), particularly life forms intelligent enough to build vessels for travel to earth. These biblical reasons can provide Christians with a useful context for evaluating claims about UFOs or UAPs, even when they are made under oath in a congressional hearing. Here are five:

1. The curse affects all creation.

In Genesis 3, God cursed the world for Adam’s sin, introducing suffering, pain, and death to human experience. In Romans 8:18-25, Paul states that this curse, the “sufferings of the present time,” has affected all creation. “We know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now” (Romans 8:22). One day, the sons of God will be revealed, and the curse will end, at which point “the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption.”

It may seem puzzling that God would curse all creation for the sin of man alone. But there is a solution in Genesis 1:26, where God gives man “dominion … over all the earth” and all its inhabitant creatures. Thus, the curse for man’s sin affects the realm man was given to rule.

That solution would be absurd if God created other living beings on a separate world, which were outside man’s dominion and yet suffered for man’s sin. What is the logic in such a move? And why would a just God curse a world whose inhabitants had never sinned for a rebellion that occurred on another planet? But if a race of sinless creatures was exempted from the curse, then “the whole creation” would not be “groaning together” under its effects.

2. Salvation is for mankind.

Another problem with the hypothesizing a race of extraterrestrials is, if they had sinned, the gospel of salvation is not offered to them. Before his ascension, Jesus told his disciples, “You will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8). He did not say “beyond the earth” or “to the ends of the stars.”

Nor does the Bible say it is God’s will to save members of other races. The Scriptures say God “desires all people to be saved” (1 Timothy 2:4) and the word translated “people” refers specifically to human beings.

3. Jesus died once for all sin.

Nor is it possible that the Son of God reenacted has salvific mission on multiple worlds, initiating a church on each. “Christ also suffered once for sins,” wrote Peter (1 Peter 3:18). This fact is vital to the sufficiency and permanence of his blood’s saving power. He offered a sacrifice for sins “once for all when he offered up himself” (Hebrews 7:27), and “he entered once for all into the holy places … by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption” (Hebrews 9:12).

Clearest of all, Paul wrote, “We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God” (Romans 6:9-10). His dying once and living again once is a model for us of baptism, forsaking sin, and our future hope of eternal life.

Beyond that, there would be the difficulty of the second person of the Trinity becoming incarnate through another virgin conception in another race. When he took on a human body, his divine nature was permanently united to his human flesh; he ascended in that same body, and he will never shed it. “In him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily” (Colossians 2:9).

Would Christ’s sacrificial atonement avail for sinners on another planet? It wouldn’t be for lack of power. But it’s hard to see how his death and resurrection on earth, as a human, could have the same significance for members of another race on another planet. They did not join in the conspiracy to kill him, as representatives of all mankind did (Acts 4:27). He would not be “made like [them] in every respect,” which is noted as essential to fulfilling the office of high priest on their behalf (Hebrews 2:17). If Jesus appeared to extraterrestrial creatures, the gospel would be so different as to be an entirely different gospel.

4. Man is made in God’s image.

Returning to Genesis 1, there we read that “God created man in his own image” (Genesis 1:27). This statement is foundational to the doctrine of man and is developed and fleshed out throughout Scripture.

Among other things, the image of God in man means that ensouled human beings are more precious than the living creatures over which man was given dominion — though those creatures, too, have value (see Proverbs 12:10, Jonah 4:11, Matthew 12:11-12).

But if there are extraterrestrial races capable of visiting earth, it raises all sorts of confusing questions for this doctrine. Do they have souls and moral agency? Do they too bear the image of God? If so, do they resemble humans? The questions could run on and on.

5. God created the heavens and the earth.

Lastly, the existence of life on other planets upends the biblical categories of heaven and earth. “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1). God gave man dominion over earth (Genesis 1:26), while he dwells in the heavens (1 Kings 8:30, etc.). These categories appear together hundreds of times throughout Scripture.

It is true that Scripture mentions various heavenly bodies. God created the sun, moon, and stars on the fourth day of creation (Genesis 1:14-19). And modern technology allows us to see the stunning variety and beauty God has created throughout the heavens. It is even true that man has managed to propel himself out of earth’s atmosphere and into the very nearest corner of the heavens. None of this fundamentally changes the categories of heavens (where God dwells) and earth (where man dwells).

But, if we ever discovered that another race dwelt on another planet somewhere else in the universe, there would be heavens and earths.

One might argue that the categories of heaven and earth were merely God stooping to describe his creation in a way that ancient readers, who had no concept of space travel, could understand. After all, the Bible never discusses other planets, as distinct from stars, but we now know God created them too. The problem with this theory is that the Bible also describes the fiery destruction (2 Peter 3:7) and recreation (Revelation 21:1) of heaven and earth, implying these categories still apply to our future.

By contrast, the existence of life on other planets is far more compatible with a secular-naturalist worldview: that the universe formed in a Big Bang, planets gradually and randomly took shape, and somehow life began on earth. In this interpretation, Planet Earth occupies no special role in the cosmos, and finding life anywhere else is just as plausible as finding it on earth. So, why not search for it? But this is not the biblical view.

Do these five reasons absolutely rule out life on other planets? The Renaissance-era controversy over a heliocentric model of the solar system stands as a caution against elevating one interpretation of the Bible over hard, scientific proof to the contrary. However, the existence of extraterrestrial life of any kind — particularly hyper-intelligent life forms capable of building vessels to traverse outer space — would pose significant challenges or complications to core Christian doctrines as they have stood for thousands of years.

For any Christian who believes these doctrines to be what God has communicated in Scripture, the choice should be clear. On one hand stands the infallible Word of God, who has proven himself faithful and true more times than we could imagine. On the other hand stand thus far unsubstantiated claims made by men, and men have been known to lie, be mistaken, and change their minds. Even if the evidence seems to tip in favor of extraterrestrial life (which it hasn’t yet come close to doing), it’s always safer to trust the Word of God rather than the shifting consensus of men.

Of course, dismissing extraterrestrial explanations does not make military sightings of UAPs less concerning or dangerous. It still points to (a possibly hostile) intelligence with technology beyond our own, or even beyond our ability to track. It just means we should look for an explanation to our geopolitical rivals on this planet rather than another.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a staff writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.