The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
S. 2173·119th Congress·Introduced Jun 25, 2025

For Sale Act of 2025

IntroducedGovernment Operations and PoliticsMajor
View bill text
Sponsor
Sen. Ernst, Joni [R-IA]
Committees
Environment and Public Works Committee (primary)
Last action
Jun 25, 2025

Bottom line

This bill mandates the sale of six prominent federal buildings in Washington, D.C., to reduce the national deficit and consolidate federal operations, while bypassing certain regulatory requirements.

What it actually does

This bill mandates that federal agencies vacate six specific federal buildings in Washington, DC, within 18 months of enactment. The General Services Administrator is then required to sell these buildings for fair market value at their highest and best use within two years of vacancy, with a strict prohibition on foreign ownership. Net proceeds from these sales are first used for implementation costs (subject to future appropriation) and then deposited into the general fund of the Treasury for deficit reduction. The bill also exempts these sales from several federal environmental, historic preservation, and homeless assistance laws.

Proponents argue

Proponents argue this bill will streamline government operations by consolidating agencies, reduce the federal footprint, and generate significant revenue to reduce the national deficit. They emphasize the efficiency gained by selling underutilized assets and the removal of regulatory hurdles that often delay such sales, allowing for a more agile and fiscally responsible federal government.

Opponents contend

Opponents might raise concerns about the potential loss of historic properties, the disruption to federal employees and agency functions during relocation, and the potential for short-sighted sales that do not fully account for long-term federal space needs. They may also criticize the broad exemption from environmental, historic preservation, and homeless assistance acts, arguing it undermines important public policy goals.

The bill is short and easy to read, allowing for a quick understanding of its core provisions.

Section 2(a)(1)

Mandatory Agency Consolidation and Vacancy

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision requires any federal agency currently occupying one of the six specified federal buildings to vacate that building and relocate to another federal building within 18 months of the bill's enactment. This sets a firm deadline for the initial phase of the building sales, aiming to clear the properties for disposal.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupFederal agencies and their employeesImpactRequired relocation and potential disruption to operationsMechanismStatutory mandate for vacation and relocation to existing federal buildings.ScaleAffects agencies housed in six major federal buildings in Washington, D.C.

Supporters argue

Supporters argue this mandate is crucial for achieving efficiency and reducing the federal real estate footprint. It forces agencies to consolidate, potentially leading to cost savings in operations and maintenance by reducing the number of owned or leased properties.

Critics contend

Critics might argue that an 18-month timeline for vacating major federal buildings is aggressive and could lead to significant operational disruptions, increased costs for relocation, and potential loss of institutional knowledge during the transition, ultimately hindering agency missions.

Tradeoffs

This provision balances the desire for rapid federal asset reduction and consolidation against the potential for operational disruption and relocation costs for affected agencies.

Section 2(a)(2)

Mandated Sale of Six Federal Buildings

prominently featuredstraightforward

This section explicitly lists six federal buildings in Washington, DC, including the Department of Agriculture South Building and the Hubert H. Humphrey Federal Building, and mandates their sale by the Administrator of General Services (GSA). The sales must be for fair market value at their highest and best use and must occur within two years after the buildings are vacated by federal agencies.

Section 2(b)

Prohibition on Foreign Ownership

mentioned in summarystraightforward

This provision prohibits the sale of any of the specified federal buildings to a foreign person, a foreign entity, or any entity where a foreign person is a beneficial owner. It references definitions from the Secure Federal LEASEs Act to clarify these terms, ensuring that the properties remain under domestic control.

Section 2(c)

Allocation of Sale Proceeds

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision dictates that the net proceeds from the sales will first cover the costs of implementing the section, with these amounts deposited into the Federal Buildings Fund, subject to future appropriation. Any remaining additional amounts are to be deposited into the general fund of the Treasury for the purpose of reducing the national deficit.

Section 2(d)

Ban on New Property Acquisition for Relocated Agencies

mentioned in summarystraightforward

This provision explicitly prohibits the Administrator of General Services or any federal agency from purchasing or leasing any other building or property, either short-term or long-term, as part of the consolidation or closing of the federal agencies impacted by the mandated sales. This aims to prevent the replacement of sold assets with new acquisitions.

Section 2(e)

Exemption from Environmental, Historic, and Homeless Assistance Laws

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision exempts the mandated sales from several key federal laws, including the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (which requires federal surplus property to be offered for homeless assistance), the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), and division A of subtitle III of title 54, United States Code (formerly the National Historic Preservation Act). It also exempts from certain chapters of Title 40 related to public buildings and works.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
  • Implementation
  • Political analysis
Ask Ledger AI about this