Unauthorized Spending Accountability Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/143
Last Updated: January 22, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Cammack, Kat [R-FL-3]

ID: C001039

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 25 - 19.

December 2, 2025

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

âś…

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the esteemed members of Congress. The "Unauthorized Spending Accountability Act" - a title that screams "we're trying to sound responsible while doing nothing." Let's dissect this farce.

**Diagnosis:** This bill is suffering from a severe case of "Fiscal Fantasy Syndrome," where lawmakers pretend to address budgetary issues while actually perpetuating the status quo.

**Symptoms:**

1. **Total funding amounts and budget allocations:** The bill establishes a three-year reduction cycle for unauthorized programs, but conveniently omits any actual numbers or specifics on how much will be cut. It's like writing a prescription without specifying the dosage. 2. **Key programs and agencies receiving funds:** The bill doesn't mention which programs or agencies will be affected by these reductions. Transparency is clearly not their strong suit. 3. **Notable increases or decreases from previous years:** There are no notable changes mentioned, only vague promises of future reductions. It's like promising to start a diet next Monday. 4. **Riders or policy provisions attached to funding:** Section 5 provides an exemption for programs that are reauthorized with sunset provisions. This is essentially a get-out-of-jail-free card for favored programs, allowing them to bypass the reduction cycle. 5. **Fiscal impact and deficit implications:** The bill claims to reduce budgetary levels by 10% in the first year and 15% in subsequent years, but without actual numbers or context, this means nothing. It's like claiming a new exercise routine will make you lose weight without specifying how many calories you'll burn.

**Underlying disease:** This bill is a classic case of "Congressional Cowardice Syndrome." Lawmakers are too afraid to make real cuts or reforms, so they create a shell game with vague promises and exemptions. The result is a bill that sounds good on paper but accomplishes nothing meaningful.

**Prognosis:** This bill will likely pass with bipartisan support, as both parties can claim to be "fiscally responsible" without actually doing anything. Meanwhile, the national debt will continue to balloon, and the American people will remain none the wiser.

In conclusion, this bill is a masterclass in legislative doublespeak, designed to fool voters into thinking something meaningful is being done about the budget. But don't be fooled - it's just another case of "same old, same old" from our esteemed leaders in Washington.

Related Topics

Transportation & Infrastructure Criminal Justice & Law Enforcement Small Business & Entrepreneurship State & Local Government Affairs Government Operations & Accountability Federal Budget & Appropriations Civil Rights & Liberties Congressional Rules & Procedures National Security & Intelligence
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

đź’° Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Cammack, Kat [R-FL-3]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$91,928
22 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$8,043
Committees
$0
Individuals
$83,885

No PAC contributions found

1
PASS THE HAT
1 transaction
$3,610
2
SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA
1 transaction
$3,300
3
S & K BARRINGTON FARMS
1 transaction
$600
4
83 FARMS, LLC
1 transaction
$283
5
RADIANT CREDIT UNION
1 transaction
$250

No committee contributions found

1
ASSEMI, KEVIN
2 transactions
$6,870
2
STREETER, JACKSON
2 transactions
$6,870
3
ADOLFSSON, MARCUS
1 transaction
$6,600
4
KEMMERER, JOHN
1 transaction
$6,600
5
KEMMERER, KAREN
1 transaction
$6,600
6
HOROWITZ, BEN
1 transaction
$6,600
7
ZUCKER, ANITA G.
2 transactions
$6,600
8
GASTON, BILL FAYE
1 transaction
$5,205
9
WEINGART, BRECK ALLEN
1 transaction
$5,000
10
FREY, HARLEY
1 transaction
$3,435
11
FREY, JOHN
1 transaction
$3,435
12
FREY, LEONARD
1 transaction
$3,435
13
MCCOY, GARY
1 transaction
$3,435
14
BOLCH, SUSAN
1 transaction
$3,300
15
DUNN MD, WILLIAM J.
1 transaction
$3,300
16
HIMSCHOOT, ROBERT
1 transaction
$3,300
17
VECELLIO, LEO
1 transaction
$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 2 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Schmidt, Derek [R-KS-2]

ID: S001228

Top Contributors

10

1
HABEMATOLEL POMO OF UPPER LAKE TRIBE OF CALIFORNIA
Organization UPPER LAKE, CA
$3,300
Jul 26, 2024
2
A-OK ENTERPRISES, LLC
Organization WICHITA, KS
$500
Jul 10, 2024
3
ROSE, DIANA
ASPIRE65 • OWNER
Individual OLATHE, KS
$6,600
Jul 19, 2024
4
ROSE, GARY
ASPIRE HEALTH PLANS, LLC • INSURANCE SALES
Individual OLATHE, KS
$6,600
Jul 19, 2024
5
PROCHNOW, JOSEPH
FOCUS WORKFORCES • EXECUTIVE
Individual OVERLAND PARK, KS
$6,600
Jul 25, 2024
6
NELSON, NORMAN T
SELF • AGRICULTURE
Individual LONG ISLAND, KS
$6,600
Sep 3, 2024
7
CUTLER, ROBERT S.
C3 • CEO
Individual OVERLAND PARK, KS
$6,600
Dec 9, 2024
8
BONAVIA, NICHOLAS J.
BONAVIA PROPERTIES • PRESIDENT
Individual WICHITA, KS
$6,600
May 3, 2024
9
MILLER, RICHARD
MILLER'S PROFESSIONAL IMAGING • CEO
Individual PITTSBURG, KS
$6,600
Jun 25, 2024
10
PATTERSON, ROB
RMJK ENTERPRISES INC • CEO
Individual KANSAS CITY, KS
$6,600
Jun 30, 2024

Rep. Barrett, Tom [R-MI-7]

ID: B001321

Top Contributors

10

1
MICHIGAN AGGREGATES ASSOCIATION PAC
Organization OKEMOS, MI
$300
Feb 27, 2024
2
DEMKOWICZ, BRIAN MR.
HURON CAPITAL • INVESTOR
Individual GROSSE POINTE, MI
$13,200
Jan 8, 2024
3
STADLER, BRIAN
WOLGAST CORPORATION • MANAGER
Individual SAGINAW, MI
$6,870
Sep 28, 2023
4
UIHLEIN, RICHARD
ULINE • CHAIRMAN
Individual LAKE FOREST, IL
$6,870
Sep 26, 2023
5
COURTNEY, JOHN
RETIRED • RETIRED
Individual OKEMOS, MI
$6,870
Dec 8, 2023
6
BAKER, JEFFREY
MUSKEGON CAR CREDIT • EXECUTIVE
Individual GRAND RAPIDS, MI
$6,600
Jul 25, 2023
7
BANCROFT, NICHOLAS
AGROLIQUID • CEO
Individual SAINT JOHNS, MI
$6,600
Sep 19, 2023
8
HAWORTH, MATTHEW
HAWORTH, INC. • CHAIRMAN
Individual HOLLAND, MI
$6,600
Sep 18, 2023
9
HAWORTH, RICHARD
HAWORTH, INC. • CHAIRMAN EMERITUS
Individual SAUGATUCK, MI
$6,600
Sep 18, 2023
10
O'NEIL, WILLIAM
W J O'NEIL COMPANY • EXECUTIVE
Individual COMMERCE TOWNSHIP, MI
$6,600
Sep 11, 2023

Donor Network - Rep. Cammack, Kat [R-FL-3]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 31 nodes and 31 connections

Total contributions: $122,698

Top Donors - Rep. Cammack, Kat [R-FL-3]

Showing top 22 donors by contribution amount

5 Orgs17 Individuals

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. Higher similarity scores indicate stronger thematic connections.

Introduction

Moderate 65.4%
Pages: 40-42

— 7 — Foreword Instead, party leaders negotiate one multitrillion-dollar spending bill—several thousand pages long—and then vote on it before anyone, literally, has had a chance to read it. Debate time is restricted. Amendments are prohibited. And all of this is backed up against a midnight deadline when the previous “omnibus” spending bill will run out and the federal government “shuts down.” This process is not designed to empower 330 million American citizens and their elected representatives, but rather to empower the party elites secretly nego- tiating without any public scrutiny or oversight. In the end, congressional leaders’ behavior and incentives here are no differ- ent from those of global elites insulating policy decisions—over the climate, trade, public health, you name it—from the sovereignty of national electorates. Public scrutiny and democratic accountability make life harder for policymakers—so they skirt it. It’s not dysfunction; it’s corruption. And despite its gaudy price tag, the federal budget is not even close to the worst example of this corruption. That distinction belongs to the “Administrative State,” the dismantling of which must a top priority for the next conservative President. The term Administrative State refers to the policymaking work done by the bureaucracies of all the federal government’s departments, agencies, and millions of employees. Under Article I of the Constitution, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.” That is, federal law is enacted only by elected legislators in both houses of Congress. This exclusive authority was part of the Framers’ doctrine of “separated powers.” They not only split the federal government’s legislative, executive, and judicial powers into different branches. They also gave each branch checks over the others. Under our Constitution, the legislative branch—Congress—is far and away the most powerful and, correspondingly, the most accountable to the people. In recent decades, members of the House and Senate discovered that if they give away that power to the Article II branch of government, they can also deny responsi- bility for its actions. So today in Washington, most policy is no longer set by Congress at all, but by the Administrative State. Given the choice between being powerful but vulnerable or irrelevant but famous, most Members of Congress have chosen the latter. Congress passes intentionally vague laws that delegate decision-making over a given issue to a federal agency. That agency’s bureaucrats—not just unelected but seemingly un-fireable—then leap at the chance to fill the vacuum created by Congress’s preening cowardice. The federal government is growing larger and less constitutionally accountable—even to the President—every year. l A combination of elected and unelected bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency quietly strangles domestic energy production through difficult-to-understand rulemaking processes; — 8 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Bureaucrats at the Department of Homeland Security, following the lead of a feckless Administration, order border and immigration enforcement agencies to help migrants criminally enter our country with impunity; l Bureaucrats at the Department of Education inject racist, anti-American, ahistorical propaganda into America’s classrooms; l Bureaucrats at the Department of Justice force school districts to undermine girls’ sports and parents’ rights to satisfy transgender extremists; l Woke bureaucrats at the Pentagon force troops to attend “training” seminars about “white privilege”; and l Bureaucrats at the State Department infuse U.S. foreign aid programs with woke extremism about “intersectionality” and abortion.3 Unaccountable federal spending is the secret lifeblood of the Great Awokening. Nearly every power center held by the Left is funded or supported, one way or another, through the bureaucracy by Congress. Colleges and school districts are funded by tax dollars. The Administrative State holds 100 percent of its power at the sufferance of Congress, and its insulation from presidential discipline is an unconstitutional fairy tale spun by the Washington Establishment to protect its turf. Members of Congress shield themselves from constitutional accountability often when the White House allows them to get away with it. Cultural institutions like public libraries and public health agencies are only as “independent” from public accountability as elected officials and voters permit. Let’s be clear: The most egregious regulations promulgated by the current Administration come from one place: the Oval Office. The President cannot hide behind the agencies; as his many executive orders make clear, his is the respon- sibility for the regulations that threaten American communities, schools, and families. A conservative President must move swiftly to do away with these vast abuses of presidential power and remove the career and political bureaucrats who fuel it. Properly considered, restoring fiscal limits and constitutional accountability to the federal government is a continuation of restoring national sovereignty to the American people. In foreign affairs, global strategy, federal budgeting and pol- icymaking, the same pattern emerges again and again. Ruling elites slash and tear at restrictions and accountability placed on them. They centralize power up and away from the American people: to supra-national treaties and organizations, to left-wing “experts,” to sight-unseen all-or-nothing legislating, to the unelected career bureaucrats of the Administrative State.

Introduction

Moderate 65.4%
Pages: 40-42

— 7 — Foreword Instead, party leaders negotiate one multitrillion-dollar spending bill—several thousand pages long—and then vote on it before anyone, literally, has had a chance to read it. Debate time is restricted. Amendments are prohibited. And all of this is backed up against a midnight deadline when the previous “omnibus” spending bill will run out and the federal government “shuts down.” This process is not designed to empower 330 million American citizens and their elected representatives, but rather to empower the party elites secretly nego- tiating without any public scrutiny or oversight. In the end, congressional leaders’ behavior and incentives here are no differ- ent from those of global elites insulating policy decisions—over the climate, trade, public health, you name it—from the sovereignty of national electorates. Public scrutiny and democratic accountability make life harder for policymakers—so they skirt it. It’s not dysfunction; it’s corruption. And despite its gaudy price tag, the federal budget is not even close to the worst example of this corruption. That distinction belongs to the “Administrative State,” the dismantling of which must a top priority for the next conservative President. The term Administrative State refers to the policymaking work done by the bureaucracies of all the federal government’s departments, agencies, and millions of employees. Under Article I of the Constitution, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.” That is, federal law is enacted only by elected legislators in both houses of Congress. This exclusive authority was part of the Framers’ doctrine of “separated powers.” They not only split the federal government’s legislative, executive, and judicial powers into different branches. They also gave each branch checks over the others. Under our Constitution, the legislative branch—Congress—is far and away the most powerful and, correspondingly, the most accountable to the people. In recent decades, members of the House and Senate discovered that if they give away that power to the Article II branch of government, they can also deny responsi- bility for its actions. So today in Washington, most policy is no longer set by Congress at all, but by the Administrative State. Given the choice between being powerful but vulnerable or irrelevant but famous, most Members of Congress have chosen the latter. Congress passes intentionally vague laws that delegate decision-making over a given issue to a federal agency. That agency’s bureaucrats—not just unelected but seemingly un-fireable—then leap at the chance to fill the vacuum created by Congress’s preening cowardice. The federal government is growing larger and less constitutionally accountable—even to the President—every year. l A combination of elected and unelected bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency quietly strangles domestic energy production through difficult-to-understand rulemaking processes;

Introduction

Low 55.3%
Pages: 316-318

— 283 — Section Three THE GENERAL WELFARE When our Founders wrote in the Constitution that the federal government w ould “promote the general Welfare,” they could not have fathomed a m assive bureaucracy that would someday spend $3 trillion in a single year—roughly the sum, combined, spent by the departments covered in this section in 2022. Approximately half of that colossal sum was spent by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) alone—the belly of the massive behemoth that is the modern administrative state. HHS is home to Medicare and Medicaid, the principal drivers of our $31 trillion national debt. When Congress passed and President Lyndon B. Johnson signed into law these programs, they were set on autopilot with no plan for how to pay for them. The first year that Medicare spending was visible on the books was 1967. From that point on through 2020—according to the American Main Street Initia- tive’s analysis of official federal tallies—Medicare and Medicaid combined cost $17.8 trillion, while our combined federal deficits over that same span were $17.9 trillion. In essence, our deficit problem is a Medicare and Medicaid problem. HHS is also home to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the duo most responsible—along with President Joe Biden—for the irrational, destructive, un-American mask and vaccine mandates that were imposed upon an ostensibly free people during the COVID-19 pandemic. All along, it was clear from randomized controlled trials— the gold standard of medical research—that masks provide little to no benefit in preventing the spread of viruses and might even be counterproductive. Yet the CDC ignored these high-quality RCTs, cherry-picked from politically malleable

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.