The bill
ELO Realignment and Strategic Engagement Reform Act of 2026
HR. 7574, 119th Congress — read as touching Law Enforcement & Surveillance Tech.
Sponsored by
Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8]
ID: E000300
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 7574, 119th Congress — read as touching Law Enforcement & Surveillance Tech.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
20 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
The alignment
This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 195-197 of the Mandate for Leadership.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
July 13, 2026
📍 Current Status
Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.
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!
Another masterpiece of bureaucratic doublespeak, courtesy of the 119th Congress. The ELO Realignment and Strategic Engagement Reform Act of 2026 - because who doesn't love a good game of musical chairs in the Department of Homeland Security?
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's primary objective is to reorganize the Engagement, Liaison, and Outreach (ELO) Office within the Department of Homeland Security. Or, in simpler terms, it's a fancy way of saying "let's shuffle some papers, pretend we're doing something meaningful, and hope no one notices." The real purpose? To create a new layer of bureaucratic red tape, ensuring that the ELO Office becomes even more inefficient and bloated.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit a comprehensive plan for reorganizing the ELO Office within 120 days. This plan must include an analysis of redundant positions, realignment of essential functions, and improved management of strategic relationships with law enforcement agencies. Oh, and let's not forget the obligatory "cost-benefit estimates" - because who needs actual numbers when you can just make something up? The bill also limits the expansion of the ELO Office until the plan is implemented, but we all know how well Congress follows its own rules.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: law enforcement agencies, the Department of Homeland Security, and various other government entities. But let's be real, the only stakeholders who truly matter are the lobbyists and special interest groups who will benefit from this bureaucratic shell game. The rest are just pawns in a much larger game of corruption and incompetence.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** The impact? A whole lot of nothing. This bill is a classic example of "rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic." It's a pointless exercise in bureaucratic navel-gazing, designed to create the illusion of progress while actually accomplishing nothing. The implications? More waste, more inefficiency, and more opportunities for corruption and abuse of power. But hey, at least it'll create some new jobs for bureaucrats and lobbyists, right?
In conclusion, the ELO Realignment and Strategic Engagement Reform Act of 2026 is a textbook example of legislative theater - a meaningless exercise in bureaucratic posturing, designed to distract from the real issues plaguing our government. It's a symptom of a deeper disease: corruption, cowardice, stupidity, and greed. And we're all just along for the ride, watching as our elected officials pretend to do something meaningful while actually accomplishing nothing. Joy.
Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No organization contributions found
No committee contributions found
This bill has 2 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: G000599
Top Contributors
10
ID: P000621
Top Contributors
10
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 47 nodes and 26 connections (47 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $115,273
Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 helped.
Section 2(a)(3) improves management and coordination of strategic relationships with priority law enforcement agencies, which could benefit the industry.
Section 2(a)(3)(C) enhances information-sharing mechanisms, which may involve cybersecurity measures and thus potentially benefit the industry.
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.
— 163 — Department of Homeland Security The old practice of relying on Executive Secretary taskings to pull documents for congressional requests does not work: It is slow, the metrics for what documents are gathered and how are unclear, and the components do not gather responsive material in an efficient manner. Document gathering should come from the Office of the Chief Information Officer or a relevant technological element within the department that can pull responsive communications quickly. OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS (OLA); OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS (OPA); AND OFFICE OF PARTNERSHIP AND ENGAGEMENT (OPE) DHS’s external communications function should be consolidated and reformed so that the President’s agenda can be implemented more effectively. The Office of Partnership and Engagement should be merged into the Office of Public Affairs. In many Cabinet agencies, outreach to companies and partner organizations is similarly performed by the Office of Public Affairs. This would also accomplish a needed DHS organizational and management reform to decrease the number of direct reports to the Secretary. Both public and legislative affairs staff in the components should report directly to their respective headquarters equivalent. This would help to avoid a failure by the department to speak with one voice. It would also allow the component staff to perform more efficiently, overseen by expert managers in their trade. This would also allow DHS to respond to crises effectively by shifting staff as needed to the most pressing issues and better use underutilized staff at less active components. Only political appointees in OLA should interact directly with congressional staff on all inquiries, including budget and appropriations matters. To prevent congres- sional staff from answer shopping among HQ OLA, the DHS OCFO, and components, DHS legislative affairs appropriations staff should be moved from MGMT OCFO into OLA. Regarding components, budget/appropriations staff should move from component budget offices into component legislative affairs offices. Because dozens of congressional committees and subcommittees either have or claim to have jurisdiction over some DHS function, DHS staff from the Secretary on down spend so much time responding to congressional hearing and briefing requests, letters, and questions for the record that they are left with little time to do their assigned job of protecting the homeland. The next President should reach an agreement with congressional leadership to limit committee jurisdiction to one authorizing committee and one appropriations committee in each cham- ber. If congressional leadership will not limit their committees’ jurisdiction over DHS, DHS should identify one authorizing and appropriations committee in each chamber and answer only to it. To focus more precisely on the DHS mission, OLA staff should also identify outdated and needless congressional reporting requirements and notify Congress — 164 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise that DHS will cease reporting on such matters. For other congressional reports, OLA should implement a sunset date so that Congress must regularly demonstrate the need for specific data. In both OPA and OLA, a change in mission and culture is needed. The clients of both components are the President and the Secretary, not the media, external organizations, or Congress. OPA and OLA should change from being compliance correspondents for outside entities airing grievances to serving as messengers and advocates for the President and the Secretary. OFFICE OF OPERATIONS COORDINATION (OPS) OPS was originally conceived by then-Secretary Jeh Johnson as an entity tasked with coordinating cross-DHS assets on an as-needed basis using a joint operations approach. This role is particularly challenging because of the disparate nature of mission sets across DHS. OPS should absorb a very small number of tactical intelligence professionals from I&A as the rest of I&A is shut down. Such intelligence officers would be a subordinate element within OPS placed within the National Operations Center. The intelligence officers would provide tactical intelligence support for upcoming or ongoing opera- tions in addition to liaising with their agency/component counterparts. There would be no strategic intelligence analysis done as part of OPS or its new I&A sub-element. In addition to facilitating all-of-DHS coordination on a task-by-task basis, OPS would be responsible for ongoing situational awareness for the Secretary and Deputy Secretary. In addition to long-term staffing, OPS would have cycling billets from each of the major agencies and components to facilitate its most effective working rela- tionships across DHS. OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES (CRCL) AND PRIVACY OFFICE (PRIV) The Homeland Security Act established only an Officer of CRCL, not an office. The only substantive function Congress then assigned to the officer was to review and assess information alleging abuses of civil rights. Since then, Congress and CRCL itself have significantly expanded CRCL’s scope and size well beyond its original intent or helpful purpose. CRCL now operates and views itself as a quasi- DHS Office of Inspector General. This results in a considerable waste of limited component resources, which are routinely tasked to address redundant, overly burdensome, and uninformed demands from CRCL. It is therefore important to recalibrate CRCL’s scope and reach. The organizational structure of both CRCL and the Privacy Office should be changed to ensure proper alignment with the department’s mission. The Office of General Counsel should absorb both CRCL’s and PRIV’s necessary functions
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.
A bill to require a briefing on increasing procurement of strategic and critical materials from sources in the United States.
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026
DHS Intelligence Rotational Assignment Program and Law Enforcement Support Act