HR-6700-119
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Sponsored by Melanie Stansbury (D-NM)
What it does
This bill would establish the Presidential Management Fellows (PMF) Program in statute, codifying and expanding a federal government leadership development program that currently operates under executive regulation. It would require the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to double the number of Fellow positions each year from fiscal years 2026 through 2031, compared to the year before enactment. Fellows — recent recipients of advanced degrees — would be placed in two-year federal agency appointments with structured training, mentorship, rotational assignments, and a pathway to permanent competitive service employment. The bill would also formally establish Federal Executive Boards in 26 metropolitan areas to coordinate field operations across federal agencies.
Who benefits
Recent advanced degree graduates (master's, law, medical, and other professional degrees) who would have more opportunities to enter federal service through a structured pathway. Federal agencies seeking to build a pipeline of future senior leaders. Veterans and preference-eligible individuals, who would receive selection preference in the program. Federal employees in field offices across 26 metropolitan areas who would benefit from better-coordinated interagency activities through Federal Executive Boards. Qualifying educational institutions whose graduates gain a clearer route to federal employment. Communities in field locations outside Washington, D.C., where more Fellows may be placed.
Who is hurt
Applicants who do not hold advanced degrees, who would remain ineligible regardless of experience or skills. Candidates who completed their advanced degree more than two years before applying, who would be excluded by the eligibility window. Federal agencies that may face administrative and budgetary burdens from doubling Fellow positions and meeting mandatory training, mentorship, and rotational assignment requirements. Taxpayers who would bear the cost of expanded salaries, training hours, and program administration. Private-sector employers competing for the same pool of advanced degree graduates, who may lose talent to the expanded federal program.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the PMF Program has historically been one of the federal government's most effective tools for recruiting high-caliber talent into public service, but that it has operated under fragile regulatory authority that can be altered or dismantled without congressional action. They contend that doubling Fellow positions addresses a documented federal workforce pipeline problem — the Senior Executive Service is aging, and agencies face succession gaps in senior leadership. Codifying the program in statute provides stability, accountability through mandatory congressional reporting, and a structural commitment to building the next generation of federal managers.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that mandating a 200 percent increase in Fellow positions over six years imposes a rigid, top-down expansion on agencies regardless of their actual hiring needs, budget conditions, or workforce plans — potentially crowding out other hiring priorities. They contend that the bill adds layers of administrative process (Individual Development Plans, mandatory training hours, Executive Resources Board certifications, Federal Executive Board reporting) that increase bureaucratic overhead without clear evidence that these requirements improve outcomes over the existing regulatory framework, which agencies have already adapted to their specific missions.