HR-8408-119
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Sponsored by Maxwell Frost (D-FL)
What it does
This bill would require each federal agency's Chief Information Officer to compile an inventory of all legacy (outdated) information technology systems within one year of enactment, and to update that inventory every five years. It would also require agency heads to develop and submit to Congress a five-year modernization plan for those systems every five years. The Office of Management and Budget would issue implementation guidance, and the Government Accountability Office would report to Congress on the law's effectiveness within three years. The bill authorizes no new funding, exempts national security systems, and automatically expires six years after enactment.
Who benefits
Federal employees who rely on outdated systems to do their jobs, potentially gaining more reliable and efficient tools. Members of the public who interact with federal agencies (e.g., Social Security recipients, tax filers, veterans seeking benefits) and may experience faster or more reliable service. Taxpayers broadly, if modernization reduces long-term maintenance costs. Technology and IT consulting firms that could compete for future modernization contracts. Congressional oversight committees that would gain visibility into agency IT spending and planning. Inspectors general and the GAO, who would have new data to support audits.
Who is hurt
Vendors currently under contract to maintain legacy systems, who could lose revenue if agencies retire those systems. Federal agency budget offices that must absorb the administrative cost of compiling inventories and writing modernization plans using existing appropriations. Agencies with large, complex legacy portfolios (e.g., SSA, IRS, VA) that face the greatest planning burden. Smaller agencies with limited IT staff who must comply with the same requirements as larger agencies. Potentially, taxpayers if modernization efforts — historically prone to cost overruns — are funded by redirecting existing agency budgets.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the federal government spends roughly 80% of its annual IT budget — approximately $60 billion — maintaining legacy systems rather than modernizing them, according to GAO reports, leaving agencies vulnerable to outages, security breaches, and inefficiency. They contend that requiring agencies to inventory and plan for modernization creates the accountability and transparency needed to break this cycle, and that the bill's sunset clause and no-new-funds provision demonstrate fiscal discipline while still driving meaningful reform.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that mandating inventories and plans without authorizing any new funding is an unfunded mandate that forces agencies to divert scarce existing resources toward paperwork rather than actual modernization. They contend that the federal government already has overlapping IT modernization frameworks — including the Technology Modernization Fund, the Federal IT Acquisition Reform Act, and OMB's existing guidance — and that adding another layer of reporting requirements may produce plans that sit on shelves rather than drive real change.
Constitutional context
No significant constitutional tension is present. Congress has broad authority to set operational and reporting requirements for executive branch agencies under the Necessary and Proper Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 18) and its power of the purse. The bill delegates limited guidance-writing authority to OMB, which is well within established norms and unlikely to raise major questions doctrine concerns under West Virginia v. EPA (2022), as the delegation is narrow and the subject matter — internal government IT management — does not involve vast economic or political significance beyond the federal government itself.
Checks and balances
The executive branch (OMB and agency heads) gains structured authority to define and implement IT modernization standards, while Congress retains oversight through mandatory plan submissions, GAO review, and inspector general access to inventories.
Historical precedent
The Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA, 2014) similarly imposed IT oversight and accountability requirements on federal agencies, with GAO tracking compliance through a biannual scorecard system.