HR-8613-119
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Sponsored by Maggie Goodlander (D-NH)
What it does
This bill would require federal agencies to keep publicly accessible memorials and cemeteries open during a government shutdown, provided those sites are not federally funded. It would also classify federal employees whose duties involve providing public access to such memorials as performing emergency services — exempting them from furlough requirements under 31 U.S.C. § 1342 during a lapse in appropriations.
Who benefits
Members of the public — including veterans, their families, and tourists — who wish to visit war memorials, cemeteries, and commemorative sites during a government shutdown. Veterans' service organizations that organize visits to memorials. Travel and tourism businesses near major memorial sites (e.g., the National Mall) that lose foot traffic during shutdowns. Federal employees assigned to these sites who would avoid furlough and continue to receive pay.
Who is hurt
Federal agencies that would bear the administrative and staffing costs of keeping memorial access open without a full appropriation. Taxpayers who may ultimately bear the cost of paying retained employees during a shutdown. Other furloughed federal workers whose duties are not covered by this exemption, who may view the carve-out as inequitable. Potentially, the broader leverage dynamic in shutdown negotiations — if shutdowns become less disruptive, some argue the political pressure to resolve them quickly may be reduced.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that closing open-air, non-federally-funded memorials during shutdowns is an unnecessary hardship on veterans and their families, many of whom travel long distances for once-in-a-lifetime visits. They point to the 2013 government shutdown, during which the World War II Memorial and other open-air sites were barricaded at significant cost, drawing widespread public criticism. They contend that keeping these sites open costs little and that denying access to monuments that receive no federal operating funds is both wasteful and disrespectful to those they honor.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that selectively exempting certain employees and sites from shutdown rules undermines the constitutional framework that uses appropriations lapses as a fiscal discipline mechanism. They contend that piecemeal carve-outs — each individually sympathetic — collectively erode the pressure on Congress to pass timely budgets, potentially making shutdowns longer and more frequent. They also raise a practical concern: the bill requires agencies to staff memorial access without clear funding authority, which may conflict with the Antideficiency Act's prohibition on obligating funds in excess of appropriations.