HR 6822 Introduced – 44 USC Update

Last month, Rep Khanna (D,CA) introduced HR 6822, the National Archives and Records Administration Modernization Act. The bill would remove a variety of male pronouns from eleven different sections in 44 USC. No funding is authorized.

This bill definitely does not fall within the normal range of topics covered in this blog, but I thought that it would be an interesting look at the variety of legislation that gets introduced by Congresscritters every year. While it would be easy to ignore this bill as a piece politically correct gender-speak, the increasing number of females filling positions of authority in the Federal Government (and about time too) does make the use of gender limiting pronouns both politically and legally suspect. The crafters of this bill did not try to saddle us with the ‘he/she, or him/her’ nonsense, or the more grammatically correct ‘they’ or ‘them’ terminology, instead they replaced the pronouns with the title of the person to whom the statute refers.

Unfortunately, I suspect that there will be significant knee-jerk opposition to this bill on the part of a significant portion of the Republican caucus as part of their opposition to all things ‘woke’ or diversity related. I do not expect this bill to move forward, either in committee or before the full House.

There will be no additional coverage of this bill in this blog.

Bills Introduced – 12-14-23

Yesterday, with both the House and Senate in session, there were 113 bills introduced. One of those bills may receive additional attention in this blog:

HR 6822 To amend title 44, United States Code, and for other purposes. Khanna, Ro [Rep.-D-CA-17]

The coverage of 44 USC is broad, and most of it is of little interest here, but there are two chapters that deal with IT issues that may be of tangential interest:

Chapter 35 - Coordination of Federal Information Policy, and

Chapter 36 - Management And Promotion of Electronic Government Services

I will be watching this bill for language and definitions that include federal cybersecurity coverage withing the scope of the changes being proposed. I suspect, however, that this may deal with Presidential records administration.