Congresswoman Kat Cammack (R-Fla.) is calling on House colleagues and leadership to “immediately bring” her measure – a House Resolution aimed at “strengthen[ing] security standards for congressional staff” – to the House floor for a vote.
The amendment, known as House Resolution 500 (H.RES.500), introduces “stronger vetting and transparency standards” to the Rules of the House of Representatives.
“Congressional staff handle Americans’ most sensitive personal information every day, from Social Security numbers on casework files to veterans’ records,” Rep. Cammack stated. “Americans are shocked when they learn that those staffers face no required background check.”
The Measure's Requirements
The resolution would amend the Rules of the Chamber by requiring:
- background checks for House Staff.
- disclosure as to whether a “House employee has received payments from, or entered into contracts or agreements with, a foreign government” in the three years before working for the Chamber.
- disclosure of an employee’s citizenship status.
- the information “to be filed with the Clerk of the House” and made publicly accessible.
If passed, the measure would apply to both current and newly hired House staff members.
Federal Employees Get Vetted, House Should Too
Congresswoman Cammack’s renewed push for the measure “comes as congressional staff security has drawn renewed public attention.”
“Federal employees across the executive branch are vetted before they ever get a badge. Not here. That should concern every member of Congress, regardless of party,” Rep. Cammack said.
Cammack's Measure Continues to Get Stalled
In June 2025, Congresswoman Cammack introduced the House Resolution, but since then her efforts to advance it in the chamber have been repeatedly obstructed.
"I introduced H.Res. 500 more than a year ago to fix this,” Rep. Cammack affirmed. “First, I was told it needed 100 cosponsors before it could be considered. Then I was told background checks couldn’t be done. Then I was told that disclosures couldn’t be published. The excuses keep changing, while the security risk stays the same.”
