Committee votes to report two resolutions of inquiry on DHS data access and grant freezes amid debate over unvetted contractors and 'Doge' staff

The House Committee on Homeland Security considered two resolutions of inquiry — H.Res.113 and H.Res.114 — demanding documents from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on recent staffing, data access, and grant-disbursement decisions. After extended debate, the committee voted to report both measures to the full House with unfavorable recommendations; the clerk recorded H.Res.113 as 13 ayes and 8 nos and H.Res.114 as 13 ayes and 10 nos.

H.Res.113, introduced by the ranking member, seeks documents related to DHS policies and activities concerning the security of department information and the recruitment and retention of its workforce. Representative Thompson framed the measure as necessary oversight in light of what he described as sudden personnel changes and a lack of transparency about who has access to DHS systems. Thompson said the resolution "demands documents related to the Trump administration's ill conceived policies to weaken DHS by indiscriminately shrinking its workforce and giving those unfettered access to sensitive data stored in its information systems."

Several members used sharp language about the involvement of private-sector personnel and youth hires in federal systems. Representative Magaziner characterized some hires as "an army of unvetted interns" and named specific individuals reported in open sources, saying they had access to Treasury and DHS systems; he urged subpoenas and oversight "to have them explain under oath what the hell they're doing." Representatives Ramirez, McIvor, Swalwell, and others described concerns that inexperienced or unvetted personnel had been granted access to sensitive data and argued the committee needed documentation about who had access, what safeguards exist, and what data may have been moved or disclosed.

H.Res.114 seeks documents relating to DHS actions affecting domestic preparedness and collective response to terrorism, including whether the administration's actions to freeze certain grant lines have disrupted programs for first responders, transit systems, ports and nonprofit security programs. Members from jurisdictions dependent on DHS grants, including Representatives Hernandez and Turner, said the funding freeze threatens disaster recovery and daily public-safety operations. Representative Magaziner recounted specific instances in Rhode Island where nonprofit security grants and other funds were being withheld and said, "Withholding them is most illegal. And we need answers from the administration about why these inexperienced tech bros ... have been empowered to cut off funding from public safety all across the country with no accountability."

The committee proceeded to record votes after debate. For H.Res.113 the clerk reported 13 ayes and 8 nos; for H.Res.114 the clerk reported 13 ayes and 10 nos. The chair announced the ayes had it on voice votes earlier in the markup but the members requested recorded votes later; the committee then postponed further proceedings consistent with committee rules and later closed the roll calls which produced the recorded tallies.

Ending note: Supporters of the two resolutions framed them as constitutionally required oversight to understand who has access to sensitive data and whether congressionally appropriated grant funds are being withheld; opponents argued the committee had already addressed these issues through other means and opposed the resolutions being favorably reported.