Missed AFSA’s Aug. 4 Advocacy Town Hall? Below are edited highlights from Congressional Advocacy Director Kim Sullivan’s briefing on the major legislative developments affecting the Foreign Service.

The recap covers the House’s Foreign Service Modernization Act, the Senate’s State Department Authorization Act, AFSA’s priorities and concerns from these proposals, legislation affecting RIF-separated employees, and what to expect from Congress in the months ahead.

Remarks have been edited and condensed for clarity.

What is the State of Play in the 119th Congress?

The 119th Congress has been fraught, and legislation related to the Foreign Service is not being proposed in a vacuum. A thin partisan margin has led to a historic number of failed rules on the House floor.

We’ve seen heightened executive branch frustrations over the Senate filibuster, which still requires 60 votes to pass partisan legislation when all three branches are controlled by the same party except in narrow circumstances.

Saying tensions are high is an understatement.

The Road to Today’s Congressional Foreign Service Reform Efforts

In early 2025, Representative Brian Mast (R-FL) became chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC), making it known that he wanted to authorize elements of the Department of State that were not codified. There is a strong desire, a bipartisan one even, that the Department of State should be re-authorized more regularly as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) does for defense.

Then, the reorganization and the reductions-in-force (RIFs) at the Department of State, in addition to the dismantling of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the RIFs there, were conducted over the next few months. The Department of State authorization efforts in HFAC last fall attempted to codify parts of the reorganization, including the movement of foreign assistance into the Department of State.

The effort was split into seven different bills corresponding with the undersecretaries, alongside a policy changes bill. Most of the efforts ended up being partisan and unable to pass in a narrow-margin Congress.

Only the three bipartisan bills from HFAC’s Department of State reauthorization effort were ultimately included in the Fiscal Year 2026 (FY26) NDAA. Specifically, the bills focused on Political Affairs (P, H.R. 5246), Management (M, H.R. 5245), and Public Diplomacy (R, H.R. 5251). These changes were made alongside the Senate’s usual bipartisan Department of State Authorization Act, which the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC) leaders have put forward for the past few years.

All these changes were made via the FY26 NDAA, which passed in December 2025. A full readout of workforce impacts from that particular NDAA can be found in our January 2026 written advocacy update.

AFSA’s Priorities for Congressional Foreign Service Reform Efforts

As all the Department of State reauthorization efforts were happening, HFAC Chairman Brian Mast made it clear he wanted to look at the Foreign Service Act.

Knowing this was coming, AFSA gathered Foreign Service Act-centered priorities based on our “State of the Foreign Service in 2025” survey results and past surveys on pressing issues related to the mobile nature of the Foreign Service. We knew some of these would be low-hanging fruit and easier to ask for, while others would be more difficult but important to push. We also had to balance this list with what was realistic in the current political environment. For example, anything with a large price tag we knew would generally be viewed as too costly to pass the 119th Congress.

First and foremost, we wanted to maintain the foundational elements that made the Foreign Service a distinct and effective instrument of American statecraft. This included items like preserving the rank-in-person structure and maintaining already codified collective bargaining rights. AFSA continued to advocate for Chief of Mission (COM) positions and other designated Foreign Service roles to be filled primarily by career members rather than political appointees, reinforcing the value of a professional, nonpartisan diplomatic corps. In addition, we wanted to preserve a recruitment process that drew talent from all segments of American society.

AFSA also advocated for greater transparency in the hiring and promotion process. For prospective and new members, we sought to make the rank-order criteria for the candidate register public. For members being considered for promotion, we supported the timely publication of Foreign Service lists, along with prompt congressional notification, to improve transparency and help accelerate confirmation of these lists.

AFSA was also committed to providing greater flexibility for members throughout their careers. We advocated for raising the mandatory retirement age to 67, aligning it with current full Social Security eligibility. We also sought to reinstate the annuity exception so that members who were not promoted within specified timeframes could still meet the requirements for an immediate pension.

Additionally, we sought to expand the jurisdiction of the Foreign Service Grievance Board (FSGB) to hear grievances from former members who had been separated without notice. Additionally, we wanted to establish time limits for selection board consideration of disciplinary letters and for final decisions regarding members' security clearance statuses. We also supported creating a more graduated disciplinary system that minimized the career-stalling effects of administrative delays while ensuring fair and timely resolution of personnel matters.

AFSA prioritized advocating for reemployment and rehiring rights for members who had been separated from the Service. We requested a practical pathway for former USAID Foreign Service members, including full recognition of prior grade and retirement eligibility, to be rehired by the Department of State. We also remained committed to ensuring that Foreign Service Fellows who had completed their educational requirements were hired in a timely manner.

AFSA continued to defend the Foreign Service retirement system and the allowances and benefits that recognize the rigors and hazards of serving in difficult and dangerous posts. We advocated for codifying that Foreign Service reductions-in-force (RIFs) must be conducted using worldwide, competitive groups based on rank and cone or specialty, rather than current assignment.

Finally, AFSA sought to focus on protecting training and detail opportunities to support robust professional development.

We’ve been working with Congress all year to have several of these priorities introduced as standalone bills.

Navigating a Difficult Political Environment & Educating Member Offices

Some members of Congress want large-scale change—they support the reorganization and the various executive orders to take away collective bargaining rights. Others want to codify USAID’s dismantling and further gut foreign assistance. Fortunately, these sentiments are generally not bipartisan, which you must have for anything not under reconciliation in this environment. The risk of anything too harmful getting signed into law is reduced significantly by the thin partisan margin in the House and a 60-vote threshold in the Senate for most legislation. In addition, the four lead authorizers for the Foreign Service Act must generally agree with what ends up in a final NDAA from their efforts. Discouraging these efforts would likely leave us no option to make meaningful changes for the workforce. On top of this, we need legislative vehicles, known as must-pass bills, like the NDAA to enact any changes—including the positive ones that benefit the workforce.

In the winter and spring of 2026, Congress looked to AFSA for guidance on this process as the collective representation for the Foreign Service workforce. Many members of Congress, especially newer House members who are often only on HFAC for a term or two, are largely unfamiliar with the inner workings of the Foreign Service itself. Staff turnover is also significant among these member offices. We are often doing re-education every two years corresponding with the House election cycle. Thus, there was a great deal of education needed to even explain our priorities and why those changes were needed. It was also made clear this would happen in the 119th Congress while there is still unified government in place—there was very limited time to make our case.

The House's Foreign Service Modernization Act

After negotiations between the majority and minority committee staff, the Foreign Service Modernization Act (H.R. 9086) was introduced on June 2 by Representative Mike Lawler (R-NY) and HFAC Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL).

This bill represents the bulk of the House’s effort surrounding Foreign Service Act reform and a true bipartisan compromise—where neither side gets 100 percent of what it wants. On June 9, HFAC began considering bills that would significantly impact members of the Foreign Service, including H.R. 9086. This link lists the bills and amendments considered during this markup.

AFSA analyzed H.R. 9086 for Foreign Service workforce impacts. To touch on just a few key changes: The bill emphasizes recruitment reforms such as outreach to nontraditional institutions of higher education. To attract military personnel, it creates a “Foreign Service Pathway for Veterans Program,” a five-year pilot program for streamlined hiring of veterans into tracks like Diplomatic Security. It also establishes specialized programs like the Diplomatic Security Fellowship, a dedicated hiring pipeline for the Bureau of African Affairs, and a Diplomatic Reserve Corps Pilot Program. Additionally, the bill looks at career development and training, specifically creating an independent commission to evaluate the effectiveness of the Foreign Service career tracks. There is also a section on expeditionary diplomacy that sets out to make engaging directly in challenging environments a normal part of regular diplomatic operations.

What AFSA Supports in the House Foreign Service Modernization Act—and Where We Have Concerns

AFSA made clear what it supports in the bill to Capitol Hill immediately: First and foremost, the bill preserves Foreign Service members’ state residency for purposes such as income and personal property taxes while serving abroad or in another state under official orders. AFSA also welcomes the workforce protections that safeguard employees from adverse career impacts resulting from participation in external training or detail assignments. We were also encouraged to see a commitment to ensuring Foreign Service fellows receive hiring determinations within 12 months of fulfilling their educational requirements. Finally, AFSA supports the provision forcing the timely transmission of Foreign Service promotion and tenure lists to Congress, helping reduce unnecessary delays on the executive branch side of the process.

However, there are many provisions that would be logistically difficult, even impossible, to implement. For example, imposing a requirement that members of the Foreign Service serve a tour at another agency of the federal or local government (called a joint duty requirement) is extremely difficult because the number of these opportunities at other government agencies is very small. Unless the number of opportunities increases, making this a consideration for promotion into the Senior Foreign Service (SFS) is a recipe for chaos, even with exceptions. Another section imposes a requirement that someone who studies a language must then serve three consecutive tours using that language. This does not consider that standard tours are two to four years in length, and sending someone to a post for eight to 12 years negates the concept of a mobile Foreign Service. As certain languages are only spoken in one or two posts, the department lacks enough designated positions to fulfill this requirement globally. Finally, the imposition of a structured training framework and protected training periods for promotion eligibility would be very difficult to implement in the current up-or-out system. Members of the Foreign Service at the same rank have varying amounts of Time-in-Class (TIC) remaining, and some could reach their TIC limit before they can realistically fulfill the requirement.

What Changed During the House Foreign Affairs Committee's Consideration of the Bill

AFSA immediately alerted Capitol Hill that these sections would not aid the Foreign Service workforce and could be harmful to members’ careers or the institution itself. Knowing there were concerns about certain provisions, members of Congress offered amendments to another bill considered at that markup, H.R. 9087, that are really meant to change provisions in H.R. 9086. This method was certainly abnormal, but it was a way to make sure H.R. 9086 remained bipartisan without poison pill amendments, which H.R. 9087 (the amended bill) contains… we expect the HFAC-passed amendments to H.R. 9087 will be used in negotiations for including H.R. 9086, the Foreign Service Modernization Act, in the FY27 NDAA. H.R. 9086 remained a widely supported, bipartisan product (vote: 38 to 2) without amendment during the markup. On June 9, HFAC paused after 11 hours of debate on approximately 100 amendments without finishing consideration of the other bills. The remaining amendments related to the Foreign Service hung in limbo for weeks.

Finally, on July 22, HFAC resumed the markup to consider 95 amendments to H.R. 9087. We’ll only focus on those impacting the workforce. To name a few amendments AFSA was glad to see pass: One providing congressional notifications for Foreign Service entrance exam changes, a pre-K allowance authorization, one restoring the Foreign Service annuity exception that is the same as the military’s, one realigning the mandatory retirement age to 67 if the Secretary certifies it won’t negatively impact promotions, one providing per diem for required leave, one providing voting residency in your same state no matter where you move on official orders, one limiting Artificial Intelligence (AI) for personnel decisions without human oversight, and one to authorize employee organizations without partisan affiliations. There were also improvements made to provisions AFSA was concerned about during the July 22 amendment votes:

Section 501 of H.R. 9086 (joint duty requirement) – This is the requirement to serve outside your agency before being promoted past a certain rank. The amendment provides the Department of State five years to implement the requirement, and members get waivers in two-year increments. An administration that wants to make some opportunities available can develop several such opportunities and then give waivers to the hundreds of employees who will need them. The Department of State would likely need to give waivers to dozens of personnel, if not hundreds, every year. However, we don’t know if the Secretary will follow through on waivers. Most “joint duty” opportunities have already been cut by the current administration. AFSA suggested prescribing an increase in “joint duty” opportunities without other specifics related to Senior Foreign Service (SFS) entry.

Section 603 of H.R. 9086 (use of world language skills) – As we noted before, this has many problems, and Foreign Service members are already motivated to do additional tours because they have spent the effort to learn a language and want to use it again. While the amendment changed the requirement to just two consecutive language tours, AFSA suggested making the tours non-consecutive as a more feasible option beneficial to members.

Section 609 of H.R. 9086 (structured training framework and protected training periods) – In practice, this section aims to overhaul Foreign Service professional development by institutionalizing a mandatory, military-style training pipeline. As noted earlier, in an up-or-out system where members at the same rank have varying amounts of time-in-class (TIC) remaining, some could reach their TIC limit before they can realistically fulfill this promotion requirement. We are not sure if the waiver would be used, and the amendment only adds an experiential component for a simulation. There is still a requirement for promotion. AFSA suggested making this framework apply only to new hires rather than making it a requirement for existing Foreign Service members.

Of course, there were other amendments to H.R. 9087 we wanted to see approved (but weren’t) that would have helped the workforce, such as codifying Deputy Chiefs of Mission (DCMs) as Foreign Service members, text to aid in the reemployment of former USAID members at State, a Basic Housing Allowance (BHA) when you are given a Permanent Change of Station (PCS) more than 50 miles from your home, granting the FSGB jurisdiction to decide grievances of former members of the Foreign Service separated without notice, and an Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report on RIF impacts. Most disappointing was the approval of an amendment allowing the Secretary to transfer USAID functions to the Department of State, as well as abolish the Agency. AFSA’s priority remains warding off the inclusion of this amendment in any final NDAA text and propping up AFSA-supported amendments that were approved for inclusion in a final bill.

Understandably, there was a ton of trepidation regarding this HFAC process given the partisan process that happened last year during consideration of the Department of State reauthorization bills. For now, we are hopeful the elements of the Foreign Service Act we wanted to preserve, like collective bargaining rights, are not being targeted and that some mobile-lifestyle improvements for the workforce can be made.

The Senate’s Approach – Another State Department Authorization Act

Senators Jim Risch (R-ID) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, submitted a bipartisan FY27 Department of State Authorization Act as an amendment to the Senate FY27 NDAA. This link is to the version being proposed for inclusion in what is called a manager’s package—or a list of amendments leadership wants to include in the bill. Among its many provisions, AFSA highlighted the key changes affecting the Foreign Service workforce in our weekly communication on July 10.

To summarize, one section directs the Department of State to create a “training float” by January 1, 2027, reserving 8 to 10 percent of Civil and Foreign Service personnel at any given time for long-term professional development. Another section ensures that Foreign Service members affected by the closure, consolidation, or downsizing of their posts are allowed to rebid for comparable positions elsewhere in the service. Another establishes an additional incentive pay structure to financially reward and retain officers with critical foreign language proficiency, even when they are not actively using those languages in their assignments.

The bill also includes several family and personnel support provisions. One section directs the Secretary of State to pursue bilateral agreements allowing eligible family members of diplomats to work in host countries. Sections 8110 and 8115, respectively, require the Department to cover moving expenses for teleworking spouses transitioning between overseas posts and to pay return relocation costs for Foreign Service members upon retirement. Another section ensures members with existing hard or super-hard language skills are prioritized for critical assignments to reduce delays and avoid redundant training pipelines.

Additional provisions focus on program management and workforce oversight. One section also requires an overhaul of the au pair program through a uniform federal rule that increases stipends, adds scheduling flexibility for families with non-traditional work schedules, and strengthens health and safety protections. Another mandates a report assessing the Department’s critical language capabilities, including staffing levels, incentives, obstacles, and reliance on contractors versus employees. Finally, the text requires the Department to develop a formal system for capturing lessons learned from embassy evacuations and to report this methodology to Congress.

The one section that AFSA was really concerned about, which imposed rigorous placement standards by prohibiting Foreign Service officers from occupying mid-to-senior level positions (above GS-12 or FS-03) within the Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) unless they possess a minimum of two years of relevant intelligence experience, was removed when the bill was put forward as an amendment to the Senate NDAA in a manager’s package. It was great to see overly prescriptive items being removed by Congress. The Senate has yet to consider its version of the NDAA and formally adopt the manager's package containing the latest SFRC State Department Authorization Act.

Authorizations Require Resources

Something I always seek to emphasize for authorizers is to coordinate with appropriators—the Foreign Service has faced cuts over the past few years. Yet, these new ideas take resources to implement. Please do not make changes without resources. While the NDAA with these provisions could pass before the end of the year, they are only authorizations. Delays can and will happen without additional funds.

Updates for Specific Foreign Service Communities

Foreign Agricultural Service/Animal Plant Health Inspection Service

Regarding the Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), a few of you asked about the Department of Agriculture's re-organization and relocation initiative. AFSA is hosting a town hall for these constituencies on Thursday, August 6, at noon. We’ve been assured that the reorganization does not impact the Foreign Service directly. Please ask your specific questions at your town hall with our legal team.

Reemployment for RIF-Separated Members

Regarding those separated via RIFs, including our USAID members, AFSA has championed bills focused on reemployment for this group. The Pathways for Advancement, Transition, and Hiring (PATH) to the Foreign Service Act (H.R.8642 / S.4466): Representative Dina Titus (D-NV) and Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI) introduced a bill that provides a Foreign Service career pathway for former USAID members at the Department of State. The bill would streamline elements of the reappointment and hiring process, including waiving the Foreign Service entrance exam requirement—to ensure former USAID members' (AFSA encouraged that all-encompassing wording to ensure everyone is covered from the Foreign Service in that agency) speedy integration at a grade commensurate with their prior rank.

More relevant for those given RIF notices at the Department of State: The Foreign Service Workforce Retention Act (H.R.8987 / S.4642): Representative Johnny Olszewski (D-MD), Representative Ami Bera (D-CA), Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), and Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI) introduced a bill codifying recall and reappointment rights for separated career Foreign Service members, which is already provided to retired members. The bill ensures there is no question whether separated Foreign Service members can be reemployed. The Foreign Service Test-Free Reentry Act (H.R. 9730) from Representative Don Beyer (D-VA) builds on this reemployment right further and prescribes that those separated do not need to retake the entrance exam if reappointed, in case there is a requirement imposed.

Foreign Commercial Service

Regarding the Foreign Commercial Service (FCS), the House has also been particularly interested in commercial diplomacy and how to revamp that work between the Department of State and the Department of Commerce to the benefit of American businesses. The idea of moving the Foreign Commercial Service to the Department of State has come up in this discussion, which AFSA opposed, but it does not have widespread support. The Department of Commerce certainly doesn’t support the idea. AFSA doesn’t expect this idea to be seriously revived at all for the remainder of this Congress. AFSA continues to collaborate with the House and explore ideas that would best support American businesses—with the help of both FCS Foreign Service officers and Department of State economic officers.

What Comes Next

AFSA expects provisions from the SFRC’s Department of State Authorization Act, as well as provisions from HFAC’s Foreign Service Modernization Act, will end up in the final FY27 NDAA. The amendments passed with bipartisan support from H.R. 9087, which amends H.R. 9086, are also expected to be negotiated for inclusion. Consideration of a final FY27 NDAA is unlikely to occur until the lame-duck session of the 119th Congress. It is also possible that things fall apart, given tensions surrounding the NDAA related to the Iran war—there’s more scrutiny on this bill than ever before.

AFSA expects Congress to only focus on must-pass items for the remainder of the year: mainly the FY27 NDAA and final FY27 funding, which are both likely to be settled in the lame-duck session. We could also see consideration of another reconciliation bill. Lame-duck sessions are notoriously unpredictable.

Thus, we are starting to turn toward the next Congress.

How do the midterms shape what Congress wants to accomplish from 2027 through 2028? A record-setting total of 71 members of Congress are not seeking re-election in 2026, marking the highest number of departures in over three decades. This includes 60 U.S. Representatives and 11 U.S. Senators who are either retiring from public office entirely or running for other positions. We know we will need to build relationships with these new offices.

SFRC is set to gain a new Ranking Member with the retirement of Senator Jeanne Shaheen — who will take over that role? With the recent passing of Senator Lindsey Graham, who will take over for the Department of State appropriations subcommittee in the Senate next year (Senator Susan Collins is filling the role for the rest of the 119th Congress)?

These are big questions that will shape the 120th Congress for the Foreign Service.

How Can Members Learn More About AFSA’s Advocacy Efforts?

For any further questions on specific legislation, please do write to our member inbox: member@afsa.org or ogc@afsa.org for legal-specific questions.