Cloud, Michael [R-TX-27]
Republican · TX · 18 bills sponsored
SAFE Olympic Sports Act
# SAFE Olympic Sports Act Summary **What the Bill Would Do:** The SAFE Olympic Sports Act (HR 7421) is a proposed law focused on safeguarding athletes in Olympic sports. While specific details about the bill's provisions aren't available in the provided information, bills with this title typically aim to establish or strengthen safety standards, oversight, and accountability measures for organizations governing Olympic sports—particularly addressing athlete protection, abuse prevention, and reporting mechanisms. **Who It Affects:** This bill would primarily impact Olympic athletes, national sports governing bodies (like USA Swimming or USA Gymnastics), the U.S. Olympic Committee, and related sports organizations. It could also affect coaches, staff members, and the overall structure of how Olympic sports are regulated in the United States. **Current Status:** The bill is currently in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House of Representatives. It was introduced by Representative Michael Cloud (R-Texas). For more detailed information about the bill's specific provisions, you would need to review the full text on Congress.gov or similar legislative tracking websites.
District of Columbia Medicaid Fairness Act
# District of Columbia Medicaid Fairness Act Summary **What the Bill Would Do:** HR 5815, the District of Columbia Medicaid Fairness Act, addresses federal funding for Medicaid in Washington, D.C. While specific details aren't available in the provided information, bills with this title typically seek to adjust how the federal government funds D.C.'s Medicaid program or change the matching formula between federal and local contributions. Medicaid is the joint federal-state health insurance program for low-income individuals. **Who It Affects:** This bill would primarily affect D.C. residents who rely on Medicaid for health insurance coverage, as well as the District's budget and healthcare system. It could also influence how the federal government distributes healthcare funding across different jurisdictions. **Current Status:** The bill is currently in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet advanced to a full floor vote in the House of Representatives. To understand the specific provisions and implications, you would need to review the full text of HR 5815 on Congress.gov, as the summary information provided does not include the detailed policy changes being proposed.
Natural Gas Export Expansion Act
# Natural Gas Export Expansion Act Summary **What the Bill Would Do** HR 5814 aims to expand the United States' ability to export liquefied natural gas (LNG) to other countries. While specific details aren't available in the basic information provided, bills with this title typically work to streamline the approval process for new natural gas export facilities or increase the volume of gas that existing facilities can export internationally. **Who It Affects** The bill would primarily impact natural gas producers and export companies who want to sell LNG abroad, as well as potential international buyers of U.S. natural gas. It could also affect domestic energy prices, energy workers, and communities near natural gas infrastructure. **Current Status** As of the information provided, HR 5814 is in committee, meaning it has been introduced but not yet voted on by the full House of Representatives. The bill was sponsored by Rep. Michael Cloud (R-TX), whose district includes the Texas coast where much of America's LNG export infrastructure is located. *Note: For complete details on specific provisions, you may want to check Congress.gov or contact your representative's office, as the summary information available here is limited.*
To amend the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 to adjust the timing of the Congressional summer adjournment, and other purposes.
# Summary of HR 5459 **What the Bill Would Do** This bill would change when Congress takes its summer break each year. Currently, Congress is required to adjourn (stop meeting) by July 31st under rules established in 1946. HR 5459 would adjust this timing, though the specific new date isn't detailed in the available information. The bill also includes undefined "other purposes," suggesting it may contain additional provisions beyond the summer adjournment change. **Who It Affects** This bill primarily affects members of Congress and their staff, as it changes their work schedule. It could indirectly affect the public by potentially changing when legislative business gets done during the summer months, though the impact would likely be minimal since Congress often works during the break anyway or conducts business through committee hearings and other activities. **Current Status** The bill is currently in committee, meaning it's in the early stages of the legislative process and hasn't yet been debated or voted on by the full House of Representatives. As of now, it remains a proposal with no indication of when or whether it will advance further.
Expressing support for designating September 12, 2025, as "The Day of the Bible" in the United States of America.
# Summary of HJRES 118 **What the Bill Would Do** This bill is a symbolic resolution expressing congressional support for designating September 12, 2025, as "The Day of the Bible" in the United States. If passed, it would not create any new laws or government programs—it's a statement of support rather than binding legislation. The resolution would recognize and honor the Bible's historical and cultural significance in American society. **Who It Affects and Current Status** This bill affects all Americans symbolically, as it concerns a national observance. It's currently in committee, meaning it hasn't yet been debated or voted on by the full House of Representatives. The bill was sponsored by Representative Michael Cloud (R-TX). Similar "Day of the Bible" resolutions have been introduced in previous congressional sessions. **Key Point** Since this is a non-binding resolution rather than legislation, passage would simply represent a congressional acknowledgment of the Bible's role in American history and culture—it would not require any government action or spending.
Preserving Presidential Management Authority Act
# Preserving Presidential Management Authority Act (HR 2249) **What It Would Do** This bill would expand the president's authority to manage federal employees and their employment conditions. While the specific details aren't fully outlined in the provided information, bills with this title typically aim to give presidents greater flexibility in hiring, firing, and managing the federal workforce—potentially by reducing civil service protections or streamlining oversight processes. **Who It Affects** The primary groups affected would be federal employees (roughly 2.3 million civilian workers) and the agencies that employ them. The changes could also impact the public, since federal employees deliver services ranging from national defense to social security administration. Presidential administrations would gain expanded powers to reorganize and manage these workforces. **Current Status** HR 2249 is currently in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House. To become law, it would need to pass the House, then the Senate, and receive presidential approval. --- *Note: For a complete understanding of specific provisions, you may want to review the full bill text on Congress.gov.*
Protecting the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Act of 2025
# Protecting the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Act of 2025 - Summary **What the Bill Would Do:** This bill would prevent the federal government from using emergency declarations (such as those issued during natural disasters or public health crises) as a way to restrict gun rights. It would also prohibit federal officials, employees, and anyone receiving federal funding from banning or restricting firearms, ammunition, or gun accessories during emergency response and disaster relief operations. **Who It Affects:** The bill would impact federal agencies involved in disaster response, federal employees, and gun owners. It essentially limits the executive branch's authority to implement gun control measures during declared emergencies or disasters. **Current Status:** The bill (HR 2039) is currently in committee and has not yet been voted on by the full House. It was introduced by Representative Michael Cloud (R-TX) in the 119th Congress.
Return to Sender Act
# Return to Sender Act (HR 1982) - Summary **What the Bill Would Do:** The Return to Sender Act is currently in committee and hasn't yet released detailed text describing its specific provisions. Based on the bill title and sponsorship, it appears to be related to addressing mail or delivery issues, though the exact scope remains unclear without access to the full legislative language. **Who It Affects and Current Status:** The bill was introduced in the 119th Congress by Representative Michael Cloud (R-TX) but has not advanced beyond the committee stage. Until the bill text is publicly available or moves forward in the legislative process, specific details about who would be affected and what key provisions it contains cannot be confirmed. **Note:** For accurate, detailed information about this bill's purpose and provisions, I'd recommend checking Congress.gov or contacting Representative Cloud's office directly, as the full bill text would provide the specific policy details needed for a complete summary.
End FEMA Benefits for Illegal Immigrants Act
# Summary of HR 1668: End FEMA Benefits for Illegal Immigrants Act **What the bill would do:** This bill would shut down a FEMA program called the Shelter and Services Program (SSP) and take back federal funding allocated to it for 2023-2024. Currently, this program provides grants to local organizations and nonprofits to offer temporary shelter, food, transportation, and other services to migrants who have been released from immigration custody while they wait for their immigration court cases to be resolved. **Who it affects:** The bill would directly impact noncitizen migrants awaiting immigration proceedings who currently receive shelter and services through the program. It would also affect the public agencies and nonprofit organizations—such as shelters and community groups—that receive federal grants to provide these services. **Current status:** HR 1668 is currently in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet been voted on by the full House. The bill was sponsored by Representative Michael Cloud, a Republican from Texas.
Dismantling Investments in Violation of Ethical Standards through Trusts Act
# Summary of HR 1599: Dismantling Investments in Violation of Ethical Standards through Trusts Act **What It Does:** This bill would restrict high-ranking federal employees—specifically those in Senior Executive Service positions—from owning certain types of investments while they work for the government. The restrictions would also apply to their spouses and dependent children. Prohibited investments include individual stocks, commodities, and complex financial instruments like derivatives. However, the restrictions wouldn't apply to diversified mutual funds, Treasury bonds, or money earned from a spouse or child's regular job. Affected employees would have 180 days to sell prohibited holdings. **Who It Affects & Key Provisions:** The bill targets roughly 6,000-8,000 senior federal executives across government agencies. Its goal is to prevent conflicts of interest—ensuring that high-ranking officials make decisions based on the public interest rather than personal financial gain. The main exemptions allow for qualified blind trusts (where investments are managed without the employee knowing details), diversified investment funds, and investments below certain value thresholds. This approach aims to balance ethical concerns with practical realities of employee finances. **Current Status:** As of now, the bill remains in committee and has not been voted on by the full House. It was introduced by Republican Representative Michael Cloud of Texas.
Cost Estimates Improvement Act
# Cost Estimates Improvement Act Summary **What the Bill Would Do** The Cost Estimates Improvement Act would change how Congress receives budget information about proposed legislation. Currently, when the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and Joint Committee on Taxation prepare cost estimates for new bills, they calculate how much the legislation would cost the government. This bill would require those cost estimates to also include the costs of servicing (paying interest on) the public debt that results from the spending. In other words, it would show the full long-term financial impact of new laws, including the interest payments taxpayers would owe on any new borrowing. **Who It Affects and Key Provisions** This bill primarily affects Congress, as it changes what information lawmakers receive before voting on legislation. It could indirectly affect the general public by potentially making the true costs of legislation more visible to both legislators and constituents. The bill has no provisions limiting what Congress can spend—it only requires different accounting and reporting practices. The change could make expensive legislation appear even more costly on paper, potentially influencing how lawmakers and voters view proposed bills. **Current Status** As of now, HR 991 is in committee and has not advanced to a full floor vote in the House. It was introduced in the 119th Congress by Representative Michael Cloud (R-TX).
PATROL Act
# PATROL Act Summary **What the Bill Does** The PATROL Act (Preventing Aliens Through Rivers or Land Act) would prevent the Department of Justice from suing states that build structures in navigable waterways along the U.S. border for security purposes. Normally, federal law requires approval before constructing bridges, dams, dikes, or other structures in navigable waters. This bill would create an exception for border security projects, allowing states to build these structures without facing federal legal action—even if they don't have federal permission. **Who It Affects** The bill primarily affects border states (like Texas) and the federal government. States would gain more freedom to construct border security infrastructure in or over waterways. The federal government would lose its ability to enforce federal environmental and water regulations in these specific situations. Native American tribes, environmental groups, and communities downstream from such structures could also be affected if projects proceed without standard federal oversight. **Current Status** The bill is currently in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet been voted on by the full House. It was sponsored by Representative Michael Cloud (R-TX) in the 119th Congress.
Dismantle DEI Act of 2025
# Dismantle DEI Act of 2025 - Summary **What the Bill Would Do:** The Dismantle DEI Act of 2025 would eliminate or restrict diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and initiatives across federal agencies and departments. Based on its subject areas, the bill would likely prohibit federal funding for DEI-related positions, training programs, and advisory committees. It would also potentially affect how federal agencies evaluate employee performance and hiring practices, and could impact education programs that receive federal funding. **Who It Affects:** This bill would primarily affect federal employees and contractors working across multiple agencies including the Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, Coast Guard, and others. It would also impact educational institutions and programs that receive federal funding, as well as any organizations contracted by the government that currently maintain DEI initiatives. **Current Status:** The bill was introduced by Representative Michael Cloud (R-TX) and is currently in committee, meaning it has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House of Representatives. At this stage, it remains a proposal rather than law.
No Regulation Through Litigation Act of 2025
# No Regulation Through Litigation Act of 2025 - Summary **What the bill would do:** This bill would restrict how federal agencies settle lawsuits with outside groups. Specifically, it would prevent agencies from agreeing to consent decrees (court-approved settlement agreements) that go beyond what the court has the legal authority to order. It would also limit or prohibit agencies from paying the opposing party's attorney fees and legal costs when settlements result in new regulations or guidance documents. **Who it affects:** The bill would primarily affect federal agencies, environmental and consumer advocacy groups that sue agencies, and the courts. Advocacy organizations that currently recover legal fees in settlements with agencies would be impacted, as would agencies' ability to resolve litigation quickly through settlements. **Current status:** The bill (HR 849) was introduced in the 119th Congress by Representative Michael Cloud (R-TX) and is currently in committee, meaning it has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House. No action has been taken beyond the initial filing.
SWAG Act
# SWAG Act Summary The Stop Wasteful Advertising by the Government Act (HR 757) would prohibit federal agencies from using taxpayer money to purchase or distribute promotional merchandise—branded items like t-shirts, hats, or mugs—or to create and use mascots for promotional purposes. The bill aims to reduce what its sponsor considers wasteful government spending on marketing materials. The legislation would apply to all federal agencies and entities, affecting how they conduct outreach and promotional activities. The bill includes three main exceptions: agencies could still use promotional items if specifically authorized by existing law, if the items are related to military recruitment efforts, or if they're athletic team mascots for military academies. Currently, the bill is in committee and has not yet been voted on by the full House of Representatives. As a piece of proposed legislation, it reflects a broader debate about government spending priorities and the appropriate use of federal funds for advertising and public engagement activities.
287(g) Program Protection Act
# 287(g) Program Protection Act Summary **What the bill does:** This bill would require the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to allow state and local police departments to perform federal immigration enforcement tasks if they request to do so. Currently, DHS has the discretion to grant or deny such requests. Under this bill, DHS could only refuse a request if it has a "compelling reason" to do so. The bill would also require DHS to publish annual reports on how these programs are performing and plans to expand them to more states and localities. **Who it affects:** State and local law enforcement agencies, immigrants subject to enforcement activities, and communities where these programs operate. The bill could significantly expand immigration enforcement activities beyond what federal agencies currently handle. **Current status:** The bill (HR 756) is currently in committee and has not yet been voted on by the full House of Representatives. It was introduced in the 119th Congress by Representative Michael Cloud (R-TX).
No Retaining Every Gun In a System That Restricts Your Rights Act
# Bill Summary: No Retaining Every Gun In a System That Restricts Your Rights Act (HR 563) **What it would do:** This bill would change federal rules about firearm transaction records when gun dealers go out of business. Currently, when a federally licensed gun dealer closes, they must hand over all their sales records to the ATF (the federal agency that regulates firearms). This bill would eliminate that requirement and also require the ATF to destroy any records it already has from closed gun dealers. **Who it affects:** The bill primarily affects gun dealers closing their businesses, gun owners (whose purchase records could be destroyed), and the ATF. It also affects law enforcement agencies that use these records for investigations, and the general public depending on one's views about gun regulation and record-keeping. **Current status:** The bill was introduced by Representative Michael Cloud (R-TX) in the 119th Congress and is currently in committee, meaning it hasn't yet been debated or voted on by the full House of Representatives.
Federal Agency Sunset Commission Act of 2025
# Federal Agency Sunset Commission Act of 2025 - Plain Language Summary **What It Would Do** This bill would create a new "Sunset Commission" tasked with reviewing every federal agency and advisory committee to determine whether they should continue operating. Under the proposal, agencies would automatically shut down unless Congress votes to keep them running. The commission would evaluate each agency at least once every 12 years, examining whether it's efficient, still needed, and operating within its legal authority. The commission would then recommend to Congress whether agencies should be abolished, reorganized, or continued. **Who It Affects** This bill would impact federal agencies and their employees, Congress, and potentially the public services those agencies provide—ranging from environmental protection to healthcare to national defense. Any advisory committees attached to federal agencies would also be subject to review. Essentially, it affects how the federal government operates and what functions it maintains. **Key Provisions & Current Status** The bill requires the commission to analyze whether executive branch agencies are doing things Congress never actually authorized them to do, and to report on any new agency legislation introduced in Congress. The Government Accountability Office and Congressional Budget Office would assist with reviews. As of now, the bill is in committee and has not been voted on by the full House.