[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
MARKUP OF H.R. 8364, TO AMEND
TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, TO
AUTHORIZE THE INCREASE OF THE RETIREMENT
AGE IN THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE
=======================================================================
MARKUP
before the
COMMITTEE ON HOUSE
ADMINISTRATION
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
APRIL 22, 2026
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
www.govinfo.gov
www.cha.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
63-538 WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION
BRYAN STEIL, Wisconsin, Chairman
LAUREL LEE, Florida, Vice Chair JOSEPH MORELLE, New York,
BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia Ranking Member
H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama
GREG MURPHY, North Carolina NORMA TORRES, California
STEPHANIE BICE, Oklahoma JULIE JOHNSON, Texas
MARY MILLER, Illinois
MIKE CAREY, Ohio
Mike Platt, Staff Director
Jamie Fleet, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Opening Statements
Chairman Bryan Steil, Representative from the State of Wisconsin. 1
Prepared statement of Chairman Bryan Steil................... 2
Ranking Member Joseph Morelle, Representative from the State of
New York....................................................... 2
Prepared statement of Ranking Member Joseph Morelle.......... 3
Submissions for the Record
H.R. 8364........................................................ 5
MARKUP OF H.R. 8364, TO AMEND
TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, TO
AUTHORIZE THE INCREASE OF THE RETIREMENT
AGE IN THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE
----------
April 22, 2026
Committee on House Administration,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in
room 1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Bryan Steil
[Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Steil, Lee, Loudermilk, Griffith,
Murphy, Carey, Miller, and Morelle.
Staff present: Mike Platt, Staff Director; Rachel Collins,
General Counsel; Elliot Smith, Director of Oversight; Kristen
Monterroso, Director of Operations; and Libby Sippel, Deputy
Director of Member Services; Khalil Abboud, Minority Deputy
Staff Director; Jamie Fleet, Minority Staff Director; and Matt
Schlesinger, Minority Senior Counsel.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BRYAN STEIL, CHAIRMAN OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM
WISCONSIN
Chairman Steil. The Committee on House Administration will
come to order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
recess at any time.
Today, the Committee on House Administration will consider
legislation to address staffing shortages at the U.S. Capitol
Police. I would like to thank my friend, Ranking Member
Morelle, for his collaboration on this important legislation.
Under current law, officers are forced to retire at age 57
unless they receive a waiver from the Capitol Police Board.
With a waiver, officers may continue working until they are age
60. Our nonpartisan legislation extends the waiver timeline.
Under the bill, the Capitol Police Board will have the
authority to grant waivers to sworn officers until they reach
65. It is critical that we quickly pass this statutory change.
Right now, nearly 60 sworn officers are working with a
waiver. Without this change, they will be forced to retire in
the next few years. That is the equivalent of more than two
recruitment classes for the U.S. Capitol Police. As many of us
know, there is already a staffing shortage with the force, but
it will only get far worse if we fail to act.
Let me also make clear there is past precedent to do
exactly what this bill does. In 2004 and in 2010, Congress
temporarily raised the mandatory Federal enforcement retirement
age from 60 to 65 to address staffing shortages at the FBI. It
is also important to emphasize that this legislation gives the
Capitol Police Board discretion when deciding who is still fit
for the job.
The men and women of the U.S. Capitol Police are some of
the best in the Nation, and we have an opportunity to continue
that tradition. These officers should not be forced into
retirement if they can still do their job, especially given the
manpower shortages in the force coupled with record threats
against lawmakers.
Again, my sincere thanks to Ranking Member Morelle for
working in collaboration with us on this bill to address the
staffing shortages at U.S. Capitol Police. I encourage all of
our colleagues here to support the legislation, and I thank
everyone for being here today.
I will now yield back and recognize the Ranking Member, Mr.
Morelle, for 5 minutes for the purpose of offering an opening
statement.
PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE ON HOUSE
ADMINISTRATION BRYAN STEIL
Today, the Committee on House Administration will consider
legislation to address staffing shortages at the U.S. Capitol
Police. I would like to thank my friend, Ranking Member
Morelle, for his collaboration on this important legislation.
Under current law, officers are forced to retire at age 57
unless they receive a waiver from the Capitol Police Board.
With a waiver, officers may continue working until they are age
60. Our nonpartisan legislation extends the waiver timeline.
Under the bill, the Capitol Police Board will have the
authority to grant waivers to sworn officers until they reach
65. It is critical that we quickly pass this statutory change.
Right now, nearly 60 sworn officers are working with a
waiver. Without this change, they will be forced to retire in
the next few years. That is the equivalent of more than two
recruitment classes for the U.S. Capitol Police. As many of us
know, there is already a staffing shortage with the force, but
it will only get far worse if we fail to act.
Let me also make clear there is past precedent to do
exactly what this bill does. In 2004 and in 2010, Congress
temporarily raised the mandatory Federal enforcement retirement
age from 60 to 65 to address staffing shortages at the FBI. It
is also important to emphasize that this legislation gives the
Capitol Police Board discretion when deciding who is still fit
for the job.
The men and women of the U.S. Capitol Police are some of
the best in the Nation, and we have an opportunity to continue
that tradition. These officers should not be forced into
retirement if they can still do their job, especially given the
manpower shortages in the force coupled with record threats
against lawmakers.
Again, my sincere thanks to Ranking Member Morelle for
working in collaboration with us on this bill to address the
staffing shortages at U.S. Capitol Police. I encourage all of
our colleagues here to support the legislation, and I thank
everyone for being here today.
I will now yield back and recognize the Ranking Member, Mr.
Morelle, for 5 minutes for the purpose of offering an opening
statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH MORELLE, RANKING MEMBER OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM
NEW YORK
Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do support this
legislation which, as you said, allows the Capitol Police Board
to grant mandatory retirement exemptions of officers up to 65
rather than the current age of 60.
The men and women of the United States Capitol Police have
one of the most important and challenging jobs in the
legislative branch. They protect the Capitol campus and the
thousands of Members, staff, and visitors who occupy it every
day, and they investigate threats, provide protective details,
screen visitors, respond to emergencies, investigate crimes,
monitor demonstrations, and secure major events like the State
of the Union and more. They do it all in an era of dramatically
increased threats and strain on the Department.
We have discussed at length in the Committee the Department
staffing and workforce capacity challenges, and I want to
commend Chief Sullivan and former Chief Manger for their
diligent work to rebuild the force.
I am pleased that the Department now has more than 2,300
sworn officers, and that is meaningful progress from the
staffing crisis the Department faced after the January 6 riots,
but there is still much more work to do. The large cohort of
officers who joined the Department after September 11
shockingly are now reaching retirement age. It is hard to
imagine. The Department cannot afford to lose a substantial
number of experienced and fully capable officers solely because
they reach an arbitrary age threshold.
The bill, as you point out--and I want to just underscore
this because it is important--does not change the mandatory
retirement age of 57. It simply gives the Capitol Police Board
discretion when doing so is in the public interest to allow an
officer to continue to serve until age 65 instead of 60.
Nothing in the bill lessens the Board's responsibility to
ensure any officer granted an exemption remains fully fit for
duty and capable of meeting the physical and operational
demands of the job.
This is a prudent, targeted step to preserve experience,
maintain staffing, help ensure the Department has the workforce
it needs, and for these reasons, I strongly recommend my
colleagues support the bill.
Thank you. I yield back.
PREPARED STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE ON HOUSE
ADMINISTRATION JOSEPH MORELLE
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do support this legislation
which, as you said, allows the Capitol Police Board to grant
mandatory retirement exemptions of officers up to 65 rather
than the current age of 60.
The men and women of the United States Capitol Police have
one of the most important and challenging jobs in the
legislative branch. They protect the Capitol campus and the
thousands of Members, staff, and visitors who occupy it every
day, and they investigate threats, provide protective details,
screen visitors, respond to emergencies, investigate crimes,
monitor demonstrations, and secure major events like the State
of the Union and more. They do it all in an era of dramatically
increased threats and strain on the Department.
We have discussed at length in the Committee the Department
staffing and workforce capacity challenges, and I want to
commend Chief Sullivan and former Chief Manger for their
diligent work to rebuild the force.
I am pleased that the Department now has more than 2,300
sworn officers, and that is meaningful progress from the
staffing crisis the Department faced after the January 6 riots,
but there is still much more work to do. The large cohort of
officers who joined the Department after September 11
shockingly are now reaching retirement age. It is hard to
imagine. The Department cannot afford to lose a substantial
number of experienced and fully capable officers solely because
they reach an arbitrary age threshold.
The bill, as you point out--and I want to just underscore
this because it is important--does not change the mandatory
retirement age of 57. It simply gives the Capitol Police Board
discretion when doing so is in the public interest to allow an
officer to continue to serve until age 65 instead of 60.
Nothing in the bill lessens the Board's responsibility to
ensure any officer granted an exemption remains fully fit for
duty and capable of meeting the physical and operational
demands of the job.
This is a prudent, targeted step to preserve experience,
maintain staffing, help ensure the Department has the workforce
it needs, and for these reasons, I strongly recommend my
colleagues support the bill.
Thank you. I yield back.
Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
I now call up H.R. 8364 to amend title 5, United States
Code, to authorize the increase of the retirement age in the
U.S. Capitol Police.
The clerk will please report the bill.
The Clerk. H.R. 8364----
Chairman Steil. Without objection, the first reading of the
bill is dispensed with.
Also without objection, the bill should be considered as
read and open to amendment at any point.
[H.R. 8364 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Steil. Do any Members seek recognition for
amendment or debate?
There being no further amendment or debate, the question
now occurs on H.R. 8364 reported favorably to the House.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, no.
The opinion of the Chair is the ayes have it. The ayes have
it. The motion to report is agreed to.
Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I request a recorded vote.
Chairman Steil. A recorded vote has been requested. The
clerk will please call the roll.
The Clerk. Chairman Steil.
Chairman Steil. Aye.
The Clerk. Chairman Steil votes aye.
Ms. Lee.
Ms. Lee. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes aye.
Mr. Loudermilk.
Mr. Loudermilk. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes aye.
Mr. Griffith.
Mr. Griffith. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes aye.
Dr. Murphy.
Dr. Murphy. Aye.
The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes aye.
Mrs. Bice.
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Carey.
Mr. Carey. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes aye.
Mrs. Miller.
Mrs. Miller. Aye.
The Clerk. Mrs. Miller votes aye.
Mr. Morelle.
Mr. Morelle. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
Ms. Sewell.
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mrs. Torres.
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Johnson.
[No response.]
Chairman Steil. Have all Members voted?
Does any Member wish to change their vote?
The clerk will report the tally.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, for this vote, there are eight
ayes and zero noes.
Chairman Steil. The ayes have it. The majority having voted
in favor of H.R. 8364, the bill is ordered favorably reported
to the House.
Without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid upon the
table.
This concludes the order of business for today's markup.
Without objection, pursuant to House rule IX, clause 2(l),
Committee Members can file with the Clerk of the Committee
supplemental, additional, minority, and dissenting views on
each of the items marked up today.
Also without objection, the staff is authorized to make
necessary technical and conforming changes.
There being no further business, I thank the Members for
their participation.
Without objection, the Committee on House Administration
stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:08 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
[all]