Tentative plan to dump federal office buildings leaves lawmakers in limbo

WASHINGTON — A Trump administration plan to sell off “non-core” federal buildings could save hundreds of millions in annual operating costs, according to a General Services Administration estimate. But it could also displace dozens of congressional offices around the country, cost taxpayers additional money and disrupt constituent services, say critics on Capitol Hill.

As many as 43 Senate state offices and 14 House district offices are housed in buildings deemed “non-core” in a list that GSA published online last week and then deleted, per a count by Democratic lawmakers. And more could be at risk as part of a push to terminate federal leases to cut spending, led by billionaire Elon Musk and the so-called Department of Government Efficiency.

“Picking major pieces of real estate to sell without any deeper analysis of market conditions, other office space and the long-term development plans in the region is just plain dumb,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. “That’s what makes this feel like it’s a whole lot more about politics than it is about government efficiency.”

Warren has an office in the John F. Kennedy Federal Building in Boston, which appeared on the list of more than 440 properties posted last Tuesday. A day later, that original list had disappeared, though an updated roster of disposable federal buildings is “coming soon,” according to GSA’s website.

“The fact that it was pulled down tells you that it wasn’t very well thought out in the first place. I’ll just wait and see, but it’s short-sighted,” said Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, who keeps an office in another building that made the list, the Edmund S. Muskie Federal Building in Augusta, Maine.

Many federal buildings have become “functionally obsolete and unsuitable for use,” according to the GSA, which touted $430 million in potential yearly savings via divestiture. A spokesperson said GSA had “received an overwhelming amount of interest” in the effort since last week.

“We anticipate the list will be republished in the near future after we evaluate this initial input and determine how we can make it easier for stakeholders to understand the nuances of the assets listed,” the spokesperson said in an emailed statement.

Federal buildings containing both Republican and Democratic offices appeared on the list. But one in particular has drawn political scrutiny: the Nancy Pelosi Federal Building in San Francisco, which houses the Democratic former speaker’s district office. Last week Rep. Earl L. “Buddy” Carter, R-Ga., introduced a bill targeting the building and issued a statement blasting “expensive, underutilized vanity projects for liberal politicians.”

Pelosi, through a spokesperson, did not respond to a request for comment.

Offices in use

Politics aside, many properties on the since-deleted list are still in use. For congressional tenants, they represent the front lines of helping constituents. Caseworkers in district and state offices provide support on a variety of issues, including veterans and Social Security benefits, immigration cases and passport applications.

“Closure and forced relocation of Congressional offices would directly interfere with Congress’s constitutional duties, pose significant security risks, and cause disruption to essential constituent services,” Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., and Rep. Joseph D. Morelle, D-N.Y., wrote in a letter sent last week to GSA acting Administrator Stephen Ehikian. “That outcome would be unacceptable.”

The pair, who serve as the top Democrats on the committees overseeing Congress’ daily operations, wrote that beyond the lawmaker offices they counted in federally owned buildings on the non-core list, “a significant number” are located in federally leased facilities that could be targeted for closure. They called on GSA and DOGE to pause any planned divestments or lease terminations that could affect the legislative branch.

There are pros and cons to having an office in a federal building, according to Anne Meeker, deputy director at the nonprofit POPVOX Foundation and a former congressional caseworker.

Federal buildings can be imposing and unwelcoming, whereas offices located on main streets may get more foot traffic and appear more accessible to constituents, Meeker said. But federal buildings can also be more convenient.

In some cases, they serve as a one-stop shop for constituents, with a multitude of services located under the same roof. And they tend to come equipped with some kind of existing security apparatus.

“It’s definitely a security thing, that as offices are handling issues with protesters and security threats, it is just handy to be in a building that already comes with some built-in screening mechanism, so that office doesn’t have to set up on their own,” Meeker said.

Operating congressional offices out of federal buildings also means lawmakers negotiate rent with the government as opposed to private landlords, though not everyone sees that as a good thing.

“It doesn’t concern me, because we pay more to the federal government for an office in Des Moines and Cedar Rapids than we would have if we rented from a private person,” Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, said when asked about spotting the Neal Smith Federal Building, which houses his Des Moines office, on the now-deleted list.

Other Republicans, like Sen. Rick Scott of Florida, whose Jacksonville office is located in a building on the list, defended the effort to divest from federal property in principle.

“When I became governor of Florida I went through the same thing. I got rid of excess real estate,” said Scott, who served two terms as governor, from 2011 to 2019.

“Understand that we’re $36 trillion in debt,” said Republican Sen. Katie Britt of Alabama, whose office in the Dothan Federal Building and Courthouse could be affected. “That’s not only fiscally irresponsible, it’s morally irresponsible to pass that to the next generation. So we’ve got to look at how we can do things better and how we can ensure that taxpayer dollars are used wisely and judiciously, and that’s part of this process.”

Even so, Britt said she’d been in touch with the White House over the list and made the case for keeping that building and others, including the Montgomery Bus Station, a Civil Rights-era landmark and home to the Freedom Rides Museum.

“We’re going to continue to work to make sure the administration has all of the information they need as they make these decisions moving forward,” Britt said. “We’re proud to have our office in the Dothan Courthouse, and we’re hopeful they’ll take a look at the case we’re making for the people of that community and for the role that the building serves.”

It’s not clear when a new GSA non-core list will be released or how many buildings currently housing Senate state and House district offices will appear on it. In the meantime, some members aren’t holding their breath.

Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., has kept an office in the Odell Horton Federal Building in Memphis for more than 18 years. He said he wasn’t particularly worried to see it pop up on the list, in part because any plan to sell implies an interested buyer, and he suspects those may be hard to find.

Still, he made a public appeal to GSA last week at a Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee hearing.

“GSA, my name is Steve Cohen. … I’m on the third floor of the Odell Horton building, which I had named for Odell Horton, a famous … African American jurist,” Cohen said. “He was a great judge and a great prosecutor … and don’t tear him down.”