By Image Credit: AI-generated image created for The Now Daily
By Lily Lederman | The Now Daily
A bipartisan pair of lawmakers is pushing legislation that would shift the Secret Service from the Department of Homeland Security to direct supervision by the White House. Democratic Representative Jared Moskowitz of Florida and Republican Representative Russell Fry of South Carolina are introducing the measure as part of a larger package of reforms aimed at reducing bureaucracy within federal agencies. The proposal reflects growing frustration with how the Department of Homeland Security manages its component agencies, particularly after security lapses during events involving President Trump. If passed, the change would give the president more direct authority over the agency responsible for protecting him and other top officials.
The Core Proposal for the Secret Service
The legislation would remove the Secret Service from under the Department of Homeland Security and place it as a direct report to the White House. Moskowitz and Fry argue that this move would streamline decision-making and eliminate layers of bureaucracy that can slow down critical operations.
Moskowitz cited his experience on the congressional task force investigating the first assassination attempt against Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania. He observed that the Secret Service faced similar structural problems to those plaguing FEMA, where red tape often hinders effective action. The bill seeks to address those issues by giving the agency more autonomy and faster lines of communication with the president.
Broader Reforms in the Package
The Secret Service proposal is only one part of a larger reform package. The same legislation would make the Federal Emergency Management Agency an independent Cabinet-level agency, removing it from DHS oversight. It would also transfer the Transportation Security Administration to the Department of Transportation.
These changes reflect a belief that DHS has become too large and unwieldy to manage its diverse responsibilities effectively. By separating key agencies, the sponsors hope to improve focus, accountability, and responsiveness across emergency management, transportation security, and presidential protection.
Moskowitz’s Observations from Butler
Representative Moskowitz told Fox News Digital that visiting Butler after the assassination attempt opened his eyes to the operational challenges facing the Secret Service. He saw firsthand how bureaucratic hurdles within DHS could impede the agency’s ability to function at full capacity during high-stakes moments.
His comments suggest the bill is not purely partisan but rooted in practical concerns observed during a real security failure. Moskowitz emphasized that cutting red tape is essential for agencies that must act quickly when lives are on the line, whether in protecting the president or responding to natural disasters.
Fry’s Perspective as a Republican Co-Sponsor
Representative Russell Fry, the Republican co-sponsor, brings a different but complementary viewpoint. As a conservative lawmaker, he has long expressed skepticism about large federal bureaucracies. Supporting the bill aligns with his belief that government functions better when agencies have clearer missions and fewer layers of oversight.
Fry’s involvement gives the legislation bipartisan credibility. It shows that concerns about DHS structure cross party lines, especially after high-profile incidents that exposed weaknesses in federal protection and response systems.
Potential Challenges and Support
The proposal will likely face resistance from those who argue that keeping agencies under DHS ensures better coordination during national emergencies. Critics may worry that making the Secret Service a direct White House entity could politicize it further.
However, the bill also has support from lawmakers who believe the current structure has proven inefficient. If it gains traction, it could spark a wider conversation about reforming homeland security architecture more than two decades after the department’s creation in the aftermath of 9/11.
Why This Matters Now
The timing of the bill comes after multiple security incidents involving President Trump and ongoing debates about government efficiency. Moskowitz and Fry hope these events have created a window for meaningful reform.
For you as a reader following national security and government operations, this proposal represents an attempt to fix long-standing structural problems. Whether it advances will depend on how Congress weighs operational needs against concerns about centralized presidential control over protective agencies.
Outlook for the Legislation
The bipartisan nature of the bill gives it a better chance of consideration than purely partisan measures. Still, overhauling major agencies is never simple, and the package will need support from key committee chairs and leadership in both chambers.
As discussions begin, the focus will likely remain on whether separating these agencies would genuinely improve performance or simply create new coordination challenges. The outcome could reshape how the United States organizes its homeland security and protective services for years to come.