Rescissions Act (H.R.4): Response Arrived 6 Days After Bill Became Law

Government Spending

Rescissions Act (H.R.4): Response Arrived 6 Days After Bill Became Law

The Timeline

MCwoHAorp.YnipR●│sto.│└1─tes4─6─isi──tn──ug──e──n──t─────────VLR──OAEJ─L─NTWSU─ao─OEPL─nt─SOY●│geRCIN─ws7E↓A↓G↓S1─o5SSNE7─rYPTE─tEDODS─hSANE─yYSN─SET─────────J─Ti─U─rn─L─ut─Y●│mo──p─2─l─4─sa──iw──g──n──s───────────J─Rf┘U─ei│L─snY●│paol3nl0syearrives

Result: By the time the constituent heard back, their input was meaningless — the bill had already passed the House, passed the Senate, and been signed into law.

The Exchange

Constituent’s Message — May 16, 2025

Constituent contacted Rep. Langworthy’s office to express opposition to the Rescissions Act of 2025 (H.R.4), which would cut $9 billion from programs including USAID and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Auto-reply received same day:

“Your correspondence has been received, and we will reach out shortly with either a response, or a further inquiry, for casework.”

→ 75 DAYS PASS →

Langworthy’s Response — July 30, 2025 (6 days after bill became law)

“Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to the Recissions Act of 2025 (H.R.4). I appreciate the opportunity to respond.”

“I proudly supported H.R.4 when it passed the House on July 17, 2025. On July 24, 2025, President Trump signed this recissions package into law.”

“Although we do not see eye to eye on H.R.4, rest assured I will keep your thoughts regarding foreign aid and public media in mind as Congress works through the Fiscal Year 2026 appropriations process.”

Key Quote

“rest assured I will keep your thoughts… in mind”

The problem: The constituent’s thoughts arrived after the vote. There was nothing to “keep in mind” — the decision was already final.

This Is a Form Letter

All responses from Langworthy’s office contain identical hidden HTML tracking code:

<span style="color: white; margin-left: -10000px; position:absolute;
left: -9999999px; opacity: 0; visibility: hidden; display: none !important;">
</span>

This code is used by mass email systems for tracking and template management — confirming these are automated, bulk-generated responses, not personalized replies.

Tracking ID in this email: [N1GK24-DY0XN]

What the Response Actually Said

Langworthy’s justification for voting YES:

  • Defended cuts as eliminating “waste, fraud, and abuse”
  • Cited DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) findings
  • Claimed taxpayer dollars were funding:
    • “Afghani opium farmers”
    • “Transgender studies on animals”
    • “DEI scholarships in Burma”
    • “Transgender operas in Colombia”
  • Criticized NPR for having “87 registered Democrats in NPR’s editorial staff, and not a single Republican”
  • Accused public broadcasting of “documented left-wing bias”

On the constituent’s opposition:

“Although we do not see eye to eye on H.R.4, rest assured I will keep your thoughts regarding foreign aid and public media in mind as Congress works through the Fiscal Year 2026 appropriations process.”

Questions This Raises

  1. Was the constituent’s May 16 message seen before the July 17 vote?
  2. If so, why did the response take until July 30?
  3. If not, what’s the point of constituent feedback?
  4. How can citizens provide meaningful input if responses arrive after votes are cast?
  5. What does “shortly” mean if it takes 75 days?

Documents

Published: December 29, 2025 Submitted by: Anonymous Constituent

Personal information has been redacted to protect constituent privacy. All information verified through email headers, timestamps, and legislative records.