PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Received from DOD.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 6, 2003
Uniformed Services Divorce Equity Act of 2003 - Requires a court, in the case of the disposition of monthly retired pay upon a divorce, to award the former spouse 50 percent of such pay of a member of the uniformed services if the former spouse was married to the member throughout the member's creditable service. Reduces such amount proportionately for the reduced period of the marriage in relation to the total service period.Requires that, if the marriage period is: (1) less than 240 months, such payments shall continue for a period equal to the marriage period; and (2) 240 months or more, such payments shall continue at least until the death of the member or former spouse.Provides that for purposes of such monthly payments, the disposable retired pay of a member to whom a final divorce, disillusionment, annulment, or legal separation decree is issued before the member begins to receive such pay shall be computed based on the pay grade and length of service of the member while married. Increases such amount concurrently with retired pay increases. Prohibits a court from ordering such payments before a member's retirement based upon an imputation of a property interest in future retired pay. Requires a former spouse to obtain a court order for reapportionment of disposable military retired pay within two years of the date of the final decree.Prohibits the court from treating as part of a member's disposable retired pay amounts which: (1) have been waived from such pay in order to receive veterans' disability compensation; or (2) represent payment for service-connected disabilities.
People & committees
Rep. Ballenger, Cass [R-NC-10] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Received from DOD.
Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Total Force.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Human Resources.
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1111 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1111 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1111 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1111 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.