PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 6, 2009
EEOICPA Ombudsman Extension and Enhancement Act of 2009 - Amends the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (EEOICPA) to: (1) make permanent the authority of the Office of the Ombudsman of the Department of Labor; and (2) increase the duties of the Ombudsman under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program, including to assist in making claims for benefits for Department of Energy (DOE) contractor employees who have contracted a covered illness through exposure at a DOE facility and to act as an advocate for such employees in appropriate cases.
People & committees
Rep. Gallegly, Elton [R-CA-24] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.
Referred to House Education and Labor
Referred to House Judiciary
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Labor, 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: Mar 23, 2026. 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.134 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.134 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.134 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.134 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.