PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 429.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Jul 11, 2012
Government Litigation Savings Act - (Sec. 2) Revises provisions of the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) and the federal judicial code relating to the fees and other expenses of parties in agency proceedings and court cases against the federal government.
Restricts awards of fees and other expenses under EAJA to prevailing parties with a direct and personal interest in an adjudication, including because of medical costs, property damage, denial of benefits, an unpaid disbursement, and other expenses of adjudication, or because of a policy interest.
Requires (currently, authorizes) the reduction or denial of an award if the party during the course of the proceedings engaged in conduct which unduly or unreasonably (currently, unduly and unreasonably) protracted the final resolution of the matter in controversy.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Increases to $200 per hour the cap on attorney fees awarded under EAJA and eliminates the cost-of-living and special factor considerations for allowing an increase in the hourly rate for such fees.
Eliminates the net worth exemption for determining eligibility for fees and expenses under EAJA for tax-exempt organizations and cooperative associations under the Agricultural Marketing Act.
Expands the reporting requirements of the Chairman of the Administrative Conference of the United States to require the Chairman to report on fees and expenses awarded pursuant to a settlement agreement and to create and maintain online a searchable database containing detailed information with respect to each award of fees and other expenses under EAJA.
(Sec. 3) Requires the Comptroller General (GAO) to: (1) audit the implementation of EAJA for the years 1995 through the end of the calendar year in which this Act is enacted, (2) complete such audit not later that one year after the end of the calendar year in which this Act is enacted, and (3) report to Congress on the results of such audit.
People & committees
Rep. Lummis, Cynthia M. [R-WY-At Large] · R–WY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 429.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-594.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-594.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 19 - 14.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.1996 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.1996 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.1996 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.1996 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.