PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 113.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · Jul 16, 2013
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Personnel Flexibilities Act - Directs the Secretary of the Treasury to establish a system to govern the compensation and performance management of employees, other than senior executives or employees in the Senior Executive Service, holding critical scientific, technical, or professional positions in the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau of the Department of the Treasury. Limits the number of employees subject to such system to 50% of the Bureau's full-time employees. Requires such system to compensate employees at a level not exceeding level III of the Executive Schedule and to have not less than two levels of performance above a retention standard.
Provides that such system: (1) may not provide for a waiver of employees' rights relating to merit system principles, and (2) must be consistent with collective bargaining agreements and rights.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Secretary, on the request of the Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), to disclose information relating to the operation of any compensation and performance management system established by this Act.
Allows the continued use of an existing compensation and performance management system, originally implemented as a demonstration project, so long as such system satisfies the requirements of this Act.
Requires the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to submit to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs a report on the operation of the system and of ongoing demonstration projects testing the use of a pay and classification system different than the General Schedule for federal employee compensation.
People & committees
Rep. Meadows, Mark [R-NC-11] · R–NC
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. 113.
Reported by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. H. Rept. 113-156.
Reported by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. H. Rept. 113-156.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
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: Apr 7, 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.2067 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.2067 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.2067 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.2067 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.