PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 106-571.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Oct 31, 2000
Federal Physicians Comparability Allowance Amendments of 2000 - Amends the Federal Physicians Comparability Allowance Act of 1978 to repeal the September 30, 2002, termination of (and thus make permanent) the authority for paying comparability allowances to Government physicians under service agreements.Redefines "basic pay" to include any amounts received as physicians comparability allowances as part of basic pay for Federal employee retirement purposes.Amends provisions relating to the computation of an annuity under the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) and the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) to prohibit any part of such an allowance from being treated as basic pay unless, before the date of the separation on which entitlement to annuity is based, the separating individual has completed at least 15 years of service as a Government physician. Requires, if such condition is met, that any amounts received by the individual as such an allowance shall be treated as basic pay, but only to the extent that such amounts are attributable to service performed on or after the enactment of this Act, and only to the extent of the percentage allowable as specified by this Act. Requires that 100 percent of all amounts received as such an allowance, to the extent attributable to service performed on or after enactment, be treated as basic pay (without regard to any of the preceding provisions of this paragraph) for purposes of computing: (1) an annuity of a disabled employee or member; and (2) a survivor annuity if based on the service of an individual who dies before separating from service.
People & committees
Rep. Morella, Constance A. [R-MD-8] · R–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-571.
Became Public Law No: 106-571.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S11940)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S11940)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H11697-11698)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H11697-11698)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 207.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H11697-11699)
Mrs. Morella moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Civil Service.
Referred to the House Committee on 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: Feb 4, 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.207 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.207 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.207 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.207 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.