PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 24, 2007
Fair Mental Health Evaluation for Returning Veterans Act - Prohibits the Secretary of a military department from discharging due to a personality disorder a member of the Armed Forces who has served on active duty in a combat zone until the later of the date of: (1) completion by the Secretary of Defense (Secretary) of a review of Department of Defense (DOD) policies and procedures for diagnosing such a disorder; (2) issuance by the Secretary of policies and procedures to ensure the appropriate use of such a discharge; (3) establishment by the Secretary of an independent review board for personality disorder discharges; (4) submittal by the Secretary of a report to Congress on progress in implementing the requirements under (1) through (3), above; or (5) the date that is 45 days after the date of the submission of the report referred to in (4), which period shall permit Congress to consider the report.
Provides an exception to such requirement in the case of a member who, during recruitment for or enlistment in the Armed Forces, provided false or misleading information, or omitted providing information about past criminal behavior, that is material to a discharge for personality disorder.
People & committees
Rep. Hare, Phil [D-IL-17] · D–IL
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 Military Personnel.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.3167 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.3167 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.3167 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.3167 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.