PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on District of Columbia.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 28, 2000
District of Columbia Retirement Equality Act of 2000 - Amends the District of Columbia Retirement Protection Act of 1997 to require, for purposes of determining the amount of a Federal benefit payment to an officer or member of the Metropolitan Police Department, that the payment under the District Retirement Program include certain service longevity payments provided for in the Police Recruiting and Retention Enhancement Amendment Act of 1999 (such Act took effect after the freeze date).
People & committees
Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large] · D–DC
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 District of Columbia.
Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E429)
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: Aug 20, 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.4099 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.4099 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.4099 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.4099 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.