PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 24, 2002
Good People, Good Government Act - Requires each executive agency to appoint or designate a Chief Human Capital Officer who shall assist in carrying out responsibilities with respect to: (1) selecting, developing, and managing a high-quality, productive workforce in accordance with merit system principles; and (2) implementing the rules and regulations and the laws governing the civil service within the agency.Requires the functions of such Officers to include: (1) setting the workforce development strategy of the agency; (2) assessing current workforce characteristics and future needs based on the agency's mission; (3) reviewing agency training and other human resources policies and programs to assess their effectiveness in promoting the achievement of the agency's mission and goals; (4) developing and advocating a culture of continuous learning to attract and retain employees with superior abilities; (5) identifying best practices and benchmarking studies; and (6) applying methods for measuring intellectual capital and identifying links of that capital to organizational performance and growth.Establishes a Chief Human Capital Officers Council.Requires a study on the feasibility and desirability of developing human capital metrics for use by the Federal Government.Revises agency training programs to require: (1) their evaluation and modification; (2) the appointment or designation of a training officer; (3) establishment of a comprehensive program to provide training to employees to develop managers for the agency; and (4) manager training on unacceptable performance issues.Revises academic degree training criteria.Requires agencies to appoint or designate a recruitment officer.Increases the biweekly contribution payable by the Government for a Federal employee or annuitant enrolled in a Federal employee health insurance plan.
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.
Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E616-617)
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 19, 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.4580 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.4580 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.4580 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.4580 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.