PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 26, 1994
Establishes the National Commission on Fairness in Military Compensation to: (1) determine the extent to which military personnel or their dependents rely on food stamps, the special supplemental food program under the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, and other Federal or local assistance programs as a necessary supplement to their regular military compensation, and the circumstances that lead to such dependence; and (2) submit to the President and the Congress a report on its findings and its recommendations on possible changes in the military pay structure so that military personnel will receive adequate compensation and no longer rely on such other forms of assistance. Limits to $750,000 the total authorized expenses of the Commission. Requires the Comptroller General to audit Commission books and records in order to ensure compliance with such expense limit. Terminates the Commission 30 days after submission of its report.
People & committees
Rep. Gallegly, Elton [R-CA-23] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Forces and Personnel.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1561)
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: Jun 6, 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.4831 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.4831 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.4831 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.4831 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.