PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 15, 2006
District of Columbia Hatch Act Reform Act of 2006 - Amends federal law commonly referred to as the "Hatch Act" (concerning political activities of public employees) to: (1) include the District of Columbia within the definition of "State" with respect to political activities concerning certain state and local employees; and (2) remove provisions specifically applicable to employees of government of the District of Columbia. Makes such amendments effective on the date a law is enacted by the District of Columbia after the enactment of this Act which places restrictions on political activities of employees of the District of Columbia government and which applies to actions occurring on or after such 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.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E382)
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 15, 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.4969 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.4969 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.4969 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.4969 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.