PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 29, 2010
Federal Employee Disability Insurance Act of 2010 - Requires the Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to establish and administer a program to make available insurance coverage for an injury occurring outside the workplace or for other disability otherwise not covered under federal employee worker's compensation provisions. Makes such insurance unavailable if the injury is caused by the employee's intention to bring about the injury to himself or to another individual. Requires an insurance contract under this provision to be fully insured.
Requires the Director to contract with one or more carriers for such disability insurance policies. Authorizes the Director to prescribe reasonable minimum standards for benefit plans offered. Prohibits such a contract from providing for a preexisting condition exclusion.
Allows an eligible employee to receive: (1) during the first 12 months that he or she qualifies, benefits equal to the lesser of 70% of his or her monthly pay at the time the injury or sickness occurs or 70% of the maximum rate of basic pay provided for grade GS-15 of the general schedule, beginning after expiration of the waiting period elected by the employee; and (2) after such 12-month period, benefits equal to 50% of monthly pay until age 67, only if such employee is totally disabled.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires each eligible individual obtaining insurance coverage under this Act to be responsible for 100% of the premiums, which shall be higher for employees who elect a shorter waiting period.
Establishes in the Employees' Life Insurance Fund a Non-Work Related Disability Insurance Administrative Account, which shall be available to OPM to defray reasonable expenses incurred in administering this Act and to which contracted carriers shall make contributions necessary to cover such expenses.
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 House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1857)
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 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.6368 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.6368 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.6368 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.6368 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.