PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Sep 11, 2008
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the House reported version is repeated here.)
House Reservists Pay Adjustment Act - Requires the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) of the House of Representatives to pay an eligible House employee, who is also a member of a Reserve component of the Armed Forces, for each active duty month the amount by which the employee's regular compensation from the House would have exceeded (if at all) the total monthly military compensation paid to the employee for the active duty month by the Secretary of Defense.
Limits employee eligibility for such adjusted compensation to those employed by the House each day of the 90 days ending on the day on which the employee reports for active duty under an involuntary mobilization order.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the CAO to reduce the amount of any payment to such employee for an active duty month by the amount of any pay and allowances received by the individual from any other source as replacement of lost income.
Prohibits the CAO from making a required payment under this Act unless the payment, taking into account any reduction, is at least $50.
Authorizes appropriations.
Amends Rule XXIII (Code of Official Conduct) of the Rules of the House of Representatives to declare that nothing in such Rule may be construed to prohibit the disbursement or receipt of any payment authorized under this Act.
Amends the Legislative Branch Appropriation Act, 1955 to declare that nothing in the Act may be construed to prohibit the CAO from paying a gratuity to the widow, widower, or heirs-at-law of a House employee who dies during an active duty month.
People & committees
Rep. Brady, Robert A. [D-PA-1] · D–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to without objection. (text: CR 09/09/2008 H7897-7899)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to without objection.(text: CR 09/09/2008 H7897-7899)
ORDER OF PROCEDURE - Mr. Lewis of Georgia asked unanimous consent that the ordering of the yeas and nays be vacated with respect to the motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 6608 to the end that the motion be considered as adopted in the form considered by the House on Tuesday, September 9, 2008. (consideration: CR H8038-8039)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6608.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7897-7899)
Mr. Brady (PA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 534.
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct discharged.
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct discharged.
Reported by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 110-832, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 110-832, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: Apr 7, 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.6608 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.6608 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.6608 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.6608 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.