PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 1, 2008
Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2008 or the No FEAR Act of 2008 - Amends the Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002, or No FEAR Act of 2002, to require a federal agency, after receiving a final finding of discrimination, to arrange with the Department of the Treasury for a two-year payment schedule for reimbursing the Judgment Fund for its payment to a federal employee, former federal employee, or applicant for federal employment who has prevailed in an anti-discrimination or whistle blower protection complaint. Requires a federal agency to: (1) give written notification of the rights and protections available to federal employees to any employee of a contractor receiving more than half of its annual gross revenues from federal contracts; and (2) notify its employees annually by email or voice mail of the agency's Internet site. Directs the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to report annually to specified congressional and executive entities on the total costs incurred during the fiscal year associated with processing and litigating cases involving prohibited personnel practices. Requires each federal agency to establish performance goals reflective of its efforts to implement such Act. Specifies the No FEAR Institute as a source of training and counseling for federal employees regarding their rights and remedies under antidiscrimination, retaliation, and harassment, as well as whistleblower protection laws.
Prescribes disciplinary action an agency must take against a culpable official in: (1) a case in which the official's discriminatory or retaliatory acts have contributed to a loss of life or limb or any other substantial diminishment of an employee's mental or physical health; or (2) other cases of discrimination. Prescribes monetary penalties for each week an agency failed to take action against employees who falsify evidence in a proceeding under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Requires the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and any agency that becomes aware of a criminal violation to refer the matter to the Department of Justice for prosecution when agency officials are found liable for intimidating or harassing employees that testify before Congress. Directs the Comptroller General to ensure that a No FEAR Oversight Office is created within GAO. Sets the liability limits for federal workplace discrimination cases under Title VII at $300,000 per each claim or alleged violation.
People & committees
Rep. Jackson-Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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: 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.6780 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.6780 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.6780 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.6780 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.