PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 1, 2008
Legislative Branch Personnel Appeals Procedural Consolidation Act of 2008 - Transfers from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) Personnel Appeals Board to the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) authority to investigate any personnel action taken with respect to a GAO officer or employee, or an officer or employee of a participating federal office, and seek corrective and disciplinary action with respect to such personnel action, in the same manner and subject to the same terms and conditions as if such officer or employee were an executive agency employee and such action were a prohibited practice against them.
Authorizes the officer or employee to seek corrective and disciplinary action with respect to such an action from the OSC and the Merit Systems Protection Board in the same manner and subject to the same terms.
Excludes current appeals by GAO officers and employees from the provisions of this Act. (Thus, allows such appeals to be considered by the GAO Personnel Appeals Board.)
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 E1696)
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.6822 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.6822 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.6822 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.6822 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.