PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 17, 2005
Federal Law Enforcement Pension Adjustment Equity Act of 2005 - Amends the Law Enforcement Pay Equity Act of 2000 to apply a prohibition against treatment as an increase in salary, for purposes of increased annuitant pension benefits, of the conversion of positions and members of the U.S. Park Police and the Secret Service Uniformed Division to a new salary schedule, and the associated initial adjustments in basic pay rates, with respect to any payment made prior to January 1, 2005. (Thus permits cost-of-living adjustments in pension benefits for annuitants of the U.S. Park Police and the U.S. Secret Service Uniformed Division for payments made in 2005 and in subsequent years.)
People & committees
Rep. Platts, Todd Russell [R-PA-19] · R–PA
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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.960 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.960 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.960 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.960 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.