PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Ethics, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, 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 · Nov 2, 2017
Congressional Education About Sexual harassment Eradication Resolution or the CEASE Resolution
Amends Rule XXIII (Code of Official Conduct) of the Rules of the House of Representatives to require each Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, and employee of the House of Representatives to: (1) complete the Office of Compliance's program of sexual harassment prevention and response training in employment annually; and (2) certify to the House Committee on Ethics by January 31 of each year that the individual has completed the program in the previous year.
Requires each current Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, and employee to meet such training and certification requirement not later than the earlier of 120 days after the adoption of this resolution or December 31, 2018. Requires each new Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, and employee to certify completion of such program within 60 days after beginning service.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Considers failure to meet such requirement a violation of Rule XXIII.
Expresses the sense of the House that the Office of Compliance should:
update, as specified, its program of sexual harassment prevention and response training in employment; and
consult with the Workplaces Respond to Domestic and Sexual Violence: A National Resource Center in updating and implementing such program.
People & committees
Rep. Speier, Jackie [D-CA-14] · D–CA
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 Ethics, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, 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 Ethics, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, 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 11, 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.Res.604 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.Res.604 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.Res.604 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.Res.604 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.