PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Feb 6, 2018
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
(Sec. 1) Requires each employing office of the House of Representatives to adopt an anti-harassment and anti-discrimination policy.
Directs the Committee on House Administration, by June, 1, 2018, to promulgate regulations to carry out this resolution and ensure their consistency with requirements of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (CAA), the House Code of Official Conduct, and other relevant laws, rules, and regulations.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 2) Establishes the House Office of Employee Advocacy (OEA) to: (1) provide legal assistance to House employees regarding CAA procedures, including those applicable to civil actions; and (2) operate an employee hotline.
Prohibits the OEA from: (1) accepting awards of litigation expenses or costs under CAA hearings or civil actions, and (2) providing assistance to an employee after the individual files a civil action.
(Sec. 3) Requires the Office of the House Employment Counsel to continue carrying out all of its current functions.
(Sec. 4) Directs the Chief Administrative Officer of the House to require: (1) House offices to certify on Payroll Authorization Forms of House employees that payroll actions are not connected to CAA awards and settlements, and (2) House Members to certify on such forms that Members' Representational Allowance is not being used for CAA awards or settlements.
(Sec. 5) Amends Rule XXIII (Code of Official Conduct) of the Rules of the House to prohibit: (1) a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House from committing sexual harassment or engaging in unwelcome sexual advances; and (2) sexual relationships between Members and employees (except between married individuals).
(Sec. 7) Bars the House Office of Congressional Ethics from initiating or continuing any investigation of an allegation of violation under CAA rights and protections, or making recommendations regarding such an allegation, if the employee initiates proceedings regarding the alleged violation under CAA administrative and judicial dispute-resolution procedures.
People & committees
Rep. Harper, Gregg [R-MS-3] · R–MS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H813-814)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H813-814)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 724.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H813-814)
Mr. Harper moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Ethics, 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 Ethics, 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.
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.Res.724 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.724 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.724 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.724 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.