[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 21, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H5308-H5312]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FEDERAL EMPLOYEE ANTIDISCRIMINATION ACT OF 2015
Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 1557) to amend the Notification and Federal Employee
Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 to strengthen Federal
antidiscrimination laws enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission and expand accountability within the Federal government, and
for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 1557
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Employee
Antidiscrimination Act of 2015''.
SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
Section 102 of the Notification and Federal Employee
Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301
note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (4), to read as follows:
``(4) accountability in the enforcement of Federal employee
rights is furthered when Federal agencies take appropriate
disciplinary action against Federal employees who
[[Page H5309]]
have been found to have committed discriminatory or
retaliatory acts;''; and
(2) in paragraph (5)(A)--
(A) by striking ``nor is accountability'' and inserting
``but accountability is not''; and
(B) by inserting ``for what by law the agency is
responsible'' after ``under this Act''.
SEC. 3. NOTIFICATION OF VIOLATION.
Section 202 of the Notification and Federal Employee
Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301
note) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Notification of Final Agency Action.--
``(1) Not later than 30 days after a Federal agency takes
final action or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
issues an appellate decision involving a finding of
discrimination or retaliation prohibited by a provision of
law covered by paragraphs (1) or (2) of section 201(a), as
applicable, the head of the agency subject to the finding
shall provide notice for at least 1 year on the agency's
Internet Web site in a clear and prominent location linked
directly from the agency's Internet home page stating that a
finding of discrimination or retaliation has been made.
``(2) The notification shall identify the date the finding
was made, the date or dates on which the discriminatory or
retaliatory act or acts occurred, and the law or laws
violated by the discriminatory or retaliatory act or acts.
The notification shall also advise Federal employees of the
rights and protections available under the respective
provisions of law covered by paragraphs (1) or (2) of section
201(a).''.
SEC. 4. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Electronic Format Requirement.--
(1) In general.--Section 203(a) of the Notification and
Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of
2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301 note) is amended by inserting ``(in an
electronic format prescribed by the Office of Personnel
Management)'' after ``an annual report''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1)
shall take effect on the date that is 1 year after the date
of enactment of this Act.
(3) Transition period.--Notwithstanding the requirements of
section 203(a) of the Notification and Federal Employee
Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301
note), the report required under such section may be
submitted in an electronic format, as prescribed by the
Office of Personnel Management, during the period beginning
on the date of enactment of this Act and ending on the
effective date in paragraph (2).
(b) Reporting Requirement for Disciplinary Action.--Section
203 of such Act is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(c) Disciplinary Action Report.--Not later than 60 days
after the date on which a Federal agency takes final action
or an agency receives an appellate decision issued by the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission involving a finding
of discrimination or retaliation in violation of a provision
of law covered by paragraphs (1) or (2) of section 201(a), as
applicable, the employing Federal agency shall submit to the
Commission a report stating whether disciplinary action has
been initiated against a Federal employee as a result of the
violation.''.
SEC. 5. DATA TO BE POSTED BY EMPLOYING FEDERAL AGENCIES.
Section 301(b) of the Notification and Federal Employee
Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301
note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (9)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking the period at the
end and inserting ``, and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) for each such finding counted under subparagraph (A),
the agency shall specify--
``(i) the date of the finding,
``(ii) the affected agency,
``(iii) the law violated, and
``(iv) whether a decision has been made regarding necessary
disciplinary action as a result of the finding.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(11) Data regarding each class action complaint filed
against the agency alleging discrimination or retaliation,
including--
``(A) information regarding the date on which each
complaint was filed,
``(B) a general summary of the allegations alleged in the
complaint,
``(C) an estimate of the total number of plaintiffs joined
in the complaint if known,
``(D) the current status of the complaint, including
whether the class has been certified, and
``(E) the case numbers for the civil actions in which
discrimination or retaliation has been found.''.
SEC. 6. DATA TO BE POSTED BY THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION.
Section 302(b) of the Notification and Federal Employee
Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301
note) is amended by striking ``(10)'' and inserting ``(11)''.
SEC. 7. NOTIFICATION AND FEDERAL EMPLOYEE ANTIDISCRIMINATION
AND RETALIATION ACT AMENDMENTS.
(a) Notification Requirements.--The Notification and
Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of
2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301 note) is amended by adding after section
206 the following:
``SEC. 207. COMPLAINT TRACKING.
``Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of the
Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act of 2015, each Federal
agency shall establish a system to track each complaint of
discrimination arising under section 2302(b)(1) of title 5,
United States Code, and adjudicated through the Equal
Employment Opportunity process from inception to resolution
of the complaint, including whether a decision has been made
regarding necessary disciplinary action as the result of a
finding of discrimination.
``SEC. 208. NOTATION IN PERSONNEL RECORD.
``If an agency takes an adverse action covered under
section 7512 of title 5, United States Code, against an
employee for an act of discrimination or retaliation
prohibited by a provision of law covered by paragraphs (1) or
(2) of section 201(a), the agency shall, after all appeals
relating to such action have been exhausted, include a
notation of the adverse action and the reason for the action
in the employee's personnel record.''.
(b) Processing and Referral.--The Notification and Federal
Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5
U.S.C. 2301 note) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``TITLE IV--PROCESSING AND REFERRAL
``SEC. 401. PROCESSING AND RESOLUTION OF COMPLAINTS.
``Each Federal agency is responsible for the fair,
impartial, processing and resolution of complaints of
employment discrimination and retaliation arising in the
Federal administrative process and shall establish a model
Equal Employment Opportunity Program that--
``(1) is not under the control, either structurally or
practically, of a Human Capital or General Counsel office;
``(2) is devoid of internal conflicts of interest and
ensures fairness and inclusiveness within the organization;
and
``(3) ensures the efficient and fair resolution of
complaints alleging discrimination or retaliation.
``SEC. 402. NO LIMITATION ON HUMAN CAPITAL OR GENERAL COUNSEL
ADVICE.
``Nothing in this title shall prevent a Federal agency's
Human Capital or General Counsel office from providing advice
or counsel to agency personnel on the processing and
resolution of a complaint, including providing legal
representation to an agency in any proceeding.
``SEC. 403. HEAD OF PROGRAM REPORTS TO HEAD OF AGENCY.
``The head of each Federal agency's Equal Employment
Opportunity Program shall report directly to the head of the
agency.
``SEC. 404. REFERRALS OF FINDINGS OF DISCRIMINATION.
``(a) EEOC Findings of Discrimination.--Not later than 30
days after the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issues
an appellate decision involving a finding of discrimination
or retaliation within a Federal agency the Commission shall
refer the matter to the Office of Special Counsel.
``(b) Referrals to Special Counsel.--The Office of Special
Counsel shall accept and review a referral from the
Commission under subsection (a) for purposes of seeking
disciplinary action under its authority against an Federal
employee who commits an act of discrimination or retaliation.
``(c) Notification.--The Office of Special Counsel shall
notify the Commission in a case in which the Office of
Special Counsel initiates disciplinary action.
``(d) Special Counsel Approval.--An agency may not take
disciplinary action against a Federal employee for an alleged
act of discrimination or retaliation referred by the
Commission under this section except in accordance with the
requirements of section 1214(f) of title 5, United States
Code.''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--The table of contents in
section 1(b) of the Notification and Federal Employee
Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (5 U.S.C. 2301
note) is amended--
(1) by inserting after the item relating to section 206 the
following:
``Sec. 207. Complaint tracking.
``Sec. 208. Notation in personnel record.'';
and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``TITLE IV--PROCESSING AND REFERRAL
``Sec. 401. Processing and resolution of complaints.
``Sec. 402. No limitation on Human Capital or General Counsel advice.
``Sec. 403. Head of Program reports to head of agency.
``Sec. 404. Referrals of findings of discrimination.''.
SEC. 8. NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT LIMITATION.
Section 2302(b) of title 5, United States Code is amended--
(1) in paragraph (13)--
(A) by inserting ``or the Office of Special Counsel'' after
``Inspector General'';
(B) by striking ``implement'' and inserting ``(A)
implement''; and
(C) by striking the period that follows the quoted material
and inserting ``; or'';
(2) by adding after subparagraph (A), as added by paragraph
(1)(B), and preceding the flush left matter that follows
paragraph (13), the following:
``(B) implement or enforce any nondisclosure policy, form,
or agreement, if such policy, form, or agreement prohibits or
restricts an employee from disclosing to Congress, the
[[Page H5310]]
Office of Special Counsel, or an Office of the Inspector
General any information that relates to any violation of any
law, rule, or regulation, or mismanagement, a gross waste of
funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial, and specific
danger to public health or safety, or any other whistleblower
protection.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Utah (Mr. Chaffetz) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Utah.
General Leave
Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Utah?
There was no objection.
Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise today in support of H.R. 1557, introduced by my friend and
ranking member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Mr.
Cummings of Maryland. He has done yeoman's work on this content. I was
proud to join him as a cosponsor of this important piece of legislation
that will help many of our Federal workers as they go through their
work in knowing they have even more protections.
The Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act of 2015 strengthens
accountability within our Federal workforce. The bill does so by
improving agencies' processes for reporting instances of workplace
discrimination and retaliation. It also requires agencies to create a
system to track complaints of discrimination and retaliation from
beginning to end.
The bill ensures that agencies report to the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission whether disciplinary action has been taken
against an employee for discrimination or retaliation. It requires
agencies to provide electronic notification to employees when such an
action occurs.
The bill requires agencies to post additional information about
discriminatory practices on their Web site. It also requires that
adverse actions taken against any employee for discrimination or
retaliation be included in that individual's personnel file.
Combined, these provisions bring additional transparency and
accountability to the Federal civil service and will help diminish
instances of discrimination and retaliation within our government.
Obviously, those things can't stand.
The bill also makes agency Equal Employment offices a direct report
to the agency head. This is an important step and a good portion of the
bill that is being brought forth today. This change will help ensure
that employees feel safe and comfortable when reporting discriminatory
or retaliatory actions.
Finally, H.R. 1557 makes clear that employees can report waste,
fraud, and abuse within their agency to Congress, the Office of Special
Counsel, or the inspectors general.
Federal employees are essential in exposing wrongdoing within the
government. An agency should never have the ability to tell a
government employee that he or she cannot report waste, fraud, or abuse
to Congress, the Office of Special Counsel, or the inspectors general.
The bill reinforces that obstructing an employee's communication with
Congress and other watchdogs is against the law.
We should be encouraging open communication between Federal employees
and Congress, the Office of Special Counsel, and the inspectors general
to protect the integrity of our government and the taxpayers.
I want to again thank Mr. Cummings for his leadership and work on
this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1557.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
As the author of the Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act, I would
like to thank Chairman Chaffetz and his staff for working with me in
drafting this bipartisan legislation. I also appreciate the chairman's
support for this bill during the committee's consideration this past
March.
I thank Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton for cosponsoring the
bill. As a former Commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, her expertise in employment law is unparalleled in
Congress.
I also appreciate the support of Representatives James Sensenbrenner
and Sheila Jackson Lee, who cosponsored the bill.
I especially want to thank Tanya Ward Jordan, Paulette Taylor, and
all the members of the Coalition 4 Change, also known as C4C, for their
invaluable assistance on this legislation.
I am also grateful that this bill has strong support of the Make It
Safe Coalition.
Both C4C and the Make It Safe Coalition are dedicated to ending
discrimination and retaliation against whistleblowers in the Federal
workplace, and I applaud their leadership and their hard work.
The Federal EEO programs are critical to ensuring that Federal
workplaces are free from discrimination and that any barriers impeding
fairness in personnel decisions are identified and eliminated. These
programs exist to ensure that our Federal workplaces uphold the
guarantee of equal opportunity. That is the right of every citizen in
this great country.
If discrimination occurs, these programs must be able to investigate
and adjudicate employee complaints impartially and in a timely manner.
{time} 1700
In fiscal year 2012, Federal employees and job applicants filed
nearly 16,000 complaints alleging that they had been victims of
discrimination. Although the vast majority of Federal workplaces are in
compliance with current EEO requirements, some Federal agencies have
failed to meet the standards of a model EEO program.
For example, in 2014, the EEOC issued a report on the Social Security
Administration that made 12 findings regarding Social Security's
failure to maintain a model EEOC program, ensure efficient management
of the various stages of the complaint process, provide uniform
training to ensure equal opportunities, and implement effective and
efficient antiharassment policies and procedures. The EEOC made more
than 60 recommendations for reform of that one program alone.
My bill would require that EEO programs operate independently of an
agency's human resources or general counsel offices and that the head
of the program report directly to the head of an agency. This would
ensure that effective implementation of the EEO program is prioritized
at the highest level of an agency and that program's sole purpose is
ensuring equal opportunity for all employees.
H.R. 1557 would also strengthen the accountability mechanisms that
are central to the effectiveness of the EEO process. This legislation
would expand the notifications that agencies are required to provide
when discrimination is found to have occurred and would require
agencies to track and report whether such findings have resulted in any
disciplinary action.
Finally, the act would prohibit the use of nondisclosure agreements
that restrict an employee from disclosing to Congress, the office of
special counsel, or an inspector general any information that relates
to any violation of law, rule, or regulation or instance of waste,
fraud, or abuse.
According to the 2014 Federal employee viewpoint survey, only 60
percent of Federal employees agreed that they could ``disclose a
suspected violation of any law, rule, or regulation without fear of
reprisal.''
As I often say, we are better than that. Employees need to have
confidence that they can report an act of discrimination without
suffering retaliation, and they need to know that such reports will be
thoroughly, fairly, and timely investigated and adjudicated.
The Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act of 2015 will strengthen
existing requirements to ensure that Federal EEO programs meet these
standards and that agency management of the EEO process follows the
best practices available.
Again, I take a moment, Mr. Speaker, to thank Chairman Chaffetz. This
was truly a bipartisan effort. We saw a problem, and we put our heads
together and tried to address it. I would urge all Members of the House
to vote for it.
[[Page H5311]]
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me rise today to thank both the
chairman and the ranking member of this committee, Mr. Chaffetz and Mr.
Cummings, for their leadership on a very important issue, which I rise
to be part of and with a little history on this issue with the earlier
passage of the No FEAR Act so many years ago.
I support this legislation which ensures agencies effectively
implement their Equal Employment Opportunity, or EEO, programs and that
Federal employees are never prevented from disclosing discriminatory or
wasteful actions to Congress, the office of special counsel, or
inspectors general.
How important is that? We have a history of addressing workplace
equality, and that is why I sponsored similar legislation with the No
FEAR Act, which was first introduced in Congress in 2002. This was
previous legislation that had a sense of Congress provision, whereas
this particular legislation further strengthens the responsibilities
and rights of employees.
The No FEAR Act set the precedent for imposing additional duties upon
Federal agency employers, intended to reinvigorate their longstanding
obligation to provide a work environment free of discrimination and
retaliation.
On October 2, 2000, the House Science Committee held a hearing
dealing with actions at one of our agencies. Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo
had been in my office repeatedly. I mention her name because of her
continued vigilance in speaking about issues dealing with
whistleblowers. In actuality, this one involved a $600,000 jury
decision against the EPA for race and sex discrimination under title
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
As we all listened in this hearing, it was clear that what we wanted
to do was prevent retaliation, which we see in this legislation here
today. I am grateful that we now have a roadmap for dealing with
individuals who want only the best for our government.
I can give some of the names as an example: Mark Felt, the FBI agent
known as Deep Throat during the Watergate scandal of the 1970s; Frank
Serpico, a New York police officer who confronted his department for
the rampant corruption the leadership let take place; Jeffrey Wigand, a
tobacco executive who admitted that tobacco companies knew they were
putting addictive chemicals into their cigarettes; and, of course,
Sherron Watkins, an executive of the Enron Corporation.
Of course, these individuals come from different walks of life, but
the whole idea is to make sure that we, as Members of Congress,
recognize that whistleblower activities or actions are clearly a part
of good government.
According to the 2014 Federal employee viewpoint survey, only 60
percent of Federal employees agreed that they could ``disclose a
suspected violation of any law, rule, or regulation without fear of
reprisal.''
I know that your committee, Mr. Chaffetz and Mr. Cummings, is really
the front line of providing this forum; and I am glad to be able to
join you as a member of the Homeland Security Committee and Judiciary
Committee to, again, emphasize the importance of safe and
discrimination-free workplaces.
I am grateful, again, to have had the opportunity firsthand to listen
to at least one of our whistleblowers who only wanted to be able to
help establish a workplace that was free of discrimination and fear.
Again, I want to make mention of Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, a dedicated
Federal employee who worked so very hard.
[From NPR.org, Sept. 6, 2011]
High Price of Blowing the Whistle on EPA
Marsha Coleman-Adebayo earned a doctoral degree from the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and worked with the
United Nations before joining the Environmental Protection
Agency in 1990. During her time at the U.N., she also
developed an expertise in African developmental issues.
During her tenure at the EPA, Coleman-Adebayo says she
requested that the agency devote attention to environmental
problems in South Africa that were allegedly caused by an
American company. She says that the agency reneged on
promises to investigate the matter, and the harder she pushed
for change, the more she faced a backlash from her superiors.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I make mention that we passed the No
FEAR Act with a number of Members.
As we have noted a number of whistleblowers who were actually Persons
of the Year on Time Magazine, I join my colleagues in supporting the
present underlying legislation and ask all Members to support this
legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today as an original co-sponsor and strong
support of H.R. 1557, the ``Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act of
2015.''
I support this legislation because it ensures agencies effectively
implement their Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) programs and that
federal employees are never prevented from disclosing discriminatory or
wasteful actions to Congress, the Office of Special Counsel, or
Inspectors General.
Let me express my thanks to Ranking Member Cummings for introducing
this critical legislation that is essential to ensuring that our
federal workplaces are free from discrimination, and that any barriers
impeding fairness in personnel decisions are identified and eliminated.
We have a history of addressing workplace equality and that is why I
sponsored similar legislation when the No Fear Act was first introduced
to Congress in 2002.
The No Fear Act set the precedent for imposing additional duties upon
Federal agency employers intended to reinvigorate their longstanding
obligation to provide a work environment free of discrimination and
retaliation.
If you would allow me I would like to put a face on this problem.
On October 2, 2000, the House Science Committee held a hearing
entitled ``Intolerance at EPA--Harming People, Harming Science?''
Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, an EPA whistleblower, won a $600,000 jury
decision against EPA for race and sex discrimination under title VII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
During that hearing, then-chairman of the Science Committee
Congressman Sensenbrenner illuminated the dangerous precedent set by
the EPA, stating, ``While EPA has a clear policy on dealing with
employees that discriminate, harass and retaliate against other EPA
employees, no one apparently involved in the Coleman-Adebayo or Nolan
cases have yet to be disciplined by EPA.''
Mr. Speaker no employee should fear voicing their concerns in
reference to a safer more work conducive environment.
We often look at individuals or groups who step forward as
whistleblowers.
This term has been used with a negative connotation to describe
insubordinate employees, but history has shown us that whistleblowers
are often heroes that have shed light on employers' illegal practices
and as a result made the workplace better for future employees.
Mark Felt, the FBI agent known as deep throat during the Watergate
Scandal of the 1970s.
Frank Serpico, New York police officer who confronted his department
for the rampant corruption the leadership let take place.
Jeffrey Wigand, a tobacco executive who admitted that tobacco
companies knew they were putting addictive chemicals into their
cigarettes.
And Sherron Watkins, an executive of the Enron corporation who was
vital in exposing the financial lies and frauds of the company.
All these individuals stood up against well-established corporations
and agencies even when others doubted their claims.
We must protect these types of acts in Federal offices and
successfully implement the Equal Employment Opportunity Programs (EEO).
Mr. Speaker, in a sense every Member of Congress is a whistleblower
for the people in that uncovering and correcting problems in the
agencies that administer the laws is an essential part of our oversight
responsibilities.
According to the 2014 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, only 60
percent of federal employees agreed that they could quote, ``disclose a
suspected violation of any law, rule or regulation without fear of
reprisal.''
We must do better and ensure employees have confidence that they can
report an act of discrimination without suffering retaliation.
Employees need to know that EEO reports will be thoroughly, fairly,
and timely investigated and adjudicated.
H.R. 1557 would require that EEO programs operate independently of an
agency's human resources or general counsel offices.
This bill requires the head of the program report directly to the
head of an agency and the act would prohibit the use of non-disclosure
agreements that restrict an employee from disclosing to Congress, the
Office of Special Counsel, or instance of waste, fraud or abuse.
As a senior member of the Committees on Homeland Security and the
Judiciary, and as
[[Page H5312]]
Ranking Member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism,
Homeland Security, and Investigations, I understand the importance of
safe and discrimination free workplaces.
In conclusion, let me express my appreciation again to Ranking Member
Cummings for introducing this legislation and Chairman Chaffetz for
shepherding this bill to the floor.
By strengthening existing requirements to ensure federal EEO programs
meet high standards, we are implementing the best practices available
to combat workplace discrimination.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, again, we urge the House to vote in favor of this very
important legislation. It is bipartisan and does address issues that
are of concern to all of us.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I simply want to thank those
Members who have worked hard on this bill. One that is of special note
is Congressman Sean Duffy of Wisconsin. He has done great work on this,
particularly trying to hold people accountable at Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau for the EEOC issues there.
This bill would not be a reality without Mr. Cummings. We thank him
for his leadership on this. I am proud to support it. I think all the
Members in this body should support it. It does further the protections
for employees. It makes government better and more responsible.
Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of H.R. 1557, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz) that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 1557.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.
____________________