[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 13]
[House]
[Pages 18301-18306]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



 NOTIFICATION AND FEDERAL EMPLOYEE ANTIDISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION 
                              ACT OF 2001

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
pass the bill (H.R. 169) to require that Federal agencies be 
accountable for violations of antidiscrimination and whistleblower 
protection laws, and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                H.R. 169

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the 
     ``Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and 
     Retaliation Act of 2001''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

                      TITLE I--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 101. Findings.
Sec. 102. Definitions.
Sec. 103. Effective date.

       TITLE II--FEDERAL EMPLOYEE DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION

Sec. 201. Reimbursement requirement.

[[Page 18302]]

Sec. 202. Notification requirement.
Sec. 203. Reporting requirement.
Sec. 204. Rules and guidelines.
Sec. 205. Clarification of remedies.
Sec. 206. Study by General Accounting Office regarding exhaustion of 
              administrative remedies.

   TITLE III--EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMPLAINT DATA DISCLOSURE

Sec. 301. Data to be posted by employing Federal agencies.
Sec. 302. Data to be posted by the Equal Employment Opportunity 
              Commission.
Sec. 303. Rules.

                      TITLE I--GENERAL PROVISIONS

     SEC. 101. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds that--
       (1) Federal agencies cannot be run effectively if they 
     practice or tolerate discrimination,
       (2) the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of 
     Representatives has heard testimony from individuals, 
     including representatives of the National Association for the 
     Advancement of Colored People and the American Federation of 
     Government Employees that point to chronic problems of 
     discrimination and retaliation against Federal employees,
       (3) in August 2000, a jury found that the Environmental 
     Protection Agency had discriminated against a senior social 
     scientist, and awarded that scientist $600,000,
       (4) in October 2000, an Occupational Safety and Health 
     Administration investigation found that the Environmental 
     Protection Agency had retaliated against a senior scientist 
     for disagreeing with that agency on a matter of science and 
     for helping Congress to carry out its oversight 
     responsibilities,
       (5) there have been several recent class action suits based 
     on discrimination brought against Federal agencies, including 
     the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Bureau of Alcohol, 
     Tobacco, and Firearms, the Drug Enforcement Administration, 
     the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and the United 
     States Marshals Service,
       (6) notifying Federal employees of their rights under 
     discrimination and whistleblower laws should increase agency 
     compliance with the law,
       (7) requiring annual reports to Congress on the number and 
     severity of discrimination and whistleblower cases brought 
     against each Federal agency should enable Congress to improve 
     its oversight over agencies' compliance with the law, and
       (8) penalizing Federal agencies by requiring them to pay 
     for any discrimination or whistleblower judgments, awards, 
     and settlements should improve agency accountability with 
     respect to discrimination and whistleblower laws.

     SEC. 102. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this Act--
       (1) the term ``applicant for Federal employment'' means an 
     individual applying for employment in or under a Federal 
     agency,
       (2) the term ``basis of alleged discrimination'' shall have 
     the meaning given such term under section 303,
       (3) the term ``Federal agency'' means an Executive agency 
     (as defined in section 105 of title 5, United States Code), 
     the United States Postal Service, or the Postal Rate 
     Commission,
       (4) the term ``Federal employee'' means an individual 
     employed in or under a Federal agency,
       (5) the term ``former Federal employee'' means an 
     individual formerly employed in or under a Federal agency, 
     and
       (6) the term ``issue of alleged discrimination'' shall have 
     the meaning given such term under section 303.

     SEC. 103. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall take 
     effect on the 1st day of the 1st fiscal year beginning more 
     than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

       TITLE II--FEDERAL EMPLOYEE DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION

     SEC. 201. REIMBURSEMENT REQUIREMENT.

       (a) Applicability.--This section applies with respect to 
     any payment made in accordance with section 2414, 2517, 2672, 
     or 2677 of title 28, United States Code, and under section 
     1304 of title 31, United States Code (relating to judgments, 
     awards, and compromise settlements) to any Federal employee, 
     former Federal employee, or applicant for Federal employment, 
     in connection with any proceeding brought by or on behalf of 
     such employee, former employee, or applicant under--
       (1) any provision of law cited in subsection (c), or
       (2) any other provision of law which prohibits any form of 
     discrimination, as identified under rules issued under 
     section 204.
       (b) Requirement.--An amount equal to the amount of each 
     payment described in subsection (a) shall be reimbursed to 
     the fund described in section 1304 of title 31, United States 
     Code, out of any appropriation, fund, or other account 
     (excluding any part of such appropriation, of such fund, or 
     of such account available for the enforcement of any Federal 
     law) available for operating expenses of the Federal agency 
     to which the discriminatory conduct involved is attributable 
     as determined under section 204.
       (c) Scope.--The provisions of law cited in this subsection 
     are the following:
       (1) Section 2302(b) of title 5 of the United States Code, 
     as applied to discriminatory conduct described in paragraphs 
     (1) and (8), or described in paragraph (9) of such section as 
     applied to discriminatory conduct described in paragraphs (1) 
     and (8), of such section.
       (2) The provisions of law specified in section 2302(d) of 
     title 5 of the United States Code.
       (3) The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1986 and the 
     amendments made by such Act.

     SEC. 202. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.

       (a) In General.--Written notification of the rights and 
     protections available to Federal employees, former Federal 
     employees, and applicants for Federal employment (as the case 
     may be) in connection with the respective provisions of law 
     covered by paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 201(a) shall be 
     provided to such employees, former employees, and 
     applicants--
       (1) in accordance with otherwise applicable provisions of 
     law, or
       (2) if to the extent that no such notification would 
     otherwise be required, in such time, form, and manner as 
     shall under section 204 be required in order to carry out the 
     requirements of this section.
       (b) Posting on the Internet.--Any written notification 
     under this section shall include, but not be limited to, the 
     posting of the information required under paragraph (1) or 
     (2) (as applicable) of subsection (a) on the Internet site of 
     the Federal agency involved.
       (c) Employee Training.--Each Federal agency shall provide 
     to the employees of such agency training regarding the rights 
     and remedies applicable to such employees under the laws 
     cited in section 201(c).

     SEC. 203. REPORTING REQUIREMENT.

       (a) Annual Report.--Subject to subsection (b), not later 
     than 180 days after the end of each fiscal year, each Federal 
     agency shall submit to the Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives, the President pro tempore of the Senate, the 
     Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the Attorney 
     General an annual report which shall include, with respect to 
     the fiscal year--
       (1) the number of cases arising under each of the 
     respective provisions of law covered by paragraphs (1) and 
     (2) of section 201(a) in which discrimination on the part of 
     such agency was alleged,
       (2) the status or disposition of cases described in 
     paragraph (1),
       (3) the amount of money required to be reimbursed by such 
     agency under section 201 in connection with each of such 
     cases, separately identifying the aggregate amount of such 
     reimbursements attributable to the payment of attorneys' 
     fees, if any,
       (4) the number of employees disciplined for discrimination, 
     retaliation, harassment, or any other infraction of any 
     provision of law referred to in paragraph (1),
       (5) the final year-end data posted under section 
     301(c)(1)(B) for such fiscal year (without regard to section 
     301(c)(2)), and
       (6) a detailed description of--
       (A) the policy implemented by such agency to discipline 
     employees who are determined in any judicial or 
     administrative proceeding to have discriminated against any 
     individual in violation of any of the laws cited in section 
     201(c), and
       (B) with respect to each of such laws, the number of 
     employees who are disciplined in accordance with such policy 
     and the specific nature of the disciplinary action taken.
       (b) First Report.--The 1st report submitted under 
     subsection (a) shall include for each item under subsection 
     (a) data for each of the 5 immediately preceding fiscal years 
     (or, if not available for all 5 fiscal years, for however 
     many of those 5 fiscal years for which data are available).

     SEC. 204. RULES AND GUIDELINES.

       (a) Issuance of Rules and Guidelines.--The President (or 
     the designee of the President) shall issue--
       (1) rules to carry out this title,
       (2) rules to require that a comprehensive study be 
     conducted in the Executive Branch to determine the best 
     practices for Federal agencies to take appropriate 
     disciplinary actions against Federal employees who are 
     determined in any judicial or administrative proceeding to 
     have discriminated against any individual in violation of any 
     of the laws cited in section 201(c), and
       (3) based on the results of such study, advisory guidelines 
     incorporating best practices that Federal agencies may follow 
     to take such actions against such employees.
       (b) Agency Notification Regarding Implementation of 
     Guidelines.--Not later than 30 days after the issuance of 
     guidelines under subsection (a), each Federal agency shall 
     submit to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the 
     President pro tempore of the Senate, the Equal Employment 
     Opportunity Commission, and the Attorney General a written 
     statement specifying in detail--
       (1) whether such agency has adopted and will fully follow 
     such guidelines,
       (2) if such agency has not adopted such guidelines, the 
     reasons for the failure to adopt such guidelines, and

[[Page 18303]]

       (3) if such agency will not fully follow such guidelines, 
     the reasons for the decision not to fully follow such 
     guidelines and an explanation of the extent to which such 
     agency will not follow such guidelines.

     SEC. 205. CLARIFICATION OF REMEDIES.

       Consistent with Federal law, nothing in this title shall 
     prevent any Federal employee, former Federal employee, or 
     applicant for Federal employment from exercising any right 
     otherwise available under the laws of the United States.

     SEC. 206. STUDY BY GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE REGARDING 
                   EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES.

       (a) Study.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the General Accounting Office shall 
     conduct a study relating to the effects of eliminating the 
     requirement that Federal employees aggrieved by violations of 
     any of the laws specified in paragraphs (7) and (8) of 
     section 201(c) exhaust administrative remedies before filing 
     complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. 
     Such study shall include a detailed summary of matters 
     investigated, of information collected, and of conclusions 
     formulated that lead to determinations of how the elimination 
     of such requirement will--
       (1) expedite handling of allegations of such violations 
     within Federal agencies and will streamline the complaint-
     filing process,
       (2) affect the workload of the Commission,
       (3) affect established alternative dispute resolution 
     procedures in such agencies, and
       (4) affect any other matters determined by the General 
     Accounting Office to be appropriate for consideration.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 90 days after completion of the 
     study required by subsection (a), the General Accounting 
     Office shall submit to the Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives, the President pro tempore of the Senate, the 
     Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the Attorney 
     General a report containing the information required to be 
     included in such study.

   TITLE III--EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMPLAINT DATA DISCLOSURE

     SEC. 301. DATA TO BE POSTED BY EMPLOYING FEDERAL AGENCIES.

       (a) In General.--Each Federal agency shall post on its 
     public Web site, in the time, form, and manner prescribed 
     under section 303 (in conformance with the requirements of 
     this section), summary statistical data relating to equal 
     employment opportunity complaints filed with such agency by 
     employees or former employees of, or applicants for 
     employment with, such agency.
       (b) Content Requirements.--The data posted by a Federal 
     agency under this section shall include, for the then current 
     fiscal year, the following:
       (1) The number of complaints filed with such agency in such 
     fiscal year.
       (2) The number of individuals filing those complaints 
     (including as the agent of a class).
       (3) The number of individuals who filed 2 or more of those 
     complaints.
       (4) The number of complaints (described in paragraph (1)) 
     in which each of the various bases of alleged discrimination 
     is alleged.
       (5) The number of complaints (described in paragraph (1)) 
     in which each of the various issues of alleged discrimination 
     is alleged.
       (6) The average length of time, for each step of the 
     process, it is taking such agency to process complaints 
     (taking into account all complaints pending for any length of 
     time in such fiscal year, whether first filed in such fiscal 
     year or earlier). Average times under this paragraph shall be 
     posted--
       (A) for all such complaints,
       (B) for all such complaints in which a hearing before an 
     administrative judge of the Equal Employment Opportunity 
     Commission is not requested, and
       (C) for all such complaints in which a hearing before an 
     administrative judge of the Equal Employment Opportunity 
     Commission is requested.
       (7) The total number of final agency actions rendered in 
     such fiscal year involving a finding of discrimination and, 
     of that number--
       (A) the number and percentage that were rendered without a 
     hearing before an administrative judge of the Equal 
     Employment Opportunity Commission, and
       (B) the number and percentage that were rendered after a 
     hearing before an administrative judge of the Equal 
     Employment Opportunity Commission.
       (8) Of the total number of final agency actions rendered in 
     such fiscal year involving a finding of discrimination--
       (A) the number and percentage involving a finding of 
     discrimination based on each of the respective bases of 
     alleged discrimination, and
       (B) of the number specified under subparagraph (A) for each 
     of the respective bases of alleged discrimination--
       (i) the number and percentage that were rendered without a 
     hearing before an administrative judge of the Equal 
     Employment Opportunity Commission, and
       (ii) the number and percentage that were rendered after a 
     hearing before an administrative judge of the Equal 
     Employment Opportunity Commission.
       (9) Of the total number of final agency actions rendered in 
     such fiscal year involving a finding of discrimination--
       (A) the number and percentage involving a finding of 
     discrimination in connection with each of the respective 
     issues of alleged discrimination, and
       (B) of the number specified under subparagraph (A) for each 
     of the respective issues of alleged discrimination--
       (i) the number and percentage that were rendered without a 
     hearing before an administrative judge of the Equal 
     Employment Opportunity Commission, and
       (ii) the number and percentage that were rendered after a 
     hearing before an administrative judge of the Equal 
     Employment Opportunity Commission.
       (10)(A) Of the total number of complaints pending in such 
     fiscal year (as described in the parenthetical matter in 
     paragraph (6)), the number that were first filed before the 
     start of the then current fiscal year.
       (B) With respect to those pending complaints that were 
     first filed before the start of the then current fiscal 
     year--
       (i) the number of individuals who filed those complaints, 
     and
       (ii) the number of those complaints which are at the 
     various steps of the complaint process.
       (C) Of the total number of complaints pending in such 
     fiscal year (as described in the parenthetical matter in 
     paragraph (6)), the total number of complaints with respect 
     to which the agency violated the requirements of section 
     1614.106(e)(2) of title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
     (as in effect on July 1, 2000, and amended from time to time) 
     by failing to conduct within 180 days of the filing of such 
     complaints an impartial and appropriate investigation of such 
     complaints.
       (c) Timing and Other Requirements.--
       (1) Current year data.--Data posted under this section for 
     the then current fiscal year shall include both--
       (A) interim year-to-date data, updated quarterly, and
       (B) final year-end data.
       (2) Data for prior years.--The data posted by a Federal 
     agency under this section for a fiscal year (both interim and 
     final) shall include, for each item under subsection (b), 
     such agency's corresponding year-end data for each of the 5 
     immediately preceding fiscal years (or, if not available for 
     all 5 fiscal years, for however many of those 5 fiscal years 
     for which data are available).

     SEC. 302. DATA TO BE POSTED BY THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 
                   OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.

       (a) In General.--The Equal Employment Opportunity 
     Commission shall post on its public Web site, in the time, 
     form, and manner prescribed under section 303 for purposes of 
     this section, summary statistical data relating to--
       (1) hearings requested before an administrative judge of 
     the Commission on complaints described in section 301, and
       (2) appeals filed with the Commission from final agency 
     actions on complaints described in section 301.
       (b) Specific Requirements.--The data posted under this 
     section shall, with respect to the hearings and appeals 
     described in subsection (a), include summary statistical data 
     corresponding to that described in paragraphs (1) through 
     (10) of section 301(b), and shall be subject to the same 
     timing and other requirements as set forth in section 301(c).
       (c) Coordination.--The data required under this section 
     shall be in addition to the data the Commission is required 
     to post under section 301 as an employing Federal agency.

     SEC. 303. RULES.

       The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission shall issue any 
     rules necessary to carry out this title.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson-Lee) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Sensenbrenner).


                             General Leave

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend 
their remarks on H.R. 169, as amended, the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, today is a historic day for the House, as we are about 
to consider, and likely pass, what Jack White at Time Magazine called 
``the first new civil rights law of the 21st century.''
  I, along with the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), 
introduced H.R. 169, the Notification and Federal Employee 
Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2001, or the No FEAR

[[Page 18304]]

Act, to address an outrage in the Federal Government. The Federal 
Government should serve as a model of the best practices for a fair and 
open work environment. But after a year-long investigation, I was 
surprised to discover that some Federal agencies appear to be allowing 
discrimination and retaliation against their own employees.
  The General Accounting Office has also investigated discrimination in 
the Federal workforce and found complaints grew tremendously in the 
1990s. In fact, in fiscal year 1999, the number of complaints to the 
Equal Employment Opportunities Commission was about 120 percent greater 
than the number of complaints in 1991. The GAO also reported that 
complaints alleging retaliation against employees who had participated 
in the complaint process had increased as well.
  That very type of retaliation is what has brought us here today. A 
number of brave EPA employees and scientists came forward to tell the 
Committee on Science, which I chaired in the last Congress, about a 
culture of intolerance and hostility at the EPA. By assisting a 
congressional investigation, those employees risked retaliation, and 
some experienced it.
  In fact, the Labor Department concluded that the EPA had retaliated 
against a female scientist because the Committee on Science used a 
memorandum she wrote 10 years prior to one of the hearings on the 
issue. She did not even know the committee had obtained her memorandum, 
but she was still punished by the agency.
  The problem is threefold: first, many employees and managers are not 
aware of their rights and responsibilities, due to inadequate 
notification requirements. Second, Federal agencies in Congress cannot 
assess the extent of the problem due to inadequate reporting. Third, 
Federal agencies are not accountable for the misdeeds of their 
employees, as Federal agencies found guilty of discrimination do not 
have to pay judgment settlement costs.
  The bill is aimed at preventing and reducing discrimination and 
retaliation in the Federal workforce by requiring better notification, 
reporting, and accountability from Federal agencies. The No FEAR Act 
would require agencies to pay for all court settlements or judgments 
for discrimination and retaliation cases, rather than allowing them to 
use a government-wide slush fund. This will make the agencies more 
accountable for their actions.
  The bill's notification requirement is aimed at improving workforce 
relations by increasing managers' and employees' knowledge of their 
respective rights and responsibilities. The act's reporting requirement 
will help determine if a pattern of misconduct exists within an agency 
and, if so, whether an agency is taking appropriate action to address 
the problem, such as disciplining those employees or managers involved 
in the misconduct. Tracking this information is critical to 
understanding whether a problem exists.
  Finally, the bill ensures that the Federal agencies abide by the same 
laws by which private citizens and businesses must operate. Just like 
private sector employees, Federal employees are protected against 
discrimination and retaliation. Just like the private sector, Federal 
agencies must be held accountable.
  Madam Speaker, H.R. 169 enjoys a broad show of diverse support. The 
NAACP has endorsed this bill, as well as the National Taxpayers Union. 
As the National Taxpayers Union stated in urging Congress to enact the 
legislation, ``The No FEAR Act promotes the virtues of fiscal 
responsibility and accountability in government.''
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I believe that this is an important day and a historic 
day, and it is a reflection on the value of persistence and 
determination.
  I would like to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Sensenbrenner), chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, for having 
both persistence and determination. Both of us served on the House 
Committee on Science just a session ago when the gentleman chaired that 
committee and we heard some very disturbing testimony. Out of that 
testimony before the Committee on Science, together we worked on what 
is now H.R. 169, the No FEAR Act. I would like to thank him for his 
work, along with the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the ranking 
member, and all of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle, for 
working with us and supporting this important civil rights legislation. 
This bill before us today, a substitute to H.R. 169, the No FEAR Act, 
is a major step in our fight to end the insidious practice of 
discrimination and retaliation in our Nation's Federal workplace. What 
better timing than in the contrast of recognizing how important our 
Federal workers are, how we are unified under one flag, hoping and 
pushing forward the democracy and principles that we all believe in.
  Madam Speaker, in fiscal year 2000, Federal employees filed nearly 
25,000 complaints against Federal agencies through the EEOC process. 
These complaints resulted in over $26 million in discrimination 
complaint settlements and judgments, with an average process time of 
384 days per complaint in 1998, while a case traveling through the 
entire complaint process from filing through appeal could take up to 38 
months. These numbers and process times indicate that discrimination is 
pervasive in our Federal workplace.
  Under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is illegal to discriminate 
against Federal employees on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, 
national origin, age or disability. These laws have taken us a long way 
towards ensuring equality, job security, and the rule of law in the 
Federal workplace by protecting Federal employees from retaliation for 
filing complaints either against an agency or other employees of the 
Federal Government who act in supervisory roles. The Federal Government 
must be the national role model.
  Currently, Federal whistleblowers may file reprisal complaints with 
the Office of Special Counsel, OSC; the Merit Systems Protection Board, 
MSPB; and the Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration, OSHA. Federal whistleblowers are protected under 
several Federal laws, the primary one being the Whistleblower 
Protection Act of 1989. But the numbers of actions and extensive 
process time indicate that further legislation is greatly needed. I 
believe many agencies and many groups saw fit for such, such as the 
NAACP.
  Since its introduction into the 106th Congress as H.R. 5516, the 
Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Retaliation Act of 
2000 has stood for the principles that Federal employees should have 
``no fear'' in reporting discriminatory behavior by their Federal 
agency employers. Like its predecessor, the legislation before us 
today, H.R. 169 demands that agencies be held accountable for their 
misdeeds; but it expands the accountability throughout the entire 
Federal Government.
  Let me put a face on this problem. On October 2, 2000, 1 year ago to 
the day, the House Committee on Science 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, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the then chairman of the Committee on 
Science, illuminated the dangerous precedent set by the EPA, stating: 
``While EPA has a clear policy on dealing with employees who 
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 the EPA.''
  I note with concern that an internal EPA memo dated August 2, 2001, 
praised the managers named in Dr. Coleman-Adebayo's case as 
environmental leaders without a single mention of their role in 
violating her civil rights. When coupled with the high-profile nature 
of the case, I believe

[[Page 18305]]

these actions send the wrong message to EPA and Federal employees.
  One manager was actually transferred from his original office, the 
Office of International Activities, to Dr. Coleman-Adebayo's present 
office. He will now be the counselor to the assistant administrator for 
Pollution Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.
  I'd like to thank Judiciary chairman James Sensenbrenner, Ranking 
Member John Conyers, and all my colleagues from both sides of the aisle 
for supporting this important civil rights legislation. This bill 
before us today, a substitute to H.R. 169 (the No Fear Act), is a major 
step in our fight to end the insidious practice of discrimination and 
retaliation in our Nation's Federal workplace.
  My friends, in fiscal year 2000, Federal employees filed nearly 
25,000 complaints against Federal agencies through the EEOC process. 
The complaints resulted in over $26 million in discrimination complaint 
settlements and judgments, with an average process time of 384 days per 
complaint in 1998, while a case traveling through the entire complaint 
process from filing through appeal could take up to 38 months. These 
numbers and process times indicate that discrimination is pervasive in 
our Federal workplace.
  Under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is illegal to discriminate 
against Federal employees on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, 
national origin, age, or disability. These laws have taken us a long 
way toward ensuring equality, job security, and the rule of law in the 
Federal workplace by protecting Federal employees from retaliation for 
filing complaints against either the agency or other employees of the 
Federal Government who act in supervisory roles.
  Currently, Federal whistleblowers may file reprisal complaints with 
the Office of Special Counsel, (OSC), the Merit Systems Protection 
Board, (MSPB), and the Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration, (OSHA). Federal whistleblowers are protected 
under several Federal laws, the primary one being the Whistleblower 
Protection Act of 1989. But the numbers of actions and extensive 
process times indicate that further legislation is greatly needed.
  Since its introduction in the 106th Congress as H.R. 5516, the 
Notification and Federal Employee Anti-discrimination and Retaliation 
Act of 2000 (No FEAR Act), has stood for the principle that Federal 
employees should have ``no fear'' in reporting discriminatory behavior 
by their federal agency employers. Like its predecessor, the 
legislation before us today, H.R. 169, demands that agencies be held 
accountable for their misdeeds, but H.R. 169 expands accountability 
throughout the entire Federal Government.
  Let me put a face on this problem. On October 2, 2000, 1 year ago to 
the day, 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 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 [sic] to be disciplined by EPA.''
  I note with concern that an internal EPA memo dated August 2, 2001, 
praised the managers named in Dr. Coleman-Adebayo's case as 
environmental leaders without a single mention of their role in 
violating her civil rights. When coupled with the high profile nature 
of the Dr. Coleman-Adebayo's case, I believe these actions send the 
wrong message to EPA and Federal employees.
  One manager was actually transferred from his original office (the 
Office of International Activities) to Dr. Coleman-Adebayo's present 
office. He will not be the counselor to the Assistant Administrator for 
Pollution Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. This assignment 
gives the appearance that such harassment and retaliation is tolerated 
by the EPA, and raises the issue of whether such harassment, 
intimidation, and violations of civil rights are ongoing.
  This assignment gives the appearance that such harassment and 
retaliation is tolerated by the EPA, and raises the issue of whether 
such harassment, intimidation, and violation of civil rights is 
ongoing.
  This is a very serious matter of discrimination, and, I believe, 
obstruction of justice.
  No FEAR contains four major provisions which address this problem.
  First, the bill requires accountability throughout our Federal 
workplace. Disturbingly, under Federal law, Federal agencies are not 
held liable when they lose judgments, awards, or compromise settlements 
in whistleblower and discrimination cases.
  Second, No FEAR requires Federal agencies to notify employees about 
any applicable discrimination and whistleblower protection laws, and to 
report to Congress and the Attorney General on the number of 
discrimination and whistleblower cases within each agency.
  Third, No FEAR recognizes Congress' intent that such legislation is 
necessary, but should not otherwise limit the ability of Federal 
employees to exercise other rights under Federal law.
  Finally, No FEAR requires each Federal agency to send an annual 
report to Congress listing, among other things, the number of cases and 
the disposition of the cases.
  I am glad that the manager's amendment corrected the source of funds 
from which the recovery should come. It excludes all agency enforcement 
funds from being used to reimburse the general Treasury for 
discrimination or whistleblower judgments against the agency.
  This is a timely piece of legislation. I would like to thank Kweisi 
Mfume, the President of NAACP, for taking the leadership in helping us 
to promote this legislation, and for testifying before our respective 
committees.
  Again, let me thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) 
and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), and all of our 
colleagues. I ask that this House unanimously support the No FEAR 
legislation in this very special time to promote our civil rights and 
civil liberties.
  Madam Speaker, let me simply, again, offer my thanks and 
appreciation, and on behalf of the other Members, let me just mention 
that I know that several Members, the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. 
Morella) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Wynn), will have 
statements and have offered their support.
  Mrs. MORELLA. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 
169, the NO FEAR legislation. This bill provides essential help to 
whistleblowers and those that suffer discrimination, and it penalizes 
agencies that attempt to practice discrimination or punish 
whistleblowers. Under current law, most judgments or awards against the 
federal government, including federal agencies, are paid out of a 
general judgment fund and are not attributed to, or accounted for, by 
the agency responsible for the claim. This bill requires federal 
agencies to reimburse the government's judgment fund for amounts paid 
out in response to a court settlement, award or judgment against an 
agency in a discrimination or whistleblower protection lawsuit. 
Hopefully, by making agencies responsible for their actions, we can 
further decrease the reprehensible practice of discrimination and the 
needless punishing of whistleblowers.
  This bill has several other important provisions which my colleague 
from Wisconsin has mentioned and so I would just like to take this 
opportunity to point out and recognize two individuals, who are here in 
the gallery today, Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo and Mr. Leroy Warren, Jr. 
Both of these individuals live in my district, Montgomery County, 
Maryland and played an instrumental role in helping this legislation 
come to the floor today.
  Mr. Warren is Chairman of the NAACP Federal Sector Task Force and was 
asked to investigate and address the ever-growing number of complaints 
of discrimination within the federal government. Mr. Warren's task 
force did an admirable job in bringing to light much of the 
discrimination that federal employees faced.
  Dr. Coleman-Adebayo has become well known for her courageous fight 
against discrimination by the EPA.
  She is someone who suffered terribly from her battle but preserved 
and won her case against the EPA. She has testified in front of both 
the Science and Judiciary Committees to alert all of us to the 
seriousness of what transpired in her case. And now, hopefully, because 
of the NO FEAR bill, the first civil rights bill of the 21st Century, 
victims of racial, sexual, and hostile work environments, and 
whistleblowers, will not have to suffer the pain and abuse that Dr. 
Coleman-Adebayo endured. Let us hope instead that H.R. 169 will push 
federal agencies to spend their time devising effective plans to 
address all forms of discrimination in the workplace.

[[Page 18306]]

  I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mrs. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Biggert). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) that the 
House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 169, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of 
those present have voted in the affirmative.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8, rule XX, and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________