PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Bean, Aaron [R-FL-4] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 14, 2026. 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.1554 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.1554 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.1554 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.1554 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.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-25 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This proposal would generally require federal agencies to buy the goods and services they need from private suppliers, affecting how agencies assign work to businesses and government employees. Exceptions would allow government production or services when required by law, needed for national defense or homeland security, critical to an agency’s mission, inherently governmental, or unavailable from a capable private supplier.
Except as provided in subsection (c) and notwithstanding any other provision of law, each agency shall obtain all goods and services necessary for or beneficial to the accomplishment of its authorized functions by procurement from private sources.
(c) Exemptions Subsection (b) shall not apply to an agency with respect to goods or services if— (1) the goods or services are required by law to be produced or performed, respectively, by the agency; or (2) the head of the agency determines and certifies to Congress in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget that— (A) Federal Government production, manufacture, or provision of a good or service is necessary for the national defense or homeland security; (B) a good or service is so critical to the mission of the agency or so inherently governmental in nature that it is in the public interest to require production or performance, respectively, by Government employees; or (C) there is no private source capable of providing the good or service.
Section 1 would name the bill the Freedom from Government Competition Act of 2025.
This Act may be cited as the Freedom from Government Competition Act of 2025.
Section 2 presents proposed congressional findings favoring private suppliers and asserting that unfair government competition harms the economy. These are the bill’s stated reasons for its policy, not demonstrated effects of the proposal.
Congress makes the following findings:
(2) Competitive private enterprises are the most productive, efficient, and effective sources of goods and services. (3) Unfair Government competition with the private sector of the economy is detrimental to the United States economic system.
Section 3 would cover executive departments, military departments, and independent establishments, using definitions in existing federal law.
In this Act, the term agency means— (1) an executive department as defined by section 101 of title 5, United States Code; (2) a military department as defined by section 102 of such title; and (3) an independent establishment as defined by section 104(l) of such title.
Section 4(a) states a policy of relying on commercial suppliers, avoiding government provision when buying commercially would be more economical, and using federal employees for “inherently governmental functions”—a legal category defined in another law that is not reproduced here.
it has been and continues to be the general policy of the Federal Government— (1) to rely on commercial sources to supply the products and services the Government needs; (2) to refrain from providing a product or service if the product or service can be procured more economically from a commercial source; and (3) to utilize Federal employees to perform inherently governmental functions (as that term is defined in section 5 of the Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998 (Public Law 105–270; 112 Stat. 2384)).
Section 4(b) would require covered agencies to obtain all goods and services necessary or beneficial to their authorized work from private sources, subject to section 4(c)’s exceptions. This purchasing requirement does not itself require a finding that private provision costs less, and it expressly applies notwithstanding other laws.
(b) General rule Except as provided in subsection (c) and notwithstanding any other provision of law, each agency shall obtain all goods and services necessary for or beneficial to the accomplishment of its authorized functions by procurement from private sources.
The private-source requirement would not apply when another law requires the agency itself to produce the goods or perform the services.
(c) Exemptions Subsection (b) shall not apply to an agency with respect to goods or services if— (1) the goods or services are required by law to be produced or performed, respectively, by the agency;
Other exceptions would require the agency head to make a determination and certify it to Congress under Office of Management and Budget regulations. The grounds would be national defense or homeland security necessity; work so mission-critical or inherently governmental that government employees should perform it in the public interest; or the absence of a capable private supplier.
(2) the head of the agency determines and certifies to Congress in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget that— (A) Federal Government production, manufacture, or provision of a good or service is necessary for the national defense or homeland security; (B) a good or service is so critical to the mission of the agency or so inherently governmental in nature that it is in the public interest to require production or performance, respectively, by Government employees; or (C) there is no private source capable of providing the good or service.
For work that is not exempt, section 4(d) would require private provision through ending federal involvement, awarding a private contract using legally defined competitive procedures, or conducting a comparison of public and private provision under Office of Management and Budget procedures. The comparison route would require findings that private provision serves the national interest and provides the best value to taxpayers.
(d) Method of procurement The provision of goods and services not exempt by subsection (c)(1) or (c)(2) shall be performed by an entity in the private sector through— (1) the divestiture of Federal involvement in the provision of a good or service; (2) the award of a contract to an entity in the private sector, using competitive procedures, as defined in section 152 of title 41, United States Code, and section 2302 of title 10, United States Code; or (3) conducting a public-private competitive sourcing analysis in accordance with the procedures established by the Office of Management and Budget and determining that using the assets, facilities, and performance of the private sector is in the best interest of the United States and that production or performance, respectively, by the private sector provides the best value to the taxpayer.
An agency head could assign goods or services previously provided by a private entity to federal employees after completing the specified public-private comparison and determining that federal employees would provide the best value to taxpayers. The provision permits this change; it does not require it.
(e) Contracted activities The head of an agency may utilize Federal employees to provide goods or services previously provided by an entity in the private sector upon completion of a public-private competitive sourcing analysis described in subsection (d)(3), and after making a determination that the provision of such goods or services by Federal employees provides the best value to the taxpayer.
The Director of the Office of Management and Budget would issue regulations considered necessary to implement section 4. Those regulations would have to ensure that states, territories, and their political subdivisions, such as local governments, follow the section’s policy and requirements when spending federal funds.
(f) Regulations The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall promulgate such regulations as the Director considers necessary to carry out this section. In promulgating such regulations, the Director shall assure that any State or territory, or political subdivision of a State or territory, complies with the policy and implements the requirements of this section when expending Federal funds.
Section 5 would require the Office of Management and Budget Director, after consulting the Comptroller General, to study each agency’s activities. The study would include activities listed as commercial or inherently governmental in the inventory required by the referenced 1998 law.
The Director of the Office of Management and Budget, after consultation with the Comptroller General of the United States, shall carry out a study to evaluate the activities carried out in each agency, including those identified as commercial and inherently governmental in nature in the inventory prepared pursuant to the Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998 (Public Law 105–270; 31 U.S.C. 501 note)
The Director would have to report to Congress before June 30 each year. Each report would evaluate the justification for exemptions and include a schedule for transferring commercial activities to private providers under section 4(d), with the transfers completed within five years after that report is sent to Congress.
shall transmit a report to the Congress prior to June 30 of each year. The report shall include— (1) an evaluation of the justification for exempting activities pursuant to section 4(c); and (2) a schedule for the transfer of commercial activities to the private sector, pursuant to section 4(d), to be completed within 5 years after the date on which such report is transmitted to the Congress.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated April 14, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on February 25, 2025. It does not establish subsequent action or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-04-14T08:05:35Z. 2025-02-25: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 2025-02-25: Introduced in House 2025-02-25: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-25. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the contents or attachment history of other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials. The bundle does not include earmark disclosures, member requests, or committee or conference materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential treatment warranting a targeted-benefit finding was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Apr 14, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI