PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · May 23, 2011
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Directs that any business determined by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs (VA) to have misrepresented its status as a small business owned and controlled by veterans or service-disabled veterans in order to increase its contracting opportunities shall be debarred from contracting with the VA for not less than five years (under current law, for a reasonable period as determined by the Secretary).
Requires the Secretary to commence the debarment action within 30 days after the misrepresentation determination, and to complete such action within 90 days after such determination. Includes in the debarment all principals in the business.
People & committees
Rep. Stutzman, Marlin A. [R-IN-3] · R–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 385 - 1 (Roll no. 332). (text: CR H3316)
House roll call 332 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 385 - 1 (Roll no. 332).(text: CR H3316)
House roll call 332 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3321-3322)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1657.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3316-3317)
Mr. Miller (FL) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 46.
Reported by the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. H. Rept. 112-85. Filed late, pursuant to previous special order.
Reported by the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. H. Rept. 112-85. Filed late, pursuant to previous special order.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity.
Referred to the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.R.1657 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.1657 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.1657 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.1657 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.