H.R.1982 / 108th Congress

To amend title III of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to provide to contracting officers of the civilian agencies the same authorities available to Department of Defense contracting officers to competitively evaluate products offered by Federal Prison Industries, Inc., to assure that such products represent the best value for the taxpayer dollars being expended, and for other purposes.

Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.

Congressional Research Service

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 6, 2003

Amends the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to require the head of an executive agency: (1) before purchasing a product listed in the latest edition of the Federal Prison Industries (FPI) catalog, to conduct market research to determine whether the Industries' product is comparable to products available from the private sector that best meet the agency's needs in terms of price, quality, and time of delivery; and (2) if an FPI product is not comparable, to use competitive procedures for the procurement of the product or to make an individual purchase under a multiple award contract, considering any timely offer from FPI; and (3) to ensure that FPI performs its contractual obligations to the same extent as any other agency contractor..Prohibits: (1) a contractor or potential contractor of an agency from being required, by any means, to use FPI as a subcontractor or supplier of products or provider of services for the performance of an agency contract; or (2) an agency head from entering into a contract with FPI under which an inmate worker would have access to specified classified or sensitive information.

Read the summary on Congress.gov

PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

People & committees

Who introduced it

Rep. Maloney, Carolyn B. [D-NY-14] · D–NY

Committees

Oversight and Government Reform Committee

1 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Rep. Souder, Mark E. [R-IN-3]

Legislative record

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

May 6, 2003
Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
May 6, 2003
Introduced in House
May 6, 2003
Introduced in House

Primary sources

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Introduced in House · May 6, 2003 Formatted Text PDF

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

AI Conversation Starters

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.1982 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.1982, 108th Congress: To amend title III of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to provide to contracting officers of the civilian agencies the same authorities available to Department of Defense contracting officers to competitively evaluate products offered by Federal Prison Industries, Inc., to assure that such products represent the best value for the taxpayer dollars being expended, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/1982

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 2003-05-06.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/108/bills/hr1982/BILLS-108hr1982ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T13:36:57Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Analyze H.R.1982 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.

Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.1982 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.1982, 108th Congress: To amend title III of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to provide to contracting officers of the civilian agencies the same authorities available to Department of Defense contracting officers to competitively evaluate products offered by Federal Prison Industries, Inc., to assure that such products represent the best value for the taxpayer dollars being expended, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/1982

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 2003-05-06.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/108/bills/hr1982/BILLS-108hr1982ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T13:36:57Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.R.1982 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.

Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.1982 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.1982, 108th Congress: To amend title III of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to provide to contracting officers of the civilian agencies the same authorities available to Department of Defense contracting officers to competitively evaluate products offered by Federal Prison Industries, Inc., to assure that such products represent the best value for the taxpayer dollars being expended, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/1982

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 2003-05-06.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/108/bills/hr1982/BILLS-108hr1982ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T13:36:57Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.R.1982 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.

Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.1982 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.1982, 108th Congress: To amend title III of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to provide to contracting officers of the civilian agencies the same authorities available to Department of Defense contracting officers to competitively evaluate products offered by Federal Prison Industries, Inc., to assure that such products represent the best value for the taxpayer dollars being expended, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/1982

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 2003-05-06.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/108/bills/hr1982/BILLS-108hr1982ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T13:36:57Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.R.1982 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.