PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 22, 2017
Promoting Value Based Procurement Act of 2017
This bill declares that it shall be U.S. government policy to avoid using lowest price technically acceptable source selection criteria in circumstances that would deny the government the benefits of cost and technical trade-offs.
The Federal Acquisition Regulation shall be revised to require that such criteria shall be used for solicitations only when:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
an executive agency is able to comprehensively describe the minimum requirements in terms of performance objectives, measures, and standards that will be used to determine acceptability of offers;
the agency would realize no, or minimal, value from a contract proposal exceeding the minimum technical or performance requirements set forth in the request for proposal;
the proposed technical approaches will require no, or minimal, subjective judgment by the selection authority as to the desirability of one offeror's proposal versus a competing proposal;
such authority has a high degree of confidence that a review of technical proposals of offerors other than the lowest bidder would not result in identifying factors that could provide value or benefit to the agency;
the contracting officer has included a justification for the use of a lowest price technically acceptable evaluation methodology in the contract file; and
the agency has determined that the lowest price reflects full life-cycle costs.
The use of such criteria shall be avoided for a procurement that is predominately for the acquisition of:
information technology, cybersecurity, systems engineering and technical assistance, advanced electronic testing, or audit or audit readiness services or other knowledge-based professional services;
personal protective equipment; or
knowledge-based training or logistics services in operations outside the United States.
The Government Accountability Office shall report annually for four years on the number of instances in which such criteria is used for a contract exceeding $2 million.
People & committees
Rep. Meadows, Mark [R-NC-11] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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 currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 11, 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.3019 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.3019 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.3019 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.3019 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.