PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 110-356.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 8, 2008
Federal Protective Service Guard Contracting Reform Act of 2008 - Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Assistant Secretary of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, to promulgate regulations establishing guidelines for the prohibition of contract awards for the provision of guard services under the contract security guard program of the Federal Protective Service to any business concern that is owned, controlled, or operated by an individual who has been convicted of a felony. Authorizes the Secretary to consider permanent or interim prohibitions when promulgating the regulations.
Requires such regulations to: (1) identify which serious felonies may prohibit a contractor from being awarded a contract; (2) require contractors to provide information regarding any relevant felony convictions when submitting bids or proposals; (3) provide guidelines for the contracting officer to assess present responsibility, mitigating factors, and the risk associated with the previous conviction and to award a contract under certain circumstances.
Requires the Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy to report on establishing similar guidelines government-wide to the House Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
People & committees
Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large] · D–DC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 110-356.
Became Public Law No: 110-356.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote. (text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR H10140)
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote.(text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR H10140)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3068.
Ms. Norton moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment. (consideration: CR H10140-10141)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Senate requests return of papers with respect to H.R. 3068 by Unanimous Consent.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9336; text as passed Senate: CR S9336)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S9336; text as passed Senate: CR S9336)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 953.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 110-455.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 110-455.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H11108)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H11108)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3068.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H11108-11109)
Mr. Brady (PA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 204.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 110-328.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 110-328.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) 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.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1543)
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: Apr 7, 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.3068 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.3068 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.3068 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.3068 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.