PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 9, 1999
Federal Asset Management Improvement Act of 1999 - Title I: Improved Property Management - Directs the: (1) Administrator of General Services to establish performance measures to determine the effectiveness of Federal property management; (2) head of each executive agency to monitor their agency's performance against such measures and report results to Congress; and (3) Administrator to submit to Congress a Federal property management plan.Title II: Public-Private Partnerships - Amends the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to authorize the Administrator to enter into agreements for the creation of one or more public-private partnerships to: (1) lease Federal real property; and (2) develop, rehabilitate, or renovate facilities on such property for use by executive agencies. Requires the Administrator to prepare and submit to Congress at least 30 days before entering into such an agreement a business plan regarding each agreement.
People & committees
Rep. Sessions, Pete [R-TX-5] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology.
Referred to the House Committee on 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: Mar 23, 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.3285 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.3285 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.3285 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.3285 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.