PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 30, 2003
Truthfulness, Responsibility, and Accountability in Contracting Act of 2003 - Requires the head of each Federal agency to submit to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a certification that a contracting function decision was based on a public-private competition and that the agency: (1) has established a centralized reporting system; (2) is not managing Federal employees by any arbitrary limitations; and (3) is reviewing work performed by contractors, recompeting or contracting in work when appropriate, and subjecting to public-private competition a certain number of Federal employee and contractor positions.
Prohibits the head of an agency from entering into any contract for the performance of services until the Director, after reviewing the certification required, determines that the agency is making substantial progress toward meeting requirements under this Act. Allows the Director to waive the applicability of this Act for national security and other specified reasons.
Requires that any decision by an agency to either transfer the performance of a function from Federal employees to a contractor or to assign to a contractor the performance of a function not currently performed by Federal employees to be based on the results of a public-private competition process that formally compares the costs of Federal employee versus contractor performance.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Comptroller General to monitor agency compliance with this Act. Authorizes: (1) the Secretaries of Defense and of Homeland Security to waive the application of the public-private competition requirements under specified circumstances; and (2) the Director to carry out a limited pilot program regarding the use of alternative public-private competition processes.
People & committees
Rep. Wynn, Albert Russell [D-MD-4] · D–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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: Aug 18, 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.3426 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.3426 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.3426 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.3426 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.