PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 10, 2007
Transparency and Accountability in Security Contracting Act of 2007 - Requires each contract, subcontract, or task order awarded or issued by a federal agency that includes private security functions (covered contract) to require the contractor to provide to the agency contracting officer specified information, including the number of persons to perform the security functions and the hiring and training process for such employees. Requires agency oversight in the performance of the covered contract.
Directs the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) to issue rules of engagement regarding the circumstances under which force may be used by contractor personnel performing private security functions within the area covered by a contingency operation, and the types of force authorized. Provides for: (1) hiring, training, and equipment standards relating to private security contractors; and (2) coordination and communication between U.S. Armed Forces and contractor personnel.
Provides for the legal status of contractor personnel with respect to investigations and prosecution of abuses by private security contractors.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), for each theater of operations established in connection with a contingency operation in which contract personnel are carrying out work under a covered contract, to establish a Theater Investigative Unit to investigate allegations of contractor personnel criminal misconduct.
Requires a study by the Comptroller General of the total federal costs of procuring security services through private contractors.
People & committees
Rep. Price, David E. [D-NC-4] · D–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Readiness.
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.369 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.369 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.369 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.369 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.