PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jul 12, 2016
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Tested Ability to Leverage Exceptional National Talent Act of 2016 or the TALENT Act of 2016
(Sec. 2) This bill codifies provisions establishing the Presidential Innovation Fellows Program (originally established pursuant to Executive Order 13704) to encourage successful entrepreneurs, executives, and innovators to join the government and work in close cooperation with government leaders to create meaningful solutions that can help save lives and taxpayer money, fuel job creation, and significantly improve how the government serves the American people.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The General Services Administration (GSA) shall continue the program in order to enable exceptional individuals with proven track records to serve time-limited appointments in executive agencies to address some of the nation's most significant challenges and improve existing government efforts that would particularly benefit from expertise using innovative techniques and technology.
The program shall be administered by a Director, who shall appoint program fellows and facilitate their placement to participate in projects that have the potential for significant positive effects and that are consistent with the President's goals.
The GSA shall continue an advisory board to recommend priorities and standards for fulfilling the program's mission and to assist in identifying potential projects and placements for fellows.
People & committees
Rep. McCarthy, Kevin [R-CA-23] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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 Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 409 - 8 (Roll no. 410). (text: CR H4683)
House roll call 410 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 409 - 8 (Roll no. 410).(text: CR H4683)
House roll call 410 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H4689-4690)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5658.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4683-4684)
Mr. Farenthold moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
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.
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.5658 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.5658 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.5658 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.5658 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.