PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Unfavorable Executive Comment Received from DOD.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 13, 2001
Fairness to Local Contractors Act - Amends Federal defense procurement law to require a bidder or offeror, to be considered a responsible bidder or offeror for the construction of a public building, facility, or work, to submit a tax clearance (a document stating that such entity is in compliance with all State tax laws) from the State in which the contract is to be performed. Requires the head of a Federal agency to withhold the final payment under such a contract until the contractor submits both a tax clearance and a certification of compliance with all State laws concerning payments to employees under such contract.Authorizes an agency head to: (1) withhold from any contractor payments amounts necessary to pay any State tax liability due under such contract; and (2) pay such amount directly to such State.Directs the Secretary of Defense to require a contractor to be licensed if the State in which a construction contract is to be performed requires such a license.Requires revision of the Federal Acquisition Regulation to explain the general excise tax law of Hawaii.
People & committees
Rep. Mink, Patsy T. [D-HI-2] · D–HI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Unfavorable Executive Comment Received from DOD.
Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E159)
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 19, 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.588 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.588 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.588 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.588 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.