PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 28, 2018
This bill requires each executive agency to take into account the existence of qualified training programs of contractors. Specifically, a contracting officer, in evaluating offers for any contract in an amount greater than $25 million, must consider:
the existence of a qualified training program of an offeror as a factor in the evaluation;
an offeror that provides comprehensive training and education programs to develop its workforce, consistent with the agency's needs; and
in assessing past performance, the manner in which an incumbent contractor is educating, investing, and retaining the contractor's workforce.
"Qualified training program" is defined as:
a program eligible to receive funds under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act,
a program eligible to receive funds under the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006,
a program registered under the National Apprenticeship Act, or
any other federal program determined by the agency to be a qualified training program.
Each agency shall develop workforce development investment incentives for contractors.
People & committees
Rep. Brown, Anthony G. [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 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: Feb 4, 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.6686 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.6686 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.6686 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.6686 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.