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 53 · Passed House · Sep 29, 2022
Chance to Compete Act of 2022
This bill modifies examination requirements and other components of the federal hiring process for positions in the competitive service.
Specifically, the bill provides that a qualifying examination includes a résumé review that is conducted by a subject matter expert. Additionally, beginning two years after the bill's enactment, the bill prohibits examinations from consisting solely of a self-assessment from an automated examination, a résumé review that is not conducted by a subject matter expert, or any other method of assessing an applicant's experience or education; an agency may waive these requirements when necessary but must report any such waivers.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Agencies may use subject matter experts to develop position-specific technical assessments that allow applicants to demonstrate job-related skills, abilities, and knowledge; assessments may include structured interviews, work-related exercises, procedures to measure career-related qualifications and interests, or other similar assessments. The bill also allows agencies to establish talent teams to support and improve hiring practices.
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) must create online platforms through which agencies may share and customize technical assessments and share the résumés of qualifying applicants. The OPM must also create online platforms with information about (1) the types of assessments used and hiring outcomes, (2) educational requirements for certain positions and related justifications, and (3) authorities and programs that support agency recruitment and retention.
People & committees
Rep. Hice, Jody B. [R-GA-10] · R–GA
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.
Pursuant to section 10 of H. Res. 1396, and the motion offered by Mr. Hoyer, the following bills passed under suspension of the rules: H.R. 1638, as amended; H.R. 3304, as amended; H.R. 4081, as amended; H.R. 4821, as amended; H.R. 6889, as amended; H.R. 6967, as amended; H.R. 8163, as amended; H.R. 8510, as amended; H.R. 8681, as amended; H.R. 8875, as amended; H.R. 8956; S. 1198; and agree to the Senate amendments to H.R. 5641. (text: CR H8145-8147)
Passed/agreed to in House: Pursuant to section 10 of H. Res. 1396, and the motion offered by Mr. Hoyer, the following bills passed under suspension of the rules: H.R. 1638, as amended; H.R. 3304, as amended; H.R. 4081, as amended; H.R. 4821, as amended; H.R. 6889, as amended; H.R. 6967, as amended; H.R. 8163, as amended; H.R. 8510, as amended; H.R. 8681, as amended; H.R. 8875, as amended; H.R. 8956; S. 1198; and agree to the Senate amendments to H.R. 5641.
Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 1396, proceedings on H.R. 6967 are considered vacated.
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. 6967.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8145-8148)
Mrs. Maloney, Carolyn B. moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and 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: Dec 5, 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.6967 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.6967 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.6967 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.6967 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.