PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 27, 2007
Employer Work Incentive Act for Individuals with Severe Disabilities - Amends the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act to require the Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy to establish, annually, a government-wide target for procurement contracts awarded to businesses that employ individuals with severe disabilities. Requires such target to be established at not less than 2.5% of the total value of all prime contract procurements for each fiscal year.
Directs: (1) each executive agency to have an annual procurement target that presents the maximum practicable opportunity for businesses that employ individuals with severe disabilities to participate in the performance of agency contracts; (2) the Administrator to ensure that the cumulative agency targets meet or exceed the annual targets; (3) the Administrator to work with the Administrator of General Services to establish and maintain a database of eligible entities that qualify as businesses that employ such individuals; and (4) the Administrator to promulgate regulations providing that the participation of such businesses shall be an evaluation factor in all contracts awarded by executive agencies.
Provides that the failure of a business that is awarded a contract to meet the employment criteria within one year shall result in contract termination, unless a one-time waiver is approved for good cause.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Makes the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Employment and Training responsible for obtaining input from agencies, individuals, and organizations regarding the effectiveness, outreach, utilization, and advancement of the goals and purposes of the employment and contracting program.
Requires the Secretary of Labor to utilize existing Regional Assistance Centers to provide assistance to businesses in qualifying for the evaluation factor.
People & committees
Sen. Roberts, Pat [R-KS] · R–KS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S8613)
Introduced in Senate
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 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 S.1702 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 S.1702 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 S.1702 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 S.1702 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.