Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
This bill would bar "special Government employees" (as defined in 18 U.S.C. §202) from entering into or benefiting from any Federal Government contract or agreement. It requires termination of any Federal contract or agreement held by a special Government employee on enactment.
Left emphasizes anti‑corruption and public trust gains
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes a substantive prohibition (barring special Government employees from entering into or benefiting from Federal contracts and terminating existing contracts) and references the statutory definition of 'special Government employee.' However, it provides limited mechanism detail, no implementation procedures, no fiscal analysis, minimal integration with existing procurement or contract law, and no oversight or compliance provisions.
This bill would bar "special Government employees" (as defined in 18 U.S.C. §202) from entering into or benefiting from any Federal Government contract or agreement.
It requires termination of any Federal contract or agreement held by a special Government employee on enactment.
The prohibition is absolute in the text; no exemptions or phased implementation language appear in the provided text.
Technically narrow but administratively disruptive with no carve-outs; legal challenges and stakeholder resistance reduce enactment probability.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes a substantive prohibition (barring special Government employees from entering into or benefiting from Federal contracts and terminating existing contracts) and references the statutory definition of 'special Government employee.' However, it provides limited mechanism detail, no implementation procedures, no fiscal analysis, minimal integration with existing procurement or contract law, and no oversight or compliance provisions.
Left emphasizes anti‑corruption and public trust gains
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Left emphasizes anti‑corruption and public trust gains
Likely broadly supportive of the bill’s anti‑corruption aim to eliminate conflicts where part‑time government advisers profit from federal contracts.
They will welcome a strict bright‑line rule preventing perceived self‑dealing by SGEs.
Sees merit in preventing conflicts of interest but worries about blunt implementation and operational impacts.
Will weigh anti‑corruption gains against practical effects on staffing, contracts, and legal exposure.
Likely opposed as an overbroad expansion of federal ethics rules that restrict private‑sector engagement and hamper public‑private collaboration.
Views the mandate to terminate existing contracts as heavy‑handed and potentially unlawful.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically narrow but administratively disruptive with no carve-outs; legal challenges and stakeholder resistance reduce enactment probability.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Left emphasizes anti‑corruption and public trust gains
Technically narrow but administratively disruptive with no carve-outs; legal challenges and stakeholder resistance reduce enactment probabi…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes a substantive prohibition (barring special Government employees from entering into or benefiting from Federal contracts and terminating existing c…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.