Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Requires the OMB Director to review whether the Federal Acquisition Regulation provision 15.101–2 (lowest price technically acceptable, LPTA) creates national security risks for Defense and civilian agencies, and to submit a report to two congressional committees within 180 days. Defines applicable terms by reference to title 41, United States Code.
Degree of concern about added bureaucracy versus security gains
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise directive for an executive-branch review and report.
Requires the OMB Director to review whether the Federal Acquisition Regulation provision 15.101–2 (lowest price technically acceptable, LPTA) creates national security risks for Defense and civilian agencies, and to submit a report to two congressional committees within 180 days.
Defines applicable terms by reference to title 41, United States Code.
Short, nonbinding review on national security-linked procurement is low-cost and bipartisan-appealing, improving odds though procedural hurdles remain.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise directive for an executive-branch review and report. It succeeds in identifying the issue, responsible official, and a deadline, but it lacks methodological detail, resourcing provisions, handling of classified or sensitive information, and specified report contents or follow-up requirements.
Degree of concern about added bureaucracy versus security gains
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Degree of concern about added bureaucracy versus security gains
Likely welcomes a security-focused review of LPTA procurement practices and increased oversight.
Sees it as a step toward protecting supply chains and preventing cost-driven compromises on security, but may worry the review is limited and nonbinding.
Views the bill as a pragmatic, evidence-seeking oversight measure that poses limited immediate policy change.
Appreciates a timely review to inform targeted adjustments, while cautioning against hasty or costly regulatory responses.
Generally supportive of a national-security review and oversight of procurement but wary of added bureaucracy.
Supports protecting defense readiness, yet concerned the review could lead to regulatory creep or domestic favoritism that raises costs.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Short, nonbinding review on national security-linked procurement is low-cost and bipartisan-appealing, improving odds though procedural hurdles remain.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Degree of concern about added bureaucracy versus security gains
Short, nonbinding review on national security-linked procurement is low-cost and bipartisan-appealing, improving odds though procedural hur…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise directive for an executive-branch review and report. It succeeds in identifying the issue, responsible official, and a deadline, but it lacks methodologi…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.