HR 1118: Value Over Cost Act of 2025

HR 1118 in plain English: This bill would allow the General Services Administration to award contracts under its multiple award schedule program based on 'best value' rather than the lowest overall cost, when GSA determines this is in the federal government's best interest. Best value allows non-cost factors, such as quality or performance, to be considered when selecting a contractor.

Stated purpose

This bill allows the General Services Administration (GSA) to award government contracts based on 'best value' — weighing factors beyond just price — rather than being required to always choose the lowest-cost option, when the GSA determines that approach best serves the federal government's interests.

Key points

• Permits GSA to award multiple award schedule contracts based on best value, not just lowest price.
• Allows non-cost factors to be considered when evaluating contract proposals.
• Applies only when GSA determines best value is in the federal government's best interest.

Arguments supporters make

• Choosing only the cheapest option can lead to poor quality goods or services that cost more to fix or replace later — best value gets taxpayers more for their money overall.
• Federal agencies have unique needs that a one-size-fits-all lowest-price rule can't always meet; this flexibility lets the government match purchases to actual mission requirements.
• The bill doesn't eliminate lowest-cost contracts — it simply adds an option, giving the GSA a tool it can use when circumstances call for it.

Arguments opponents make

• Allowing agencies to pick 'best value' over lowest cost opens the door to favoritism or waste, since non-price judgments are harder to verify and audit.
• Lowest-cost requirements are a built-in check against overspending; removing that guardrail could lead to higher government spending without clear accountability.
• Decisions about what counts as 'best value' are subjective and concentrated in the GSA Administrator, which could create inconsistent or politically influenced purchasing decisions.

Tradeoffs

Giving the government flexibility to buy higher-quality goods and services may improve outcomes but could also increase costs compared to a strict lowest-price rule; the tradeoff is between spending discipline and purchasing flexibility, with the benefit of better value potentially offset by the risk of less price accountability.

Current status in Congress: In committee.

NewsClear — neutral news & congressional tracking · Bill of the Week