Pennsylvania House Bill HB897

Pennsylvania 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/13/25
• Refer: 3/13/25

Caption

In general provisions relating to Commonwealth Procurement Code, further providing for definitions and providing for prioritization of American-made supplies.

Summary

HB897 would amend Pennsylvania’s Procurement Code to create a formal preference for American-made supplies in Commonwealth purchasing. The bill adds a definition of “American-made” as goods produced, manufactured, mined, grown, or performed in the United States, with “produced or manufactured” meaning assembled in the United States. It then directs the Department of General Services to prioritize American-made supplies and to build that preference into procurement policies, procedures, and specifications. The bill also establishes a process for exceptions and challenges. If the Secretary of General Services determines that a supply is not American-made, or that an American-made supply is not available in sufficient quantity to meet agency needs, the determination must be published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. Businesses or individuals may object within 30 days by submitting evidence that the supply is American-made and/or available in sufficient quantities. Those objections are treated as appeals under the Commonwealth’s judicial review provisions. If the determination is upheld, the American-made prioritization requirement does not apply to that particular supply.

Impact

HB897 would change state procurement policy by requiring the Department of General Services to favor American-made supplies when buying goods for Commonwealth agencies. It would add a new statutory definition to Title 62 and create a new section governing procurement prioritization, publication of determinations, objections, and judicial review. The practical effect would be to influence how state agencies and the central purchasing authority evaluate vendors, sourcing, and supply availability, while preserving an exception process for items that are not domestically made or not available in adequate quantity.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the available context suggests the measure is framed positively by its sponsors as a domestic-preference or buy-American policy. The bill’s introduction by multiple House members indicates some legislative support for the concept, but there is no recorded committee debate or vote history here to show broader consensus or opposition. Overall, the tone of the proposal is pro-manufacturing and pro-domestic sourcing, with an emphasis on supply-chain availability and administrative process.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely to be whether Pennsylvania should prioritize domestic sourcing over potentially lower-cost or more readily available imported supplies. Supporters would likely emphasize strengthening U.S. manufacturing, local jobs, and supply-chain resilience, while opponents may argue the policy could increase procurement costs, limit competition, or complicate agency purchasing. A secondary issue is the exception process: the bill allows determinations that a supply is not American-made or not available in sufficient quantities, and those findings can be challenged through an appeal-like process, which could create administrative and legal disputes over what qualifies as American-made and whether enough supply exists.