[House Hearing, 110 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP OF HR. 3866, THE
SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS ACT OF 2007 and
H.R. 3867, THE SMALL BUSINESS
CONTRACTING PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS ACT
=======================================================================
COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
OCTOBER 18, 2007
__________
Serial Number 110-53
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Small Business
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
house
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
39-374 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800
DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS
NYDIA M. VELAZQUEZ, New York, Chairwoman
HEATH SHULER, North Carolina STEVE CHABOT, Ohio, Ranking Member
CHARLIE GONZALEZ, Texas ROSCOE BARTLETT, Maryland
RICK LARSEN, Washington SAM GRAVES, Missouri
RAUL GRIJALVA, Arizona TODD AKIN, Missouri
MICHAEL MICHAUD, Maine BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania
MELISSA BEAN, Illinois MARILYN MUSGRAVE, Colorado
HENRY CUELLAR, Texas STEVE KING, Iowa
DAN LIPINSKI, Illinois JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska
GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin LYNN WESTMORELAND, Georgia
JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas
BRUCE BRALEY, Iowa DEAN HELLER, Nevada
YVETTE CLARKE, New York DAVID DAVIS, Tennessee
BRAD ELLSWORTH, Indiana MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma
HANK JOHNSON, Georgia VERN BUCHANAN, Florida
JOE SESTAK, Pennsylvania JIM JORDAN, Ohio
BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
MAZIE HIRONO, Hawaii
Michael Day, Majority Staff Director
Adam Minehardt, Deputy Staff Director
Tim Slattery, Chief Counsel
Kevin Fitzpatrick, Minority Staff Director
______
STANDING SUBCOMMITTEES
Subcommittee on Finance and Tax
MELISSA BEAN, Illinois, Chairwoman
RAUL GRIJALVA, Arizona DEAN HELLER, Nevada, Ranking
MICHAEL MICHAUD, Maine BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania
BRAD ELLSWORTH, Indiana STEVE KING, Iowa
HANK JOHNSON, Georgia VERN BUCHANAN, Florida
JOE SESTAK, Pennsylvania JIM JORDAN, Ohio
______
Subcommittee on Contracting and Technology
BRUCE BRALEY, IOWA, Chairman
HENRY CUELLAR, Texas DAVID DAVIS, Tennessee, Ranking
GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin ROSCOE BARTLETT, Maryland
YVETTE CLARKE, New York SAM GRAVES, Missouri
JOE SESTAK, Pennsylvania TODD AKIN, Missouri
MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma
.........................................................
(ii)
Subcommittee on Regulations, Health Care and Trade
CHARLES GONZALEZ, Texas, Chairman
RICK LARSEN, Washington LYNN WESTMORELAND, Georgia,
DAN LIPINSKI, Illinois Ranking
MELISSA BEAN, Illinois BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania
GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin STEVE KING, Iowa
JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania MARILYN MUSGRAVE, Colorado
JOE SESTAK, Pennsylvania MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma
VERN BUCHANAN, Florida
JIM JORDAN, Ohio
______
Subcommittee on Urban and Rural Entrepreneurship
HEATH SHULER, North Carolina, Chairman
RICK LARSEN, Washington JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska,
MICHAEL MICHAUD, Maine Ranking
GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin ROSCOE BARTLETT, Maryland
YVETTE CLARKE, New York MARILYN MUSGRAVE, Colorado
BRAD ELLSWORTH, Indiana DEAN HELLER, Nevada
HANK JOHNSON, Georgia DAVID DAVIS, Tennessee
______
Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight
JASON ALTMIRE, PENNSYLVANIA, Chairman
CHARLIE GONZALEZ, Texas LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas, Ranking
RAUL GRIJALVA, Arizona LYNN WESTMORELAND, Georgia
(iii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Velazquez, Hon. Nydia M.......................................... 1
Chabot, Hon. Steve............................................... 2
Braley, Hon. Bruce............................................... 7
Fallin, Hon. Mary................................................ 7
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Velazquez, Hon. Nydia M.......................................... 21
Chabot, Hon. Steve............................................... 24
Braley, Hon. Bruce............................................... 25
(v)
FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP OF HR. 3866, THE
SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS ACT OF 2007 and
H.R. 3867, THE SMALL BUSINESS
CONTRACTING PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS ACT
----------
Thursday, October 18, 2007
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Small Business,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in Room
2360 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Nydia Velazquez
[Chairwoman of the Committee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Velazquez, Shuler, Gonzalez,
Larsen, Grijalva, Bean, Cuellar, Lipinski, Moore, Altmire,
Braley, Clarke, Ellsworth, Johnson, Sestak, Hirono, Higgins,
Chabot, Bartlett, Graves, Akin, Musgrave, Davis, Fallin,
Buchanan and Jordan.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRWOMAN VELAZQUEZ
Chairwoman Velazquez.
I am pleased to call this markup to order. In today's
markup, the committee will consider two pieces of legislation.
These two bills are the remaining pieces in the effort to
update and modernize the programs operated by the Small
Business Administration.
With these changes, the committee seeks to ensure that we
are meeting the needs of our changing economy. Small businesses
face many challenges in running a successful company. They are
competing in a global economy where they are also faced with
rising energy and health care costs.
Over the last 50 years, the SBA has helped millions of
entrepreneurs overcome these types of obstacles.
The first bill that the committee will consider provides
the SBA with the necessary funding to continue helping small
businesses grow. This legislation expresses the intent of the
committee that these programs need adequate resources to
effectively meet the needs and demands of small firms.
Our second bill will modernize and update the SBA's small
business contracting programs. For many years, small business
owners have expressed concern that these are not working and
changes need to come from Congress.
The data on federal contracting shows that these
entrepreneurs are correct. It is my hope that the contracting
legislation we move forward today will address some of the
shortcomings.
Before we move to the consideration of these bills, I would
like to yield to the ranking member, Mr. Chabot, for any
opening remarks that he may have.
OPENING STATEMENT OF MR. CHABOT
Mr. Chabot. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I'm going
to, in my opening statement, just address both the bills that
we have before us here today, and we are marking up the Small
Business Contracting Improvements Act and the Small Business
Programs Act of 2007 as you had indicated, the last pieces in
the re-authorization puzzle.
The Chairwoman set an aggressive schedule for the committee
to consider a complete reexamination of the Small Business Act
and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958.
Despite this crowded schedule of hearings and markups, the
Chairwoman and her staff I believe worked diligently to operate
as much as possible in a bipartisan manner.
Her efforts and those of her staff have resulted in 14
bills being reported out by this committee, and all of them
passing in the House with overwhelming margins.
The work of this committee has shown that despite
fundamental differences, we can work together to help small
businesses, and I think we would agree that is the goal of all
the members of this committee. Even when there is a failure to
agree, the disagreements, for the most part, are not dripping
in rancor. The Chairwoman has recognized that there will be
times when our fundamental philosophies will prohibit
agreement. Today is one of those occasions.
I, for example, cannot support the Small Business
Contracting Improvements Act of 2007, although there are some
things in the bill which I strongly support. For example, the
bill helps America's veterans. There are other provisions in
the bill that just make it problematic and therefore I can't,
in good conscience, support this particular bill.
Instead of, you know, pitting various small business owners
against each other, we should expand procurement opportunities
for all small businesses on an equal basis.
I do want to thank the Chairwoman for working with
Congresswoman Fallin to include in the bill I think an
important part of this, which is in the bill at this time, and
I want to thank her for doing that, and I want to thank
Congresswoman Fallin for this. I know she's been like a pit
bull on this, to get this done. She's spoken to me, and I think
the Chairwoman , many times on this, to make this happen. So I
want to commend her for her hard work and I want to commend the
Chairwoman for working with her in improving this bill. I think
that is one of the good things in the bill.
The other bill that we're considering today, the Small
Business Programs Act of 2007, is a highly technical bill but
one of the committee's legislative obligations.
The financing programs in the Small Business Act, and Small
Business Investment Act of 1958, rely on guarantees of
repayment issued by the SBA. Congress must impose limits on
that authority. Now this bill adopts limits on that authority,
such that the SBA will not have to impose programmatic
restrictions as a result of unexpected demand for these
programs.
I want to point out that supporting these limits will have
no budgetary impact. In addition, the committee must provide
authorization levels for the Small Business Development Center
Program.
The allocation of funds to various centers is based, in
part, on a comparison of funds appropriated to funds
authorized. Without an authorization level, the funding formula
cannot work. The other authorization levels in the bill are
simply the committee's recommendations to the appropriators on
what the authorizing committee believes is the most appropriate
allocation of resources among the various SBA programs.
Before yielding back, I again want to thank the Chairwoman
for her efforts this year. It's been a packed year for Members
and staffs. As we move away from the reauthorization project, I
look forward to working with the Chairwoman on, among other
things, improving the procurement process for small businesses,
examining ways to make the tax code beneficial to small
business economic growth, and after all, small businesses are
the driving force in this economy,most of the jobs created
nowadays are in the small business sector, so that's very
important, and reducing unnecessary regulations on small
business.
And again I want to thank the Chairwoman for working with
the minority on the committee, time and time again on this
committee, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Thank you, Ranking Member Chabot, and
it has really been a pleasure working with you and your staff,
and I think that if there has been a message, the strong
message that we have sent to America is that yes, in Congress
we can do, we can work, and we can allow for the deliberation
of different ideas to be discussed, and that this is a
committee where we have to show that we leave the ideology at
the door and do what is best for American businesses, and that
is to provide the tools that they need in order to flourish.
And I think that even despite our philosophical
disagreements, that we have shown respect to each other, and
for the flows of ideas, and input coming from both sides of the
aisle.
With that, let's go to the first bill that the committee
will consider, is the Small Business Program Act of 2007.
This legislation establishes the funding levels for the
entrepreneurial assistance initiative for the next two years.
It also provides for the necessary authority for the SBA to
carry out its lending and venture capital programs.
At a hearing with stakeholders three weeks ago, it became
clear that the SBA and its partners have played a vital role in
assisting small businesses across this country.
The wide network of SBDCs, Women Business Centers, and
SCORE, have done their best to meet the rising demand for
services at a time when their budgets are being trimmed.
Despite these programs track record of success, they must
be able to evolve and modernize. In the new economy, these
entrepreneurial initiatives must provide technical expertise on
new issues, ranging from exporting to online sales, to
identifying different avenues of capital.
These type of assistance cannot occur without the proper
resources. The legislation under consideration will ensure that
every entrepreneur in America has access to the technical
assistance they deserve. Rural and urban areas will have
centers that can provide the support for small business owners
who have the drive but need help with a business plan.
The authorization bill also establishes the necessary loan
levels for these programs. The SBA lending and venture capital
programs have a proven track record of providing capital to
successful businesses.
There is not a community that has not seen some benefit
from the financing in the form of SBA loans and venture
capital.
The SBA's partner-lenders have been able to provide access
to capital in a time when there is a concern about the
availability of credit. Increasing the loan levels for the 7(a)
and 504 lending programs will come and not cause, and will
prevent the situation of 2004, when there was a program
shutdown.
When one talks about pro business policies, one part of the
equation is providing the tools for success. As conservative
columnist Cal Thomas wrote, when discussing legislation passed
out of this committee earlier this year, these programs help
individuals who help themselves. This legislation is a step
forward in allowing the SBA and its partners to meet the rising
demand for services and capital.
Just as small businesses need to adjust to changing
business conditions, so do the stakeholders in assisting
entrepreneurs create jobs. This legislation will provide the
tools to do and to achieve that.
I urge support of the legislation and I will now yield to
Mr. Chabot for any comments he may have.
Mr. Chabot. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. The
comments that I had on this particular bill I already made in
my opening statement, so I will have no further comments. We do
support this bill and would encourage our members to support
this.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Are there any other Members that wish
to be recognized on the legislation?
The committee now moves to consideration of the bill, H.R.
3866, the Small Business Programs Act of 2007. The Clerk will
report the title of the bill.
The Clerk. H.R. 3866, a bill to reauthorize certain
programs under the Small Business Act for each of fiscal years
2008 and 2009.
Chairwoman Velazquez. I ask unanimous consent that the
bill, in its entirety, be open for amendments at this time.
Does any Member seek recognition for the purpose of offering an
amendment?
Seeing no amendments, the question is on passing and
reporting the bill, H.R., 3866.
All those in favor say aye.
[Chorus of ayes]
Chairwoman Velazquez. All those opposed, no.
The ayes have it, and H.R. 3866 is adopted and ordered
reported.
The committee now will consider the second bill, the Small
Business Contracting Programs Improvement Act that modernizes
the SBA contracting initiatives.
Chairwoman Velazquez. This is an important bill and one
that is long overdue. Primarily, it has two main missions. To
update the SBA contracting programs and to ensure that taxpayer
dollars are protected.
The act makes critical changes that will open up new
opportunity for small businesses. It will serve to spur
entrepreneurial activity across a wide spectrum of industry and
lead to a more competitive procurement marketplace, and,
ultimately, a better value for our taxpayers.
This legislation has bipartisan support within this
committee and includes the input from a number of Members.
I would like to give special thanks to Congresswoman
Fallin, an original co-sponsor of the act, for her leadership
on this bill.
The legislation will assist veterans, entrepreneurs,
including those that are service-disabled. When the men and
women serving our Nation in Iraq and Afghanistan return home,
many hope to start a small business. This can be especially
true for those injured veterans recovering at medical
facilities such as Walter Reed.
Our hope is that this bill will provide the tools to start
a new endeavor and begin a new life. To do this, we propose
placing veteran small business owners at the top of the list
for receiving federal contracts.
This will eliminate the barriers that veterans face in
receiving noncompetitive contracts. We are also requiring the
SBA fulfill its obligation under executive order 13360, which
will give veterans access to procurement assistance.
It is important that we act on this legislation, so that
all veterans can become, if they so choose, successful
entrepreneurs. The 8(a) program has not been modernized in 20
years, and we will be making minimal but important steps to
allow it to operate in the current business environment.
For most, the net worth standard is increased to a level
consistent with inflation. This change will ensure that we do
not penalize companies for success, and then wonder why they
fail when they leave the program.
These provisions, while seemingly technical and without
cost, will help make a great difference for program
participants.
Similarly, the SBA has taken too much time to implement the
women's procurement program. This bill will provide agencies
with sufficient information to immediately begin competing
contracts among women business owners. Women entrepreneurs have
been waiting nearly seven years. They have lost tens of
billions of dollars in contracting opportunities and they will
not have to wait any longer.
To combat fraud and taxpayers waste, the legislation takes
several steps. Safeguards and business integrity standards are
incorporated, that will make sure criminals are not squandering
taxpayers dollars. To better promote self-policing, any small
business can challenge an individual program award.
Further steps are taken to require on-site reviews by SBA
personnel to verify eligibility for the HUB Zone Program prior
to a contract award. This provision requires certification only
once before a second contract award.
This is a common sense approach and is sorely needed, as
SBA has been aware of programs in this area for at least four
years.
The legislation also takes steps to extend the Rise SBA
contracting programs. All procurement initiatives will have
both prime and subcontracting goals. Each program that has
noncompetitive contracts as benefit will have the same
threshold, increased and indexed for inflation.
This will ensure contractors, including service-disabled
veterans, have access to higher dollar contracts.
Finally, the legislation will assist small businesses in
the temporary staffing industry. I would like to thank
Representative Fallin for continuing to work with the committee
and her leadership on this important issue.
Together, these changes bring SBA contracting initiatives
into the 21st Century, by raising the profile of veteran
entrepreneurs and rooting out fraud and taxpayers waste in SBA
contracting programs.
There is remarkably broad support on this leg ranging from
the National Black Chamber of Commerce to the National
Federation of Independent Business, and the Associated General
Contractors of America.
Also supporting the legislation are the American Legion,
the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and AMVETS, the United States
Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the U.S. Women's Chamber of
Commerce, and the National Defense Industrial Association, also
support this bill.
Again I would like to thank Ranking Member Chabot and his
staff for working with us on these challenging issues.
While we do not see eye to eye on all these changes, I
believe that this legislation has benefited from your input and
counsel along the way. I hope that we can work through our
differences of this legislation as we move forward, and now I
would yield to Mr. Chabot.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you, Madam Chair. I made most of my
points in my opening statement originally. We just have some
philosophical differences which I have already expressed
somewhat. So rather than take up the time, I know we have votes
on the floor, and a couple other Members I think want to make
opening statements, I will just yield back. Thank you.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Are there any other Members who wish
to make an opening statement?
Ms. Fallin. Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Yes. Ms. Fallin, we have like two
minutes now. We can come back. We are going to recess and then
come back right after the vote.
Ms. Fallin. Whichever you would like to do. Mine is brief.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Let's recess, and then when we come
back, I will give you an opportunity to make an opening
statement.
[Recess.]
Chairwoman Velazquez. The committee is called to order. Are
there any other Members that wish to be recognized on this
legislation?
Mr. Braley
Mr. Braley. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman .
OPENING STATEMENT OF MR. BRALEY
I will not make my complete opening statement which I have
submitted for the record, but I would just like to point out
the importance of the Small Business Contracting Improvement
Act, in conjunction with the bill we earlier reported out of
this committee, the Small Business Fairness In Contracting Act,
which passed on the House Floor on May 10th by an overwhelming
bipartisan vote of 409 to 13, which raised the small business
federal contracting goal from 23 percent to 30 percent.
This means that all of the programs included in the Small
Business Contracting Improvements Act will have greater
opportunities to compete for federal contracts, and that's why
I support the bill. I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Thank you. Are there any other
Members that wish to be recognized on this legislation?
Ms. Fallin. Madam Chair, I would like to be recognized.
Chairwoman Velazquez.
Ms. Fallin is recognized for five minutes.
OPENING STATEMENT OF MS. FALLIN
Ms. Fallin. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I would like to
just first of all, thank you and your staff for the opportunity
to work with you on this legislation and to address some issues
that are important to the small business owners of my state,
and will actually affect small business owners across our
Nation as it deals with Federal Government contracting.
And I would also like to thank our Ranking Member, Mr.
Chabot, who has had many conversations over the past month, and
his staff, especially Barry, for working with me on some
language that, as I said, has been important to some companies
in my state, and will affect many businesses throughout our
Nation, and thank you so much. And I have deep respect for our
Ranking Member and appreciate his interest in helping me with
my particular concern.
I am also very pleased that we are having this markup today
as it will update many important small business programs,
including service for the disabled veterans and the HUB Zone
programs. Small business programs such as these go a long ways
towards helping our struggling small business owners succeed as
well as fostering real long-term economic growth in our
communities and helping to create jobs.
i want to thank both, as I said, the majority and the
minority staff on our Small Business Committee, who have worked
with me in helping to craft language in this bill, and your
willingness to help me to resolve some difficult issues that
affect my district, and Madam Chair, I just urge my colleagues
for their support of this bill.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Are there any other Members that wish
to be recognized on the legislation?
The committee now moves to consideration of the bill, H.R.
3867, the Small Business Contracting Program Improvements Act.
The Clerk will report the title of the bill.
The Clerk. H.R. 3867, a bill to update and expand the
procurement programs of the Small Business Administration, and
for other purposes.
Chairwoman Velazquez. I ask unanimous consent that the
bill, in its entirety, be open for amendments at this time.
Does any Member seek recognition for the purpose of
offering an amendment?
The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. Akin. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I come with--
Chairwoman Velazquez. Does the gentleman have an amendment?
Mr. Akin. Yes, I have an amendment, and it's--let's see--it
just says Section 501 amendment.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Okay. The Clerk will report the
amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment offered by Mr. Akin of Missouri, to
strike Section 501.
Chairwoman Velazquez. I ask unanimous consent that the
amendment be considered as read. Without objection, so ordered.
The gentleman is recognized for five minutes on your
amendment.
Mr. Akin. Thank you, Madam Chair.
It is a little bit of an odd situation I find myself in,
Madam Chair. This amendment is not one that, actually, the way
it is drafted, I would particularly support. The way the bill
is drafted, I don't support that either, and let me explain the
concern that I have and would just ask maybe we could work on
this problem together.
The concern I have is that you have a certain number of
these different contracts in the 8(a) program, and there is
competition for the various businesses that want to get those
contracts, and the way the bill was set up originally, there is
a limitation of $250,000 that would be--that if you have more
than that, then you are not economically disadvantaged.
Now that 250,000 hasn't changed in 30 years, and so in that
regard, I think that it is important that we update it, and so
I agree with the bill and my amendment basically takes it back
to where it currently is, at 250,000.
It seems to me, Madam Chair, that there is a little bit of
a tension here, and that is, if you increase the number of
people who can apply for the 8(a) programs, and you have a
limited number of those contracts already, what is going to
happen is that it is going to be harder and harder for people
to get those, and a lot of larger businesses that are much more
stable, that don't have to have them, may get different grants
that the smaller businesses cannot get.
So what my suggestion would be, to try to work up a
mechanism of a sliding scale, so as the business becomes
stronger, it has more assets in the business, the owner of the
business becomes stronger economically, that they are limited
to the number of these contracts they can get, and it's a
sliding scale. So the poorer businesses, the ones that are just
starting, can get as many as they can get, whereas as the
business gets bigger, we reduce the number of those 8(a)
programs that we could do.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Is the gentleman--
Unknown Speaker: Yes.
Mr. Akin. So--
Chairwoman Velazquez. Okay.
Mr. Akin. So, in other words, my concern is this could go
the way we did the same kind a thing with blighted land some
years ago. We said well, if you are in an inner city, some of
the land can be blighted and therefore the local government can
set it up for eminent domain and this land--well, what happened
is we got land out in our area that is going for a couple
million bucks an acre and it is blighted. An awful lot of us
wish we had some of that blighted land too but the program has
expanded way beyond what it was originally intended to do.
My concern is if we go in this trajectory, we expand 8(a)
in the same way, and it loses its effectiveness in helping the
smallest businesses.
So I don't have the mechanism to how to create that sliding
scale but that's what I would just, would ask the Chairwoman ,
if she would work with us, at least see if there's a practical
way to do that.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Yes. I would like to work with the
gentleman before we report, bring this legislation to the
Floor. I want for the record to reflect some of the comments
that I have on your amendment, and this is very important
because what your amendment does, it strikes the language in
the bill that modifies the net work limitation for the SBA's
8(a) program.
And the language in the bill provides an inflationary
adjustment and removes a burdensome restriction that this
committee, under Republican leadership, eliminated for other
SBA programs.
Even though the economy has changed dramatically, the net
work limitation on business owners has not been increased since
1988. Then a gallon of gas was 91 cents. Now it is $2.76. The
average price of a new home was $89,300. Now it is nearly
triple that.
In 1988, a Ford F150 truck was around $13,000. In 2007 is
at least $30,000. Basically, Mr. Akin wants minority businesses
to operate under the economic and financial structure of 1988,
when, in fact, today's economy bears little resemblance to it.
We need to give businesses the tools they need, and Mr.
Akin's amendment simply takes them away. His amendment will
penalize companies for success. We want companies to grow, to
borrow more money, to get stronger and to hire more employees.
But if this amendment is adopted, we prevent these businesses
from doing so and we are simply setting them to fail.
What we need in this legislation is what the SBA
administrator included in his testimony. The administrator
stated that adjusted for inflation, the net work should be
$550,000, and that is what we have done in this bill.
We have merely adjusted the 8(a) net worth at the program's
entry point to $550,000, consistent with increases inflation.
You probably never thought you will hear me say this, but even
the previous chairman thought this type of standard should be
changed.
In 2003, when the Republicans controlled this committee, we
unanimously passed legislation that lifted the net worth cap on
the HUB Zone Program.
The gentleman from Missouri was on this committee then and
did not object. Why, in 2003, did the gentleman from Missouri
support lifting the restriction completely but today he's
concerned with a much more measured move.
In the committee report from 2003, the Republican chairman
stated that, and I quote: ``Success is penalized due to a
finding that the program participant is no longer economically
disadvantaged. Thus the only businesses that remain in the
program are those that are not very successful. In the
committee's view, this single change will dramatically improve
the success rate of the program.''
That was what the chairman said then, it was true then, and
it is true today.
For the very same reasons that existed in 2003, we should
be allowing these firms to operate in the same way that other
small businesses are able to.
No other small business program has the type of stringent
requirement. None of the companies, no service-disabled
veterans, no women procurement program. If we want businesses
to be successful, we need to update this program, and for that
reason I object and I oppose this amendment.
Mr. Bartlett. Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Yes. I recognize the gentleman.
Mr. Bartlett. It is kind of interesting. If you have a
personal net worth of $550,000, plus the kind of a home that
would go with that, plus the assets of your business, you are a
millionaire. And it is kind of interesting. That speaks, I
think, to an enormous devaluation of the dollar, that we now
have millionaires who are disadvantaged. It is just a comment
on our time, I think.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Would the gentleman yield. Yes. Would
the gentleman yield. This is the only program to have a net
worth. We don't require for the HUB Zone and we don't require
for service-disabled veterans. We require it for the 8(a)
program.
What the SBA administrator stated here, when he came before
this committee and testified, said that it should be adjusted
for inflationary indexes, and that is exactly what we are
doing. What we are doing is minimum changes to the restriction.
Mr. Bartlett. I think that is true but it is just
interesting that we now are defining a millionaire who is
disadvantaged, who needs special treatment in the marketplace.
Interesting, isn't it?
Chairwoman Velazquez. Mr. Akin.
Mr. Akin. Madam Chair, as I said in my opening comment, I
am not really kicking about the change from 250 to 550. My
concern is more of a mathematical one, and that is that people
qualify for this all the way up to a certain point, and then
they mathematically just fall off a cliff, and now you don't
qualify. And it seems like to me what we want to do is to take
the weakest and the smallest and the beginning companies, give
them the maximum benefit, and then as the companies grow and
the people prosper, the assets of the organization get bigger,
that what we want to do is to wean them off of these contracts
on a gradual basis where they can be competitive in all kinds
of other contracts.
So I am really asking, instead of just having a square
corner or a cliff where you fall off, I am just talking about
trying to set it up as a sliding scale, because what is going
to happen is every time somebody gets to the edge of the cliff,
they are going to be back here saying we will just bump it up a
little bit more instead of if we just sort of taper off the
number of contracts that they can--as they get bigger and
stronger, we just drop the number that they are eligible for.
And I don't know if we can do that practically, but Madam
Chair, I would withdraw the amendment. Thank you.
Chairwoman Velazquez. And as I offered to you, we will work
before we go to the Floor.
Mr. Chabot. Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Yes, sir.
Mr. Chabot. I will be very brief, and in light of the fact
that the gentleman from Missouri has already withdrawn the
amendment, there is no sense to go into great detail, but I
would just note for the record that when the chair mentions the
previous statement by the previous chair, the chair is not
talking about this Ranking Member.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Oh. You know that I love you.
Mr. Chabot. I am not going to touch that.
[Laughter.]
Chairwoman Velazquez. You are already blushing, so we know.
So, without objection, your amendment is withdrawn.
Are there any other amendments to the bill?
Mr. Bartlett.
Mr. Bartlett. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk
relative to Section 101.
Chairwoman Velazquez. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk. Offered by Mr. Bartlett of Maryland to in
Section 101, strike subsection B.
Chairwoman Velazquez. I ask unanimous consent that the
amendment be considered as read. Without objection, so ordered.
The gentleman is recognized for five minutes on his amendment.
Mr. Bartlett. Okay. Well, the amendment is very simple. It
simply says strike subsection B in Section 101. Madam Chair,
this gets down to a single word, which is what this subsection
is about.
If you look at our agencies, which all have goals for a
number of different small business groups, the group that
probably has the most difficulty of reaching the goal is the
Hub Zone group, and one of the requirements is that where there
are two HUB Zone companies that could perform, then that
contract has to be competed between these two HUB Zones.
The bill which is before us, subsection B, what it really
does is to strike the word ``shall`` and change it to ``may.``
What this would do is to permit a contracting officer who is
used to dealing with Joe and some other small business
category, to just ignore the fact that there are two Hub Zones
there, which I think is the small business category which has
the most trouble of meeting the goals, that he could just
ignore the fact that it could be competed because the
legislation would say may rather than shall.
I think and I think most Americans agree that the quality
and the quantity of the performance of a contract goes up when
you have competition.
I just think that this moves us in the wrong direction, in
two ways. One, it denies the benefits that the taxpayer gets
from competition and two, it makes it more difficult to meet
our goals for the Hub Zone category.
Chairwoman Velazquez. I rise in opposition to this
amendment. This amendment strikes the language in the bill that
makes the Hub Zone Program a discretionary program rather than
a mandatory one.
What we are doing today is giving the agencies discretion
by changing to ``may`` rather than ``shall.`` But also I just
want for my Members here to know that this amendment will
disrupt the carefully crafted underlying agreement that we have
reached.
This agreement has a more diverse group of supporters than
any piece of legislation this committee has acted upon.
Currently supporters include the Associated General
Contractors, the National Federation of Independent Business,
the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, AMVETS, the
National Black Chamber of Commerce, the U.S. Women's Chamber of
Commerce, the Aerospace Industry Association, and the National
Defense Industrial Association.
This amendment will also give the highest contracting
standard for competitive contracts to the HUB Zone Program, a
program that the Small Business Administration Inspector
General has raised serious concern about. Congress must be
mindful of providing contracting priorities over other small
business when the beneficiaries of those preferences are likely
not eligible for them.
In fact the American Legion sent a letter, and I want to
read.
``We steadfastly oppose any amendments to alter these
legislation provisions that assist veterans-owned businesses in
Section 101.''
With that, I ask my colleagues to defeat this amendment.
Does any other Member seek recognition?
Yes--
Mr. Bartlett. Madam Chair, I would just like to note that
your comments made my point, and that is it gives discretion to
the contracting officer to award sole source, avoiding the
benefits that accrue to the taxpayer by competition.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Mr. Altmire is recognized for five
minutes.
Mr. Altmire. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I know that my
friend from Maryland is well-meaning in this amendment but a
consequence, probably unintended of this, is the amendment is
going to strike the portion of the bill that gives priority to
veterans that receive contracts, and anyone who has worked with
me on this committee knows what a priority I place on giving
veterans increased access to small business programs, and with
Federal Government providing less than 1 percent of contracts
to service-disabled veterans, this provision is necessary to
ensure that veterans are continually made a priority.
As our veteran population grows, it is vital for the
Federal Government to improve the environment for veteran
entrepreneurs by providing them with contracting opportunities.
This amendment does the exact opposite. The amendment that has
been offered would negatively impact the ability for these
veteran-owned businesses to get contracts, and I know this
because I have been contacted by the American Legion, the VFW,
and AMVETS, all of which oppose this amendment and support the
bill as is.
I yield back my time.
Mr. Bartlett. Madam Chair, I would just like to note that I
am one of the strongest supporters of veterans in the Congress.
I serve on the Armed Services Committee. I am informed that
this does not change the veterans preference and in no way
diminishes their opportunities for contracting.
Chairwoman Velazquez. I will invite the gentleman to read
the letter that I was sent by the American Legion and the other
veteran's group. They support, strongly, Section 101, and they
really oppose any alteration to--
Mr. Bartlett. Madam Chair, I suspect that they have
erroneously been led to believe that my amendment would change
their priorities and I am told it does not.
Chairwoman Velazquez. I believe that they can read, I
believe they can read English, and they understand the
agreement that has been reached, where we are going to have the
8(a), and the veterans, disabled service veterans, and then as
a preference program, any other programs.
Any other Member who seeks recognition on the amendment?
Ms. Moore. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I just want to point out that currently, we are not even
providing 1 percent of the contracts to service-disabled
veterans, and so I think that an amendment that would even
suggest that we not give priority to veterans would have a
chilling impact, given our egregious, abysmal record on
providing access to the program for veterans now.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Any other Member who seeks
recognition on this amendment?
The committee now--the question is on the amendment. All
those in favor say aye.
All those against say no.
The noes have it.
Mr. Bartlett. Madam Chair, I would just like to note that I
do not believe that my amendment--I think that I should have to
verify that, and I would like, rather than delay the recorded
vote, I would like a show of hands so the record will show what
the vote was. Just have a show of hands...
Chairwoman Velazquez. Do you want a vote on this amendment?
Mr. Bartlett. Show of hands.
Chairwoman Velazquez. No. We will go for the roll call. Do
you want a roll call?
Mr. Bartlett. What I would like is for the record to show
that Roscoe Bartlett did not capitulate without a fight.
[Laughter]
Chairwoman Velazquez. Let's have a roll call.
The Clerk will call the vote.
The Clerk. Ms. Velazquez.
Chairwoman Velazquez. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Velazquez votes no.
Mr. Shuler.
Mr. Shuler. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Shuler votes no.
Mr. Gonzalez.
Mr. Gonzalez. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gonzalez votes no.
Mr. Larson.
Mr. Larson. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Larson votes no.
Mr. Grijalva.
Mr. Grijalva. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Grijalva votes no.
Mr. Michaud.
Ms. Bean.
Ms. Bean. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Bean votes no.
Mr. Cuellar.
Mr. Cuellar. No. Chairwoman .
The Clerk. Mr. Cuellar votes no.
Mr. Lipinski.
Mr. Lipinski. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lipinski votes no.
Ms. Moore.
Ms. Moore. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Moore votes no.
Mr. Altmire.
Mr. Altmire. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Altmire votes no.
Mr. Braley.
Ms. Clarke.
Ms. Clarke. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Clarke votes no.
Mr. Ellsworth.
Mr. Ellsworth. No.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Mr. Ellsworth votes no.
Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Johnson votes no.
Mr. Sestak.
Mr. Sestak. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Sestak votes no.
Ms. Hirono.
Ms. Hirono. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Hirono votes no.
Mr. Higgins.
Mr. Chabot.
Mr. Chabot. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Chabot votes yes.
Mr. Bartlett.
Mr. Bartlett. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett votes yes.
Mr. Graves.
Mr. Graves. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Graves votes yes.
Mr. Akin.
Mr. Shuster.
Ms. Musgrave.
Ms. Musgrave. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Musgrave votes yes.
Mr. King.
Mr. Fortenberry.
Mr. Westmoreland.
Mr. Gohmert.
Mr. Heller.
Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Davis votes yes.
Ms. Fallin.
Ms. Fallin. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Fallin votes yes.
Mr. Buchanan.
Mr. Buchanan. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Buchanan votes yes.
Mr. Jordan.
Mr. Jordan. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan votes yes.
Mr. Braley.
Mr. Braley. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Braley votes no.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Are there any other Member who has
not been recorded?
The Clerk will report the vote.
The Clerk. The vote is 16 noes, eight yeas.
Chairwoman Velazquez. The notes have it and the amendment
has been defeated.
Mr. Chabot. Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Yes.
Mr. Chabot. I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order
for just a moment.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Sure.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you. Again, in the interest of not
dragging this out any longer than is necessary, I'm only going
to speak when I think it is particularly necessary, and I think
Mr. Bartlett's amendment, for those who voted yes, I just want
to reiterate the point of view of those Members, that we still
consider that veterans would still get sole source authority
under 101(a). I know there is some dispute about that and some
groups that believe that that's not accurate.
But I think there is no one, as Mr. Bartlett said, who I
think defends veterans on a daily basis than Mr. Bartlett, and
I think those of us who agree with him agree on that.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Would the gentleman yield. Would the
gentleman yield.
Mr. Chabot. I would be happy to yield.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Well, two things. For once, the
number don't lie. Veterans have gotten less than 1 percent in
contracting opportunities with the Federal Government. Two, we
held the hearings and veteran groups were here. They strongly
supported it and they explained the obstacle that they had been
facing in trying to access the federal marketplace and that is
why we are striking this balance today.
Mr. Chabot. And again, reclaiming my time, I appreciate the
Chairwoman 's comments, but still, I just want to make the
point that I think those of us that voted in the way that we
did are doing the best we can to look out for veterans and we
think the minority is as well. There is just a difference of
opinion here and I would yield back.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Thank you. Yes, sir. The gentleman is
recognized.
Mr. Sestak. If I just might say, having testified as part
of the military before Mr. Bartlett, and having numerous
conversations when I was there before him, and now having
worked on the House Armed Services Committee, there is no one
who has been in stronger support of our military, our veterans,
and I understand the difference of opinion here but I needed to
say that.
But I am glad this one passed, because if I might, just one
moment, back in World War II, 182 days, on average, every
soldier spent in combat. In this war, our soldiers over there
in Iraq spend every day in combat for 15 months. So we are
going to see more disabled come back, particularly with PTSD,
and I know you support that. It is just a difference of
opinion, but since I am on the other side of this debate on
facts, but I do know you support it. Thank you very much.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Would the gentleman yield. Would the
gentleman yield.
Mr. Sestak. Yield.
Chairwoman Velazquez. It is clear to this committee and
this Chairwoman , that we are not questioning here your support
to veterans. But what we are questioning here is the ability of
veterans to be able to access the federal marketplace, and that
is what we are doing.
In the interest of moving this along, since we are going
to have a vote coming up, are there any other Members who seek
recognition for the purpose of offering an amendment?
Mr. Bartlett. Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Mr. Bartlett.
Mr. Bartlett. I have an amendment at the desk on Section
201, which I will withdraw, if you can convince me that in fact
we need the amendment. I mean we need the bill.
Chairwoman Velazquez. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment offered by Mr. Bartlett of Maryland to
strike Section 201.
Chairwoman Velazquez. I ask unanimous consent that the
amendment be considered as read. Without objection, so ordered.
The gentleman is recognized for five minutes.
Mr. Bartlett. Thank you very much and I will be very brief.
The amendment is very simple. It says simple strike Section
201. What Section 201 does is require a background check, a
business integrity check for all small business programs. I
believe that the FAR 9.104 does exactly that, and if it does
that, then why do we need this bill language? If you can
convince me that FAR 109.4 does not accomplish what this bill
language accomplishes, then I will withdraw my amendment.
Chairwoman Velazquez. It does it for other agencies but not
for SBA program. We require background checks for other
programs. We do not do it for this program. And you were here
when the Inspector General of the SBA released a report on the
Hub Zone programs, on fraud and waste, and I think that all of
us should be for protecting taxpayers money and against waste
and fraud, and that is exactly what we are doing with this
language.
Mr. Bartlett. Two things, Madam Chair. First of all, in
nine years of the Hub Zone Program, there has been no
prosecution, not one. There has been not one case referred for
prosecution. There has been no investigation by an official
government agency of any fraud. There have been a lot of ``sour
grapes`` and allegations of fraud, but the three things that I
stated are a fact. It is my understanding that our government
contracting officers cannot award any contract without doing a
business integrity check. Is that not true?
And if that is true, then why do we need this bill
language?
Chairwoman Velazquez. Because we have it for other
agencies. We don't have it for the SBA programs, and that is
what we are doing here.
Mr. Bartlett. Okay. What you are saying is that other
agencies, in spite of the FAR, we have legislation that says--
Chairwoman Velazquez. They require--
Mr. Bartlett. That require background checks. Okay. Because
they are doing something dumb, that means we are going to do it
too?
Chairwoman Velazquez. Well, we have--
Mr. Bartlett. I withdraw my amendment.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Okay. The gentleman withdrew his
amendment.
Are there any other amendments? Does any other Member--
Mr. Bartlett. Madam Chair, I have one additional amendment
and I just--I will withdraw the amendment but I just want to
make a point. In our bill we extend the 8(a) program from nine
years to ten years. I just was reflecting on that. That is the
amount of time that it takes from the time you graduate from
high school to get a PhD from Carnegie Mellon. My son just did
that.
And, you know, if you can't, in the time it takes to
graduate from high school and get a degree from Carnegie Mellon
in chemical engineering, you know, if you can't be standing on
your feet in nine years, I am not sure adding one more year is
going to make much difference.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Let me just say, sir, that when it
comes to the Hub Zone Program, it allows the company to be
approved for three years at a time, indefinitely, as long as
the business meets the basic eligibility requirements. Both
service-disabled veterans and women entrepreneurs will be able
to get contracts with the respective program's benefit until
they are no longer small.
What we are saying is let's extend--and you were part of
all the hearings that were conducted here--to say nine years is
not enough. It takes at least 18 months, once a company gets
into the 8(a) program, to learn the ``nuts and bolts`` of the
federal marketplace.
So it is not enough for these people to be able to grow
their business within the nine years. What does it make--what a
difference a year will make. You know, we should be in the
business, this committee, to provide the tools that will enable
all these businesses to expand and grow because they are the
ones creating jobs in our country, and every witness who came
before this committee testified that nine years was not enough.
Mr. Bartlett. The 8(a) program is obviously a very unique
program. It is intended to provide sole source contracts to
firms that couldn't get a contract in the competitive world,
and the original legislation thought that nine years was
adequate time.
I am just reflecting, Madam Chair, that when my young son
was a high school senior, and he had nine years to go to
college and get his five year doctorate, that, you know, that
ought to be enough time for a business to mature if it is
enough time for my kid to mature. I am not going to bring the
amendment to a vote but I just don't see any difference between
10 years and nine years.
If we really want to make a difference, let's make it 12
years.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Oh, if you want to do it, make an
amendment.
Mr. Bartlett. I withdraw my amendment.
Chairwoman Velazquez. I ask unanimous consent to amend your
amendment.
Mr. Bartlett. I object.
Chairwoman Velazquez. Mr. Sestak.
Mr. Sestak. My only comment on this was when this original
bill was implemented, I mean some company was obviously in
Philadelphia competing with someone in Arkansas. But the whole
globalization of the world and the bill that we just recently
passed to help small businesses with a new strategy to approach
the export world, that they're now competing with Shanghai, I
think another year can help since the dynamics have truly
changed in the competition that is out there, since it's a
vastly more globalized world than when this was originally
instituted. Thank you. I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairwoman Velazquez. I am going to ask unanimous consent
to withdraw his amendment.
Any other Member wants to introduce an amendment, who seeks
recognition for the purpose of an amendment?
Seeing no further amendments, the question is on passing
and reporting the bill, as amended, H.R. 3867.
All those in favor say aye. Aye.
All those opposed no.
The ayes have it.
On that I request a recorded vote and the Clerk will call
the vote.
The Clerk. Ms. Velazquez.
Ms. Velazquez. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Shuler.
Mr. Shuler. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Shuler votes aye.
Mr. Gonzalez.
Mr. Gonzalez. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Gonzalez votes aye.
Mr. Larsen.
Mr. Larsen. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Larsen votes aye.
Mr. Grijalva.
Mr. Grijalva. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Grijalva votes aye.
Mr. Michaud.
Ms. Bean.
Ms. Bean. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Bean votes aye.
Mr. Cuellar.
Mr. Cuellar. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Cuellar votes aye.
Mr. Lipinski.
Mr. Lipinski. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Lipinski votes aye.
Ms. Moore.
Ms. Moore. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Moore votes aye.
Mr. Altmire.
Mr. Altmire. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Altmire votes aye.
Mr. Braley.
Ms. Clarke.
Ms. Clarke. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Clarke votes aye.
Mr. Ellsworth.
Mr. Ellsworth. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Ellsworth votes aye.
Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Johnson votes aye.
Mr. Sestak.
Mr. Sestak. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Sestak votes aye.
Ms. Hirono.
Ms. Hirono. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Hirono votes aye.
Mr. Higgins.
Mr. Higgins. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Higgins votes aye.
Mr. Chabot.
Mr. Chabot. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Chabot votes no.
Mr. Bartlett.
Mr. Bartlett. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett votes no.
Mr. Graves.
Mr. Graves. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Graves votes aye.
Mr. Akin.
Mr. Shuster.
Ms. Musgrave.
Ms. Musgrave. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Musgrave votes no.
Mr. King.
Mr. Fortenberry.
Mr. Westmoreland.
Mr. Gohmert.
Mr. Heller.
Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Davis votes aye.
Ms. Fallin.
Ms. Fallin. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Fallin votes aye.
Mr. Buchanan.
Mr. Buchanan. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Buchanan votes aye.
Mr. Jordan.
Mr. Jordan. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan votes no.
Mr. Braley.
Mr. Braley. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Braley votes aye.
Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Velazquez. The Clerk will report the vote.
The Clerk. With that, there are 21 yes and four no votes.
Chairwoman Velazquez. The ayes have it. H.R. 3867 is
adopted and ordered reported as amended. Thank you.
I ask unanimous consent that the committee be authorized to
correct section numbers, punctuation, and cross-references and
to be make all the necessary technical and confirming
corrections on the bills considered today.
Without objection, so ordered. This markup is now
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:28 a.m., the committee was adjourned,
subject to the call of the chair.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]