    [House Hearing, 112 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

      MARKUP OF H.R. 3985, H.R. 3987, H.R. 4081, H.R. 4203, AND H.R. 4206

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                          COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS
                                 UNITED STATES
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                          ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                                  HEARING HELD
                                 MARCH 22, 2012

                                   __________

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                Small Business Committee Document Number 112-060
                  Available via the GPO Website: www.fdsys.gov

                                    _____

                      U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

    76-467                    WASHINGTON : 2012
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    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) 512-2104  Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
    20402-0001

                       HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS

                         SAM GRAVES, Missouri, Chairman
                           ROSCOE BARTLETT, Maryland
                               STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
                                STEVE KING, Iowa
                             MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado
                         MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina
                             SCOTT TIPTON, Colorado
                          CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee
                             JEFF LANDRY, Louisiana
                       JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington
                              ALLEN WEST, Florida
                         RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina
                              JOE WALSH, Illinois
                           LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania
                            RICHARD HANNA, New York

                   NYDIA VELAZQUEZ, New York, Ranking Member
                             KURT SCHRADER, Oregon
                            MARK CRITZ, Pennsylvania
                          JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania
                            YVETTE CLARKE, New York
                              JUDY CHU, California
                         DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
                           CEDRIC RICHMOND, Louisiana
                             GARY PETERS, Michigan
                              BILL OWENS, New York
                          BILL KEATING, Massachusetts

                          Lori Salley, Staff Director
                        Paul Sass, Deputy Staff Director
                         Barry Pineles, General Counsel
                      Michael Day, Minority Staff Director

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page
    Hon. Sam Graves..................................................     1
    Hon. Nydia Velazquez.............................................     2

                                   WITNESSES

    None

                                    APPENDIX

    Prepared Statements:
        None
    Questions for the Record:
        None
    Answers for the Record:
        None
    Additional Materials for the Record:
        None

      MARKUP OF H.R. 3985, H.R. 3987, H.R. 4081, H.R. 4203, AND H.R. 4206

                                  ----------

                           WEDNESDAY, MARCH 22, 2012

                              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. Sam Graves [chairman
    of the Committee] presiding.
        Present: Representatives Graves, Bartlett, Chabot, King,
    Coffman, Mulvaney, Tipton, Landry, Herrera Beutler, West,
    Ellmers, Walsh, Barletta, Hanna, Schilling, Velazquez,
    Schrader, Critz, Clarke, Chu, Cicilline, Richmond, Hahn,
    Peters, Owens, Keating.
        Chairman Graves. Good morning. I will call this Committee
    hearing to order.
        The Committee is in the midst of an effort to enact
    comprehensive reform of government contracting to help small
    businesses. Our efforts began with 10 hearings on contracting
    topics. And this was followed by the introduction of 8
    contracting bills supported by over 20 trade associations. Last
    week, the Committee marked up four of those bills, plus two
    additional bills introduced by the minority. This week, we are
    going to mark up the remaining four bills, plus a bill
    introduced by the Ranking Member. And I believe this is a
    testament to the importance of government contracting for small
    businesses, and I think it is a tribute to the bipartisan
    nature of this Committee.
        While we are going to briefly discuss each of the bills
    individually before we mark it up, I want to emphasize how
    important these issues are to small businesses and taxpayers.
    The federal government regularly spends over half a trillion
    dollars on federal contracts each year, and has spent over $100
    billion so far this year. When small businesses compete for
    those contracts, something important happens: we get jobs
    created, innovation occurs, competition brings down prices. So,
    in short, when small businesses win, we all win.
        Today we are examining some of the key issues for small
    businesses such as who is actually small. We are making sure
    that the programs intended to help small businesses deliver
    results and do not inadvertently harm the very businesses they
    are supposed to help. We are halting unjustified contract
    bundling, which will result in more competition; we are
    standardizing the assistance we provide to the subcategories of
    small businesses; and we are protecting the taxpayers against
    fraud.
        All of these issues deserve support, and I look forward to
    working with all of you today to move these bills one step
    closer to becoming law.
        And I now recognize Ranking Member Velazquez.
        Ms. Velazquez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Small businesses
    continue to be at the center of the economy, creating nearly
    two-thirds of net employment gains. Seizing on this job-
    creating power is essential to move the economy forward. As a
    result, it is important that we help lay the foundation for
    their success.
        One way to do this is to provide entry for small
    enterprises into the federal procurement marketplace. As a $500
    billion market for goods and services, the government buys
    everything from paper to furniture, to aircraft carriers. At
    every point in this procurement process small firms should have
    an opportunity to compete for the government's business.
    Unfortunately, this vision is far from reality. The government
    continues to struggle to meet the 23 percent goal for small
    firms and has not even come close to achieving the 5 percent
    goal for women-owned businesses. Fraud in contracting programs
    continues to increase as contracts are still being channeled to
    ineligible companies. And finally, contract bundling and
    consolidations remain a key problem and small businesses lack
    the tools and resources to fight back.
        Tackling these problems is the right thing to do and I am
    hopeful that the legislation we consider today will take steps
    in the right direction. In this regard, I want to thank the
    chairman for continuing to work with us in a bipartisan manner
    on these bills.
        And I thank the chairman and I yield back the balance of my
    time.
        Chairman Graves. All right. We will be marking up the five
    contracting bills. We are going to do it in the order that they
    were--that we noticed them out.
        The first bill is H.R. 3985, the ``Building Better Business
    Partnerships Act of 2012.'' It was introduced by Mr. Schilling
    and Ms. Chu. I now yield to Mr. Schilling to speak on 3985.
        Mr. Schilling. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Ranking
    Member Velazquez. I want to thank Representative Chu for her
    work on H.R. 3985 and the efforts of the Committee to reform
    the federal contracting process.
        I have owned my small pizzeria for more than 15 years and
    understand firsthand how difficult and basically limiting some
    federal programs can be for small business owners to navigate
    and access through. Contracting with the federal government is
    really no different.
        I have heard from numerous job creators in my district
    about how valuable winning and retaining federal contracts are
    to growing their business and how the end results affects men
    and women they employ. Most recently, we helped a gentleman
    navigate successfully through and gain a Navy contract, which
    was a great win for our area.
        With unemployment over 9 percent in my home state of
    Illinois, every job counts. The bill we have introduced focuses
    on improving and streamlining 13 mentor-protege programs, which
    pair new businesses looking to increase their government
    contracts with more experienced businesses.
        The GAO report released last year revealed there are a
    number of issues that need to be addressed with the mentor-
    protege program. First, the GAO report revealed duplication
    among programs, creating more unnecessary paperwork for
    businesses. Secondly, participants risk losing their small
    affiliation when working with other businesses. And thirdly,
    some programs lack accountability. And lastly, the majority of
    our small businesses do not qualify to participate.
        H.R. 3985 addresses these issues by placing the SBA in
    charge of overseeing and setting standards for the 13 existing
    programs based on the concerns I have just listed. It also
    requires the SBA to collect data from the agencies regarding
    the number and types of participants, including the number of
    HUBZone, veteran-, and women-owned businesses. Data showing the
    ability of businesses to retain these contracts is also
    required and must be submitted to Congress.
        Ultimately, our bill will improve mentor-protege programs,
    making it easier for small firms to compete for and win
    contracts, enabling them to grow, create jobs, and get folks
    back to work.
        I thank you for the opportunity and urge Members of the
    Committee to support H.R. 3985.
        Chairman Graves. And I yield to Ranking Member Velazquez.
        Ms. Velazquez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mentor-protege
    programs have been successful across 13 federal agencies to
    enhance the ability of small firms to compete for federal
    government contracts by furnishing them with a system to
    improve their performance. To this point the GAO reported at a
    Small Business Committee hearing last year that all--all--13
    agencies have established policies and procedures for
    administering and monitoring their programs. GAO found that
    agencies have requirements in place to conduct periodic reviews
    as well as controls to help ensure that mentors and proteges
    meet eligibility criteria and benefit from participation in the
    program.
        As a result of GAO's findings, it seems to me unnecessary
    and potentially problematic that the legislation will require
    the SBA to approve all mentor-protege programs government-wide.
    Given SBA's track record of delay and inaction, the agency
    could effectively shut down these initiatives across the
    government by merely delaying an approval or disapproval
    decision.
        And I want to be on record on this. I do not want to see
    that these programs are shut down and then members will call me
    or you, Mr. Chairman, to question why is it that we allow for
    this program to expire. While the true benefits of this program
    are uncertain, it is not advisable in this stage of the
    recovery to discontinue any source of small business support
    simply because the SBA is unable to act timely to approve
    otherwise well-functioning mentor-protege programs as it was
    substantiated by the GAO report. In fact, the GAO analysis
    suggests that the programs are operating well without any
    additional bureaucratic layer of oversight. Plus, given SBA's
    poor track record of oversight of the HUBZone program, it gives
    me little comfort that we are handing the agency a similar
    responsibility.
        With these concerns in mind, I hope that the legislation
    will continue to be improved as it heads to the floor. Mentor-
    protege programs remain an important resource for many small
    businesses, enabling them to learn the ropes from more
    experienced contractors. Improving them is important, but we
    must make sure that future changes do not undermine the very
    strength of those mentor-protege programs in existence today.
        And with that, I yield back the balance of my time.
        Chairman Graves. Do other Members wish to be recognized for
    a statement on H.R. 3985? Ms. Chu.
        Ms. Chu. I hear over and over again from small businesses
    one question: How do I break into federal contracting? With
    average annual spending at $500 billion there is no better way
    for small businesses to expand during these tough times than
    through federal contracts.
        Historically, however, it has been difficult for small
    businesses to gain a toehold in the federal procurement system.
    To help small businesses gain entry into the federal
    marketplace, mentor-protege programs were established. This
    program allows smaller firms the opportunity to work directly
    with larger vendors. This can provide them with vital
    experience and lead to future opportunities, which will,
    hopefully, lead to getting more federal contracts in the hands
    of small business.
        The Building Better Businesses Partnership Act of 2012 will
    help small firms break into federal contracting by making it
    easier for them to join mentor-protege programs. This bill will
    streamline the process by putting these programs under one
    agency, the SBA, and create better oversight over the programs
    so that small businesses truly benefit from the agreements. It
    will address the GAO report issues by determining how well the
    program goals have been achieved.
        Helping small businesses win contracts will help put
    Americans back to work. And with two out of every three jobs
    coming from small businesses, this bill will help the true
    driving force behind America's economy.
        I ask my colleagues on the Small Business Committee for
    their support. Thank you, and I yield back.
        Chairman Graves. Does any other Member wish to be heard on
    the bill?
        The Committee now moves consideration of H.R. 3985. Clerk,
    please report the title of the bill.
        The Clerk. H.R. 3985: To amend the Small Business Act with
    respect to mentor-protege programs and for other purposes.
        Chairman Graves. Without objection H.R. 3985 is considered
    read and open for amendment at any point.
        [The bill H.R. 3985 follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Graves. Does anyone have an amendment? I believe,
    Ms. Chu, you have an amendment.
        Ms. Chu. Yes, sir. Yes. Mr. Chairman, I have a perfecting
    amendment to H.R. 3985.
        Chairman Graves. Clerk, please report the amendment.
        The Clerk. Amendment 1 to H.R. 3985 offered by Ms. Chu of
    California.
        Chairman Graves. Without objection the amendment is
    considered as read. The gentlelady has five minutes.
        [Amendment 1 to H.R. 3985 offered by Ms. Chu follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Ms. Chu. Mr. Chair, I have a perfecting amendment to the
    Building Better Business Partnerships Act. The amendment
    clarifies that program regulations must protect proteges
    against actions that negatively impact them or provide
    disproportionate benefits to the mentor. It also allows for
    current mentor-protege agreements to be grandfathered into the
    new program until the expiration date of their agreement.
        The amendment also says that agencies operating mentor-
    protege programs will be allowed six months after the
    regulations are transmitted to submit their mentor-protege
    plans and then provide a detailed timeline for SBA's approval
    of these plans.
        Finally, the amendment requires a GAO report to assess the
    impact of the changes to the mentor-protege program.
        This amendment was crafted with input from the majority and
    minority sides of the Committee and strengthens the language of
    the bill. I ask for the Committee's support.
        Chairman Graves. Does any other Member wish to be heard on
    the amendment? Mr. Schilling.
        Mr. Schilling. Yes, thank you. I believe this is a good
    amendment that makes H.R. 3985 stronger, more accountable, and
    further protects small businesses, and I urge Members to
    support Representative Chu's amendment.
        Chairman Graves. Does any other Member wish to be heard on
    the amendment?
        Seeing none, the gentlelady's amendment, I think it
    furthers the intention of the bill and it was done through
    bipartisan discussions. So with that, I am very pleased to
    support the gentlelady's amendment.
        And a question. The question is on the amendment offered by
    Ms. Chu. All those in favor say aye.
        [A chorus of ayes.]
        Chairman Graves. Opposed no.
        [No response.]
        Chairman Graves. In the opinion of the chair the ayes have
    it. The ayes do have it. The amendment is agreed to.
        Does any other Member wish to be recognized for an
    amendment?
        Seeing none, the question is on agreeing to H.R. 3985 as
    amended. All those in favor say aye.
        [A chorus of ayes.]
        Chairman Graves. All opposed no.
        [No response.]
        Chairman Graves. It is the opinion of the chair that the
    ayes have it. H.R. 3985 is agreed to without objection. A
    quorum being present, the bill is favorably reported to the
    House. And without objection the Committee staff is authorized
    to correct punctuation and make other necessary technical
    changes and conforming changes.
        Our next bill for consideration is H.R. 3987, the ``Small
    Business Protection Act of 2012,'' which is introduced by Mr.
    Walsh and Mr. Connolly. I now yield to Mr. Walsh to speak on
    3987.
        Mr. Walsh. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Ranking
    Member Velazquez. As you know, the SBA has proposed radically
    new size standards for small business government contracting
    that do not just alter the size standard for each industry,
    but, in some instances, actually combine several different
    industries into a new common group under a single size
    standard. The problem is that in creating these new common
    groups SBA, by its own analysis, is excluding legitimate small
    businesses from small business contracting programs and
    allowing large businesses to participate in the same programs.
        For example, let us look at architecture and engineering
    firms. SBA's own metrics and analysis shows that architecture
    firms should have a small business size standard of $7 million
    and engineering firms of 25.5 million. Yet, SBA has decided to
    combine them into a common group and assign them a size
    standard of 7 million, which is completely inappropriate for
    either of them. In the one instance it legitimately excludes
    small businesses from competing for government contracts and in
    the other it forces legitimate small businesses to compete
    against much larger firms. In fact, the American Institute of
    Architecture has estimated that this new size standard will
    include 98 percent of all architecture firms.
        I think we can all agree that situations like this are not
    in the best interest of small businesses. After all, size
    standards do not exist for the ease of the SBA, but for the
    benefit of America's small businesses. The Small Business
    Protection Act is simple: It protects legitimate small
    businesses in government contracting by requiring that the size
    standard assigned to each new common group is appropriate for
    each industry included in that group. Without this bill small
    businesses, the backbone of the American economy, will be
    driven out of competition for government contracts.
        And I yield back.
        Chairman Graves. I now recognize Ranking Member Velazquez
    for opening comments.
        Ms. Velazquez. Mr. Chairman, the complexity of size
    standards is only exceeded by the process in which they are set
    and revised. Providing greater transparency to this complicated
    machinery is important. While SBA has recently taken major
    actions on size standards, this proposal will obviously have no
    effect on them.
        However, increasing small businesses' awareness of the size
    standard process during the proposed rulemaking stage is
    essential. To this point it is important that SBA provide the
    public with a competitive landscape of the affected industry.
    The approach the agency used to determine the new standard, the
    source of the agency's data, and the specific impact on the
    industry, such openness will only enhance small businesses'
    ability to understand what has become an opaque decision-making
    process at the agency. Given the size standard determinations
    can limit firms' ability to secure government contracts,
    receiving training or secure financing, it is vital that these
    decisions are done in the most transparent fashion possible.
    Bringing sunlight to this shadowy area of the SBA should be a
    priority.
        And for that, I thank you and I yield back the balance of
    my time.
        Chairman Graves. Does any other Member wish to be
    recognized for a statement on H.R. 3987?
        Seeing none, I think this bill addresses a central issue of
    the Committee's work and that is what is a small business. So
    without objection, would the clerk please report them?
        The Clerk. H.R. 3987: To amend the Small Business Act with
    respect to small business concerning size standards and for
    other purposes.
        Chairman Graves. Without objection H.R. 3987 is considered
    read and open for amendment at any point.
        [The bill H.R. 3987 follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Graves. Does any Member have an amendment? I
    think, Mr. Walsh, you do.
        Mr. Walsh. Yes, Mr. Chairman. My amendment makes two----
        Chairman Graves. Let the clerk report it.
        Mr. Walsh. Amendment Number 1.
        The Clerk. Amendment Number 1 to H.R. 3987 offered by Mr.
    Walsh of Illinois.
        Chairman Graves. Without objection the amendment is
    considered read. The gentleman has five minutes.
        [Amendment 1 to H.R. 3987 offered by Mr. Walsh follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Walsh. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The amendment makes two
    small changes to the Small Business Protection Act.
        First, it requires that the SBA make publicly available its
    analysis and rationale when revising size standards or creating
    new ones. I think we can all agree, as the Ranking Member said,
    that more transparency here is a good thing and will help
    prevent further instances like the one we are correcting here.
        Second, it prohibits SBA from artificially limiting the
    number of size standards. Our goal with this entire process is
    for the SBA to create and maintain the most accurate size
    standards possible. This amendment keeps the SBA from choosing
    administrative ease over the correct number of size standards.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
        Chairman Graves. Does any other Member wish to be heard on
    the amendment?
        Seeing none, the amendment as developed through
    discussion----
        Ms. Velazquez. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would like----
        Chairman Graves. Oh, yes, absolutely.
        Ms. Velazquez. I would like to say something about this
    amendment.
        Chairman Graves. Of course.
        Ms. Velazquez. Mr. Chairman, this amendment will guarantee
    that SBA does not try to make the industry fit the size
    standard, but that an individual size standard will be created
    for each industry. While the amendment made great strides in
    trying to guarantee fair process for small businesses, the
    amendment and corresponding bill still failed to provide an
    agency appeal process for small businesses if they feel the
    size standard does not adequately represent their industry.
    Instead, small businesses will be faced with either expending
    their limited time and money to challenge the size standard or,
    the more likely scenario, accept the standard developed by SBA
    and be excluded from small businesses programming.
        I hope that as we move forward with this piece of
    legislation and on future bills we can come up with a
    meaningful option for small businesses to challenge unfair
    standards. Thank you.
        Chairman Graves. Does any other Member wish to be heard on
    the amendment?
        The basis of the SBA's size standards, I think, should be
    public so that businesses can better understand the SBA's
    rationale and challenge it when appropriate. Furthermore, I
    think SBA should not be allowed to force over 1,100 industries
    into 16 size standards. The facts, not SBA's administrative
    ease, should dictate the size standards, and I do support the
    amendment.
        So with that, the question is on the amendment offered by
    Mr. Walsh. All those in favor say aye.
        [A chorus of ayes.]
        Chairman Graves. All opposed no.
        [No response.]
        Chairman Graves. In the opinion of the chair the ayes have
    it. The amendment is agreed to.
        Does any other Member wish to offer an amendment?
        Seeing none, the question is on agreeing to H.R. 3987 as
    amended. All those in favor say aye.
        [A chorus of ayes.]
        Chairman Graves. All opposed no.
        [No response.]
        Chairman Graves. In the opinion of the chair the ayes have
    it. H.R. 3987 is agreed to without objection. A quorum being
    present, the bill is favorably reported to the House. And
    without objection the Committee staff is authorized to correct
    punctuation and make other necessary technical corrections and
    conforming changes.
        With that, our next bill for consideration is H.R. 4081,
    the ``Contractor Opportunity Protection Act of 2012,'' which I
    introduced with Mr. West. This bill addresses what may be the
    top complaint I received from small business contractors, which
    is contract bundling or the process of taking what could be
    several small contracts and packing them together as one large
    contract that is simply too big for small businesses to
    compete. Sometimes bundling is justified, in which case it can
    proceed. But in other cases, it needlessly shuts down so many
    small businesses.
        This bill does four things. First, it clarifies the
    definition of ``bundling'' so that we can capture construction
    contracts. Second, it improves processes by eliminating the
    needless and duplicative distinctions between bundling and
    consolidation. And third, it makes the process objective and
    transparent using boards of contract appeals and Government
    Accountability Office's existing contracting appeals process to
    ensure that a neutral third-party makes decisions about
    bundling and to give small businesses a voice in this process.
    And finally, it holds agencies accountable.
        This bill requires agencies to demonstrate that the
    anticipated savings on a bundled contract actually materialize
    before they continue bundling a successor contract. I want to
    emphasize that I think this is one of the most important bills
    that we can pass if we want to help small businesses compete
    and save taxpayers money, and I urge the Committee to support
    it.
        I now recognize Ranking Member Velazquez for her statement.
        Ms. Velazquez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a good
    bill, straightforward. And for the longest time now at every
    meeting that we have done, hearing, in terms of contracting, we
    hear time and time again how contract bundling and contract
    consolidation is hurting small businesses.
        In fiscal year 2011, for instance, more than $50 billion
    worth of contracts were awarded through bundled or consolidated
    contracts. To address this, the legislation before us makes
    several key statutory changes. Most importantly, it expands the
    definition of what a bundled contract is and requires review by
    the SBA and procurement center representatives before the
    proposed procurement could occur, changes that were included in
    H.R. 1873, which this Committee approved in the 110th Congress.
        Similarly, an appeal process is included that enables both
    the SBA and affected small businesses to request further action
    to unbundle contracts. These are positive changes that will
    help small firms.
        However, changes to laws without an accompanying increase
    in enforcement personnel may do more harm than good. And in
    this regard, there is a glaring lack in oversight when trying
    to stop contract bundling. While government procurement
    spending has more than doubled between 2001 and 2010, from 233
    billion to 536 billion, resources dedicated to anti-bundling
    efforts have dwindled. So while the statutory changes in this
    legislation are welcome, it is unfortunate that we are not
    adding more cops on the beat.
        Do not get me wrong, this legislation makes positive
    changes, but without adequate enforcement, small businesses may
    be left out without the real change they crave.
        And with that, I yield back.
        Chairman Graves. Are there any other Members who wish to
    make a statement on 4081?
        Mr. Owens. Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Graves. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Owens. Thank you. A question actually. Has any analysis
    been done to determine whether or not this will increase costs
    for government agencies if you fail to bundle what would be
    called small contracts?
        Chairman Graves. Barry.
        Counsel. I am not sure I actually understand the question.
    The concept of contract bundling implies that the federal
    agency has done an assessment as to whether or not it is
    actually saving money by taking contracts that were previously
    done by small businesses and combining them.
        Mr. Owens. So then, in fact, if I am understanding your
    response, even though you did not understand my question, in
    fact, they have done an analysis that the bundle is actually
    cheaper before they would go ahead and bundle.
        Counsel. There is nothing currently in law or changes being
    made in H.R. 4081 that prevents the government from bundling.
    It prevents the government from bundling when the government
    does not obtain what are called substantial measurable
    benefits. Those may be cost savings, they may be savings
    related to the delivery of the product as opposed to
    necessarily the actual cost savings. In other words, there may
    be other values that the government captures other than purely
    costs associated with the savings.
        Mr. Owens. Okay. Thank you.
        Counsel. Mm-hmm.
        Chairman Graves. Any other Member wish to be heard on H.R.
    4081?
        Clerk, please report the title of the bill.
        The Clerk. H.R. 4081: To amend the Small Business Act to
    consolidate and revise provisions related to contract bundling
    and for other purposes.
        Chairman Graves. Without objection H.R. 4081 is considered
    as read and open for amendment at any point.
        [The bill H.R. 4081 follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Graves. And I do have an amendment in the nature
    of a substitute, if the clerk would read the amendment.
        The Clerk. Amendment 1: Amendment in the nature of a
    substitute offered by Chairman Graves of Missouri.
        Chairman Graves. Without objection the amendment is
    considered as read.
        [Amendment 1 to H.R. 4081 offered by Chairman Graves
    follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Graves. And without objection the amendment is in
    the nature of a substitute. It shall be considered the base
    text for the purpose of the bill.
        Does anyone wish to offer an amendment to that?
        Seeing none, the question is on agreeing to H.R. 4081 as
    amended. All those in favor say aye.
        [A chorus of ayes.]
        Chairman Graves. All opposed no.
        [No response]
        Chairman Graves. In the opinion of the chair the ayes have
    it. H.R. 4081, as amended, is agreed to and without objection.
    A quorum being present, the bill is favorably reported to the
    House. And without objection the Committee staff is authorized
    to correct punctuation and make other necessary technical
    changes and conforming changes.
        Our next bill for consideration is H.R. 4206, the
    ``Contracting Oversight for Small Business Jobs Act of 2012,''
    which is introduced by Mr. Coffman. And I now yield to Mr.
    Coffman to speak on 4206.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am very pleased
    that my legislation, H.R. 4206, the Oversight for Small
    Business Jobs Act of 2012, is being included in today's markup.
    Passage of this legislation will help small businesses comply
    with complicated size and contracting rules while provided a
    safe harbor provision for those small businesses which are
    making a good faith effort to comply with those rules.
        The bill goes on to establish real penalties for instances
    of fraud, including suspension or even debarment from
    eligibility in these programs. Such actions will do a great
    deal to ensure that only those firms which are truly eligible
    are taking part in these programs.
        H.R. 4206 also will raise fraud penalties so that the cost
    of litigation by the government no longer outweighs possible
    recovery, further increasing the likelihood that bad actors are
    identified, appropriately dealt with, and the programs can
    continue to provide valuable income streams to those small
    businesses which are truly eligible and will benefit.
        I urge my fellow Committee Members to support H.R. 4206,
    the Oversight for Small Business Jobs Act of 2012.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back the remainder of my
    time.
        Chairman Graves. I recognize Ranking Member Velazquez for
    comments.
        Ms. Velazquez. I congratulate the gentlemen on this
    legislation. As we all know, and we witnessed the GAO report on
    HUBZones, this is the one program that really is being filled
    with fraud and mismanagement. And we all know that this year
    across the government, federal agencies are unknowingly victims
    of contracting fraud. Investigations conducted by the GAO, as
    well as the SBA's Inspector General and other agencies, have
    discovered businesses making false statements in order to
    obtain preferential contracts awards under SBA's small business
    contracting programs. This has included instances of fraud in
    the SBA's 8(a), HUBZone, and Service-Disabled Veteran Programs,
    some of which were brought to light in testimony before this
    Committee.
        These instances have become more brazen and not only steal
    money from honest small businesses, but also the taxpayers.
    Stopping this behavior and making sure that these individuals
    cannot do business with the government is vital. By increasing
    penalties for companies who knowingly misrepresent their status
    as a small business we are helping the small firms who play by
    the rules and who should be rightfully competing for these
    awards. Strengthening the consequences will make would-be
    fraudsters think twice about scamming the government.
    Maintaining the integrity of the procurement process is a
    priority, and through weeding out bad actors we can ensure that
    small businesses and the taxpayers are not taken advantage of.
        And with that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Graves. Does any other Member have a statement on
    H.R. 4206?
        Seeing none, the Committee now moves to consideration of
    H.R. 4206.
        Ms. Velazquez. She had----
        Chairman Graves. Oh, I am sorry.
        Ms. Hahn. I have an amendment.
        Chairman Graves. We have to open it up, so hang on. Clerk,
    will you please report the title of the bill?
        The Clerk. H.R. 4206: To amend the Small Business Act to
    provide for increased penalties for contracting fraud and for
    other purposes.
        Chairman Graves. Without objection H.R. 4206 is considered
    as read and open for amendment at any point.
        [The bill H.R. 4206 follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Graves. Does a Member wish to--or have an
    amendment? And I know now Ms. Hahn, you are ready. Would the
    clerk please report the amendment?
        The Clerk. Amendment 1 to H.R. 4206 offered by Ms. Hahn of
    California.
        Chairman Graves. Without objection the amendment is
    considered as read. The gentlelady has five minutes.
        [Amendment 1 to H.R. 4206 offered by Ms. Hahn follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Ms. Hahn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
    Velazquez, and thank you to Mr. Coffman for introducing this
    legislation. I think this is an important step towards ensuring
    that small businesses who are awarded government contracts are
    actually small businesses.
        Just yesterday, this Committee held a hearing on
    entrepreneurship, where we learned, among other things, that
    immigrants were more than twice as likely to start businesses
    as non-immigrants, and that Latinos demonstrated the highest
    entrepreneurial activity in 2010, which is a good thing for
    this country. And given the importance of this bill and the
    surge in Latino business owners, it only makes sense to require
    that the SBA publish the Small Business Compliance Guide in
    Spanish as well as English. That is why I am offering my
    amendment to H.R. 4206, the ``Contracting Oversight for Small
    Business Jobs Act of 2012,'' which simply requires that all the
    regulations and guides the SBA will produce as a result of this
    act be made in Spanish.
        Many of the bills we are marking up today aim to increase
    government contracts to small businesses and to help them
    succeed. My amendment is a simple way, a simple step to make
    sure that these new business owners can comply with the new
    rules and regulations.
        Just before I came in here I ran into the California
    Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. They are walking the halls of
    Congress today and I am sure that they would agree with this
    simple step and would urge this Committee to accept my
    amendment. Thank you very much.
        Chairman Graves. Does any other Member wish to be heard on
    the amendment?
        Ms. Herrera Beutler. Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Graves. Ms. Herrera Beutler.
        Ms. Herrera Beutler. I thank the Chairman and the
    gentlelady for offering the amendment. The only question I
    would have, I guess, is a question for the sponsor, if I can do
    that.
        What would you say--and as the first Hispanic to represent
    Washington State in the federal government, this is an issue
    near and dear to my heart. What would you say then if there
    were other groups who come forward and ask for this in their
    language? I mean, I am wondering about the slippery slope.
        Ms. Hahn. Well, the greatest slippery slope we could have
    in this country is more people starting their own businesses,
    expanding, hiring, and really turning this economy around. The
    only reason I introduced this specific language was because of
    what we heard in this Committee as Latinos having the highest
    entrepreneurial activity in 2010, and it certainly would be
    open to, you know, other languages as well.
        I think anything we can do to empower folks in this country
    to succeed----
        Ms. Herrera Beutler. I would agree and I am reclaiming my
    time on that. I think the most important thing we can do is set
    up people who are coming here to obtain the American dream, set
    them up to succeed. And one of the ways that I found in my
    family is making sure that they are able just to start their
    business and serve customers, and one of the ways that they can
    do this is making sure that they have the support that they
    need and obviously speaking and being able to communicate in
    different languages. Obviously they are not going to learn
    every language of somebody who walks into their door.
        But I just--I would agree, the goal is to support them. And
    in considering this, that is how I am going to look at it, what
    is going to best set up any immigrant family who wants to come
    here and take hold of the American dream, what is going to set
    them up for success.
        So with that, I yield back.
        Mr. Cicilline. Mr. Chairman.
        Ms. Velazquez. Would the gentlelady yield for a second?
        Ms. Herrera Beutler. I yield.
        Ms. Velazquez. Okay.
        Mr. Cicilline. Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Graves. Does any other Member wish to be heard on
    the amendment? Mr. Cicilline.
        Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to speak in
    strong support of the amendment and thank the gentlelady from
    California for raising this really important issue. And I come
    from a district where the Latino community has played a very
    important role in rebuilding the economy of Rhode Island. And I
    recently hosted the administrator of the Small Business
    Administration to Rhode Island, and she, too, spoke about
    nationally the entrepreneurial power and productivity of the
    Latino community.
        And what I think in particular this bill, which involves
    the imposition of pretty serious penalties for noncompliance,
    that in this area in particular we should be sure that people
    are communicated with in a way that most effectively shares
    really vital information which has in it penalties of a million
    dollars.
        And so I would say to the gentlelady that if there is
    another community, you know, next year or the following year
    that is present in the growing entrepreneurial sector of the
    economy, we ought to be prepared to be sure that that community
    has this information in their language as well. I think this is
    the beauty of Congress meeting regularly, we have the ability
    to respond emerging new communities and new languages, and it
    is one of the great strengths of our country. But I think it is
    indisputable that in this moment the Latino community is
    playing a very powerful and important and growing and
    significant role in the development of new businesses. And when
    we are about to enact a set of penalties for noncompliance with
    those, which are very severe, then I think we have to go the
    extra mile to be sure that they are getting that information
    effectively and, in this case, in their language. So I applaud
    the gentlelady from California for her visionary thinking in
    this matter.
        I yield back the balance of my time.
        Ms. Hahn. Well said.
        Chairman Graves. Mr. Coffman.
        Mr. Coffman. Mr. Chairman, government contracting is highly
    technical and requires a master of English. Nobody here is
    saying that these proposals are going to be submitted in other
    languages other than English. And so I think it is an
    unnecessary cost to have it in a different language than what
    we are requiring the submission to be in.
        I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Ms. Velazquez. Mr. Chairman? I rest in support of the
    gentle-lady's amendment and I am even open to contemplate
    including other languages. You know, at a time when the economy
    continues to struggle and we know that immigrants are an
    important--they play an important role in our economy, we
    should do everything we can to open opportunities, the door of
    opportunity for immigrants entrepreneurs to participate in the
    federal marketplace. It is not only about knowing the penalties
    if they apply for an award where they do not qualify because of
    their size, but for them to understand what is needed in order
    to qualify as a small business concern.
        Between 2002 and 2007, the number of Hispanic-owned
    businesses in the United States increased by 43.7 percent to
    2.3 million, more than twice the national rate of 18 percent.
    Hispanic-owned businesses, for example, generated $345.2
    billion in sales in 2007, up 55.5 percent compared with 2005.
    And this over trend in Hispanic-owned businesses is likely to
    continue as the Census Bureau reported that the U.S. Hispanic
    population surged 43 percent, rising to 50.5 million in 2010
    from 35 million. Furthermore, an estimated 45 million of this
    demographic speak Spanish.
        And I will ask the gentlelady who spoke before that maybe
    we could work together to make sure the resources are included
    when we are reauthorized ESL programs, so that the resources
    are there for those who want to learn English, and believe me,
    they do. But resources are not there for them to be able to
    have the English language classes that they need.
        As the Hispanic population continues to grow, this
    amendment will ensure that Hispanic-owned businesses have the
    information necessary to determine whether or not they qualify.
        And with that, I yield back.
        Chairman Graves. Ms. Ellmers.
        Ms. Ellmers. I have a question, and it is very simple. Is
    there a cost associated with this? And do we know that number?
    And I guess it would be to the gentlelady who has put forward
    the amendment.
        Ms. Hahn. Thank you. I, at this time, do not have a cost
    estimate of what this would require, but, you know, again, I
    think this is an important step that we can take to let
    entrepreneurs, let small business folks out there in this
    country know that we are on their side. And, again, what we are
    enacting today could cost penalties up to a million dollars for
    some of these small business owners, which I am sure they would
    argue is not something that would be welcome at a time when
    they are trying to get started. So we want them to be in
    compliance.
        And, you know, current law is vague on what documents must
    be made available in a language other than English and what
    constitutes a vital document. So I just think that this ensures
    that our policy matches the facts.
        And I think what we want to do in this Committee is, again,
    be on the side of small businesses. We want to empower them. We
    want to make sure that they are in compliance with Federal
    Government regulations. And so I think this is an important
    amendment and it is a simple one.
        Ms. Ellmers. I want to reclaim the time.
        Chairman Graves. Reclaim your time.
        Ms. Ellmers. I just want to comment then that we do not
    know the cost associated with this, and I think that is
    something that we need to consider. Thank you.
        Chairman Graves. Yes. Mr. Hanna.
        Ms. Velazquez. We have passed legislation before where the
    Chairman said that he did not do the study.
        Chairman Graves. Mr. Hanna.
        Mr. Hanna. If I could ask the gentlelady, Ms. Hahn, why is
    not the overwhelming success of the Hispanic community's growth
    evidence that this is not necessary?
        Ms. Hahn. Well, again, this is because we are enacting a
    new law here, so it has nothing to do with previously whether
    or not Latinos have shown that great American entrepreneurial
    passion. This is that we are enacting a new law that could
    impact them, and I think it is only fair and right that we----
        Mr. Hanna. Well, what I am suggesting----
        Ms. Hahn [continuing]. Translate this in their own
    language.
        Mr. Hanna. I appreciate that, but what I am suggesting is
    that that is actually evidence to the contrary, that people are
    quite capable of managing within the rules that we have.
    Clearly there is a lot to be read, a lot to be done, a lot to
    be studied, and it is obviously going well. I guess your point
    would be that they would do even better maybe.
        Ms. Hahn. Well, I just think it is the right thing to do
    when we enact a law like this to have it published in Spanish.
    I come from California.
        Mr. Hanna. Sure.
        Ms. Hahn. We do this all the time, so it is interesting I
    have this debate where others do not agree with this. This is
    like second nature for us, particularly in Los Angeles.
        Mr. Hanna. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. I yield back.
        Chairman Graves. Mr. West.
        Mr. West. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I would like to ask
    the gentlelady from California, do we have the technical
    manuals for a C-17 aircraft in other languages than English?
        Ms. Hahn. I do not know the answer to that.
        Mr. West. I can tell you no. Do you have the technical
    manuals for an F-15/F-16 aircraft or, you know, helicopters in
    other languages than English?
        Ms. Hahn. Well, you know, I do not really see this as being
    along the same subject.
        Mr. West. I do because this is the point. If you are a crew
    chief on these aircraft, you are responsible for that aircraft,
    if that aircraft were to crash we are talking about
    multimillions of dollars in penalties. So if we are not
    producing, you know, technical manuals for the Federal
    Government, United States military, in languages other than
    English, then why do we need to produce this in a language
    other than English?
        So I think that the precedent is established. We have one
    language that we operate in, the Federal Government, and that
    is English. And what the state of California wants to do, that
    is fine. I can tell you in the state of Florida, in South
    Florida, that election ballots are printed in three different
    languages and that is Spanish, Creole, and English. That is
    something they do in South Florida that the Federal Government
    has not mandated. So I do not think that this should be
    mandated from this Committee or as part of this legislation, so
    I will be voting no on this amendment.
        Ms. Hahn. And I just want to, if I may, reply that, again,
    this is not military contracts we are talking about here. This
    is small business contracts and----
        Mr. West. They are.
        Ms. Hahn. Well, I mean, this is, you know, we are talking
    about a document here that we are considering a vital document.
    And according to our policy a vital document can be translated
    in another language.
        Chairman Graves. Mr. Chabot.
        Mr. Chabot. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would just start off
    by noting to the gentlelady that some of the resistance that
    you are hearing here from our side, I think we want to be
    welcoming to those folks that are here legally in this country.
    And I know the folks in California are oftentimes trendsetters
    and the rest of us sometimes follow along, but the business of
    this country is generally conducted in English and that has
    been accepted for a long time. Many of us here favor English as
    the official language of our country and I happen to favor that
    as well.
        We also think that it is in the best interest of groups as
    quickly as possible to learn the language of this country, to
    learn English, and they will be far better off, whether it is
    in the schools or whether it is in the business community or
    other. Many of us believe that you are unfortunately holding
    folks back by having exceptions in different languages. They
    are much better off in the long term, and I think there are a
    number of studies that show this, if they learn the language
    now and operate in that language. And I think that this
    particular amendment is in opposition of that.
        So I think that is what you are hearing, at least some of
    the resistance on this side. We think people are much better
    off learning the language of this country and they will be much
    further ahead much more quickly if they do that.
        I yield back.
        Ms. Hahn. Mr. Chair.
        Mr. Schrader. I move the previous question.
        Ms. Hahn. Mr. Chair.
        Chairman Graves. The previous question has been moved, but,
    you know----
        Ms. Hahn. This is such an interesting debate.
        Chairman Graves. It is. The thing is we are running out of
    time and we have one more bill to do, but I do not want to cut
    anybody off. I want anybody to be able to speak that wants to
    speak, but we are running out of time. We got Ms. Chu, we got
    Ms. Clarke, and we got Mr. Bartlett.
        Ms. Chu, if you can, please.
        Ms. Chu. I would like to yield to the gentleman from Rhode
    Island, Mr. Cicilline.
        Mr. Cicilline. I thank the gentlelady. I just want to say
    that I think it is important in this discussion to recognize
    that by suggesting that this amendment, which would require
    that this information be provided to people in Spanish, does
    not mean every document, including airplane manuals or every
    ballot. We are talking about in particular how we help small
    businesses.
        And it is irrefutable when you look at the evidence the
    role that new immigrants play in the start up of new
    businesses, the role that new residents to our country play in
    beginning and growing jobs as a part of creating new
    businesses. There is a special role that new immigrants or
    immigrants to this country often who do not speak English,
    particularly who speak Spanish, are playing in job creation.
    And so it is very different than--of course, I think everyone
    would agree it is easier if you move to a country when you
    learn that language and you are able to integrate fully with
    the language of that country. Of course, that is everyone's
    hope and that will certainly be true.
        But what we are really asking is what is best for our
    country in these early years? And if there is someone who
    speaks Spanish and they are going to start a new business or
    grow a business, being sure that they have information which
    includes a very serious penalty makes sense. And, you know, to
    suggest that by doing that we are arguing that every plane
    manual or every ballot also has to be in Spanish, that is not
    the argument.
        This is a population that is starting new businesses. If
    you look at the statistics of what is the percentage of new
    business in this country that are being started, particularly
    in urban areas, by new immigrants, that people have been here
    less than a couple of years, it is staggering. It is the engine
    of the small business economy in this country. And to suggest
    somehow we should not do everything we can to share information
    with that community in their own language that has very serious
    penalties I think fundamentally ignores reality, the reality of
    the Latino presence in the small business economy of this
    country.
        And I urge people to separate out this notion that we
    cannot do it in this one area without doing it everywhere in
    government for every group. We have the ability to discern
    situations one from the other, and I think this one makes good
    common sense not only for the community that we are reaching
    here that speaks Spanish, but for all of us who benefit from
    the growth of jobs in these new businesses, in Latino
    businesses all across this country.
        And with that, I yield back the balance of my time.
        Chairman Graves. All right. Yield back to Bartlett.
        Mr. Bartlett. Thank you. I am really conflicted on this
    amendment. I have been a very long-time supporter of English
    first. It is the language of commerce in our country. If you do
    not ultimately learn English, you will be relegated generally
    to entry-level kinds of jobs. And so I think that it is
    essential that we encourage people to learn English. But
    English first does not mean English only.
        Ms. Hahn. That is right.
        Mr. Bartlett. And I would be more supportive of this
    amendment if it said that we would provide in digital form for
    downloading a Spanish translation, so that those who needed it
    could get it. I understand the concern of many of those.
        Ms. Hahn. All right, I like that.
        Mr. Bartlett. Okay. Well, if I could make a friendly----
        Ms. Hahn. That is friendly.
        Mr. Bartlett [continuing]. Perfecting amendment to your
    amendment, I would suggest that we provide this in digital form
    for downloading. I think that does away with almost all the
    objections on our side.
        Ms. Hahn. I love it. I will accept that friendly amendment.
        Mr. Bartlett. If we could do that, I think that would help
    to advance this.
        Ms. Hahn. So moved.
        Chairman Graves. We are going to have to have that in
    writing.
        Mr. Coffman. Mr. Chairman, may I offer an amendment to
    that?
        Chairman Graves. No, because that would be in the third
    degree, but we are going to have to have it writing to be able
    to do it, so we are going to have to recess to be able to do
    that.
        Mr. Bartlett. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if we could agree that
    before this goes to the floor that we will work to improve this
    so that she might not withdraw her amendment with the----
        Chairman Graves. I am not going to support the amendment.
    So we can--I mean, I would love to support the gentlelady, but
    I cannot support this amendment.
        Ms. Hahn. Even if downloaded?
        Mr. Bartlett. Can we simply move to the last one and they
    can work this while we are doing the last bill and then we come
    back?
        Ms. Velazquez. Maybe we should move to the next bill and
    let them work on which of that amendment.
        Ms. Hahn. Thank you.
        Mr. Bartlett. Being in writing can be in handwriting, can
    it not?
        Ms. Velazquez. Yes.
        Chairman Graves. Yes.
        Mr. Bartlett. Okay. Thank you and I yield back.
        Chairman Graves. Pursuant to Rule 10 of the Committee----
        Ms. Clarke. Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Graves. Ms. Clarke, you want to be heard on the
    amendment?
        Ms. Clarke. Yes, I would and thank you, sir. I just wanted
    to add my voice. My colleague, Mr. Hanna, raised a question
    about the fact that we recognize that so many Hispanic
    businesses already exist and are already being successful, but
    what is implied in there is that all of these businesses are
    doing business with the SBA. That is not accurate.
        What we are trying to do is encourage these businesses to
    grow and many of them are mom-and-pop establishments as most
    small businesses start out. Once these businesses have reached
    a certain size they are often seeking ways to grow. And during
    that interim period, these are immigrants who are learning
    English. I think there is a misrepresentation here that people
    are not multitasking. I think the very first thing that
    immigrants who speak another language try to do is,
    particularly when they want to go into business, is to begin
    learning the English language as best they can.
        The challenge is interpreting information, and there is
    oftentimes not a direct translation of how to do business with
    the U.S. Government. What this amendment would do is clarify
    and remove the barriers to the understandings and the
    complexities of doing business with the Federal Government,
    which I believe would certainly help these businesses to expand
    and to become employers of many Americans across the Nation. I
    think this is a small price to pay when you look at the success
    of these businesses; that is, to provide a way for them to
    interpret our laws and keeping with the language that is their
    first language while, at the same time, learning the native
    language of this Nation which has been English and helping
    them, therefore, to move forward.
        So I just wanted to correct an assumption that was sort of
    built into your statement, Mr. Hanna. Many of these businesses
    already operate. They have just never done business with the
    government. And this is a way of building a bridge to their
    access to the programs that we know will help them to expand
    and become employers in our Nation.
        With that, I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Ms. Hahn. Well said.
        Mr. Hanna. I will withdraw my perfecting amendment.
        Chairman Graves. Does any other Member wish to be heard on
    the amendment? Any other Member wish to be heard on the
    amendment?
        With that, I want to kind of----
        Mr. Cicilline. I would like to offer that perfecting
    amendment in substitution, if I may, Mr. Chairman. I think it
    is an excellent suggestion that the sponsor----
        Chairman Graves. We need it in writing.
        Mr. Cicilline. Pardon me?
        Chairman Graves. We need it in writing.
        Ms. Clarke. We need it in writing. Can we download it?
        Chairman Graves. In English.
        Ms. Clarke. In English.
        Chairman Graves. Does any other Member wish to be heard on
    the amendment? And then we are going to postpone proceedings.
        Ms. Clarke. Mr. Chairman, can we handwrite?
        Ms. Velazquez. Yes.
        Chairman Graves. Yes, you can handwrite it.
        Ms. Clarke. Okay.
        Chairman Graves. What we will do, pursuant to Rule 10 of
    the Committee's rules, proceedings on the amendment will be
    postponed. And we are going to come right back to it just as
    soon as we do the next bill, which is H.R. 4203, the ``Women's
    Procurement Act of 2012,'' which is introduced by Ranking
    Member Velazquez. I now recognize Ms. Velazquez for her opening
    remarks.
        Ms. Velazquez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The federal
    government has a 5 percent procurement goal for women-owned
    businesses, established in 1994, that has never been achieved.
    In fact, last year, the government missed the goal by more than
    20 percent. As a result, one of the primary obstacles facing
    women-owned businesses over the last 10 years has been the
    government's failure to implement the Women's Procurement
    Program. Last year, that obstacle was finally removed as the
    final regulations for the Women's Procurement Program were
    released and the program was implemented.
        Through this program women-owned small businesses are now
    eligible for contracts through restricted competition in 83
    industries that have historically had underutilization of
    women-owned businesses. However, the program is far from
    perfect. While parity among small businesses contracting
    programs was achieved two years ago, the women's procurement
    still lags behind. Simply put, contracting offices do not have
    the options under the Women's Procurement Program that they do
    under the HUBZone, 8(a), and Service-Disabled Veterans
    initiatives. To address these issues and maintain parity the
    bills gave federal agencies new tools to award contracts to
    women-owned businesses similar to those that already exist for
    the 8(a), HUBZone, and Service-Disabled Veterans Program.
        For restricted competitions, they will remove the existing
    caps on contracts eligible for set-aside, putting the program
    on par with other small businesses' contracting programs.
    Together these changes support efforts to maintain parity among
    all SBA contracting programs while giving contracting officers
    another tool to make awards to these types of companies.
        There is another key problem that is holding back the
    program. The statutes call for businesses to certify their
    eligibility for the program and for these certifications to be
    verified by either agency contracting officers or third
    parties. What has happened is that the agency procurement
    officers have now become the de facto certifiers, a tedious and
    exacting role that is causing delays in the program's roll-out.
    These procurement officers should not be verifying
    certifications. Instead, they should be working with small
    businesses to award them contracts.
        Making matters worse, the SBA requested inadequate
    resources to support these certifications, making the document
    repository, eligibility examinations, and protest process
    nearly unworkable. To address these issues the legislation
    charges SBA with the responsibility of certifying participants.
    If SBA is unable to do so, SBA may continue to approve third-
    party certifiers to carry out such responsibility.
        The truth of the matter is that this is SBA's
    responsibility and they need to step up to the plate and
    certify women-owned businesses for this program to succeed.
    Frankly, I think we are growing tired of the agency's excuses
    that it is someone else's job to certify eligibility for the
    agency's very own programs.
        Strengthening the Women's Procurement Program is critical
    to the 7.8 million women-owned businesses in the United States.
    Making up nearly 30 percent of all businesses across the
    country and generating $1.2 trillion in revenue, they are a
    fast-growing sector of the economy. Ensuring that they have
    access to compete for government contracts is essential for
    their continued growth, and I urge a yes vote on this
    legislation.
        And I yield back the balance of my time.
        Chairman Graves. Are there any other Members who wish to be
    recognized for a statement on ranking member's H.R. 4203?
        Seeing none, I support H.R. 4203. In our last markup I said
    that I did not want to pick winners and losers, but rather
    ensure that all small businesses have the opportunity to
    compete for contracts. Standardizing the various small business
    programs to the extent possible helps meet that objective.
        And I particularly support removing the caps on competitive
    contracts. If we believe in the market, why would we say that
    when multiple firms are competing we need to cap the size of
    the award? I think competition will keep the price reasonable,
    and the contracting officer is required to certify that the
    price that government is paying is fair and reasonable. I do
    urge the Committee to support the bill.
        The Committee now moves to consideration of H.R. 4203.
    Clerk, please report the title.
        The Clerk. H.R. 4203: To amend the Small Business Act with
    respect to the procurement program for women-owned small
    business concerns and for other purposes.
        Chairman Graves. Without objection H.R. 4203 is considered
    as read and open for amendment.
        [The bill H.R. 4203 follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Graves. Does any Member have an amendment?
        Seeing none, the question is on agreeing to H.R. 4203. All
    those in favor say aye.
        [A chorus of ayes.]
        Chairman Graves. All opposed no.
        [No response.]
        Chairman Graves. The opinion of the chair is the ayes have
    it. The ayes do have it. H.R. 4203 is agreed to without
    objection. A quorum being present, the bill is favorably
    reported to the House. And without objection the Committee
    staff is authorized to correct punctuation and make other
    necessary technical changes.
        Counsel. We are still waiting on the copies.
        Chairman Graves. All right, we are waiting on the copies.
        The Committee previously postponed action on H.R. 4206.
    Just as soon as we have the copies we will move forward. How
    long is it going to take?
        Counsel. Two minutes.
        Chairman Graves. The Committee previously postponed action
    on H.R. 4206. Without objection we will now resume these
    discussions.
        Does the gentleman wish to offer a perfecting amendment?
    The amendment is being distributed. The clerk will report the
    amendment to the amendment.
        The Clerk. Amendment offered by Mr. Cicilline of Rhode
    Island, Perfecting Amendment 1 to H.R. 4206 offered by Ms. Hahn
    of California.
        Chairman Graves. With that, does any other Member wish to
    be heard on the amendment to the amendment?
        Ms. Hahn. Yes, I just want to say again, as we are really
    working to protect and support job creators, that was really
    the intention of this amendment. And I think having it
    available to be downloaded really gets rid of the idea that it
    will cost more in the long run.
        Chairman Graves. Any other Member wish to be heard on the
    amendment to the amendment? Ms. Clarke?
        Ms. Clarke. Thank you, Mr. Graves. I just wanted to, again,
    share with my colleagues my support for this amendment and its
    perfecting amendment. I think that we have come to a great
    compromise here.
        There are hosts of small businesses that are growing across
    our Nation that really rely on us to be helpful to them. I know
    of the concerns of my colleagues on the other side of the
    aisle. It is my hope that this perfecting amendment which
    provides this online will ease any concerns that our colleagues
    would have.
        Again, it has been my experience that most immigrants
    really desire to learn the English language, particularly those
    who are involved in commerce. They want to be able to pitch
    their services, their products, and their wares to every
    American, and they recognize that anything that is a barrier to
    that is a barrier to their success.
        So my support for this amendment is a bridge-building
    amendment that enables those who would like to use the services
    of the federal government to expand their businesses, to become
    employers to all Americans, to have this translation available
    that enables them to accurately understand what is required by
    the SBA of them to strengthen, build, and to further their
    pursuits of the American dream.
        With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Chairman Graves. Does any other Member wish to be heard on
    the amendment to the amendment?
        We are going to have votes in five minutes. Does any other
    Member wish to be heard on the amendment to the amendment?
        Seeing none, I am going to oppose both. I do not support
    the underlying amendment. I am not going to support the
    amendment to the amendment.
        I believe translating the compliance guidelines into
    another language is just going to be money that is going to be
    spent without actual benefit. This is 10th government
    contracting bill we have marked up and the last 9 have shown
    us, if anything, that government contracting is a very
    technical area. And I am going to back up what Mr. Coffman said
    earlier. In dealing with something technical the choice of
    words matter and a common language allows us to use words with
    precision. And in the case of compliance guidelines that
    precision is especially important because it is a legal
    document.
        The underlying documents themselves are only available in
    English. The Federal Acquisition Regulations is over 2,000
    pages of regulation that all government contractors need to
    understand. It is only available in English. Solicitations are
    only available in English. Government contracts themselves are
    only available in English. And I think the amendment actually
    does very little to help small businesses and it is going to
    add to the cost.
        Therefore, I am opposing the amendment to the amendment and
    the underlying amendment. And with that, the question is on the
    amendment offered by Mr. Cicilline to the amendment. All those
    in favor say aye.
        [A chorus of ayes.]
        Chairman Graves. All opposed no.
        [A chorus of noes.]
        Ms. Hahn. Mr. Chairman, can we have a recorded vote?
        Chairman Graves. A recorded vote has been requested. Clerk,
    please call the roll.
        The Clerk. Chairman Graves.
        Chairman Graves. No.
        The Clerk. Chairman Graves votes no.
        Mr. Bartlett.
        Mr. Bartlett. Yes.
        The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett votes aye.
        Mr. Chabot.
        Mr. Chabot. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. Chabot votes no.
        Mr. King.
        [No response.]
        The Clerk. Mr. King.
        [No response.]
        The Clerk. Mr. Coffman.
        Mr. Coffman. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. Coffman votes no.
        Mr. Mulvaney.
        Mr. Mulvaney. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. Mulvaney votes no.
        Mr. Tipton.
        Mr. Tipton. Aye.
        The Clerk. Mr. Tipton votes aye.
        Mr. Landry.
        [No response.]
        The Clerk. Mr. Landry.
        [No response.]
        The Clerk. Ms. Herrera Beutler.
        Ms. Herrera Beutler. No.
        The Clerk. Ms. Herrera Beutler votes no.
        Mr. West.
        Mr. West. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. West votes no.
        Mrs. Ellmers.
        Ms. Ellmers. No.
        The Clerk. Mrs. Ellmers votes no.
        Mr. Walsh.
        Mr. Walsh. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. Walsh votes no.
        Mr. Barletta.
        Mr. Barletta. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. Barletta votes no.
        Mr. Hanna.
        Mr. Hanna. Yes.
        The Clerk. Mr. Hanna votes aye.
        Mr. Schilling.
        Mr. Schilling. Yes.
        The Clerk. Mr. Schilling votes aye.
        Ranking Member Velazquez.
        Ms. Velazquez. Yes.
        The Clerk. Ranking Member Velazquez votes aye.
        Mr. Schrader.
        Mr. Schrader. Aye.
        The Clerk. Mr. Schrader votes aye.
        Mr. Critz.
        Mr. Critz. Aye.
        The Clerk. Mr. Critz votes aye.
        Ms. Chu--I am sorry, Ms. Clarke.
        Ms. Clarke. Aye.
        The Clerk. Ms. Clarke votes aye.
        Ms. Chu.
        Ms. Chu. Aye.
        The Clerk. Ms. Chu votes aye.
        Mr. Cicilline.
        Mr. Cicilline. Aye.
        The Clerk. Mr. Cicilline votes aye.
        Mr. Richmond.
        [No response.]
        The Clerk. Mr. Richmond.
        [No response.]
        The Clerk. Ms. Hahn.
        Ms. Hahn. Aye.
        The Clerk. Ms. Hahn votes aye.
        Mr. Peters.
        Mr. Peters. Aye.
        The Clerk. Mr. Peters votes aye.
        Mr. Owens.
        Mr. Owens. Aye.
        The Clerk. Mr. Owens votes aye.
        Mr. Keating.
        Mr. Keating. Yes.
        The Clerk. Mr. Keating votes aye.
        Chairman Graves. Does any other Member wish to vote? Any
    Member wish to change their vote?
        The Clerk. Fourteen ayes, nine noes.
        Chairman Graves. On this vote the ayes are 14, the noes are
    9. The amendment to the amendment is agreed to.
        The question is now on the underlying amendment by Ms.
    Hahn. All those in favor say aye.
        [A chorus of ayes.]
        Chairman Graves. All opposed no.
        [A chorus of noes.]
        Chairman Graves. In the opinion of the chair the noes have
    it.
        Ms. Hahn. Could we have a recorded vote on that as well?
        Chairman Graves. A recorded vote has been requested. Will
    the clerk please call the roll?
        The Clerk. Chairman Graves.
        Chairman Graves. No.
        The Clerk. Chairman Graves votes no.
        Mr. Bartlett.
        Mr. Bartlett. Aye.
        The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett votes aye.
        Mr. Chabot.
        Mr. Chabot. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. Chabot votes no.
        Mr. King.
        [No response.]
        The Clerk. Mr. King.
        [No response.]
        The Clerk. Mr. Coffman.
        Mr. Coffman. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. Coffman votes no.
        Mr. Mulvaney.
        Mr. Mulvaney. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. Mulvaney votes no.
        Mr. Tipton.
        Mr. Tipton. Aye.
        The Clerk. Mr. Tipton votes aye.
        Mr. Landry.
        [No response.]
        The Clerk. Mr. Landry.
        [No response.]
        The Clerk. Ms. Herrera Beutler.
        Ms. Herrera Beutler. No.
        The Clerk. Ms. Herrera Beutler votes no.
        Mr. West.
        Mr. West. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. West votes no.
        Mrs. Ellmers.
        Ms. Ellmers. No.
        The Clerk. Mrs. Ellmers votes no.
        Mr. Walsh.
        Mr. Walsh. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. Walsh votes no.
        Mr. Barletta.
        Mr. Barletta. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. Barletta votes no.
        Mr. Hanna.
        Mr. Hanna. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. Hanna votes no.
        Mr. Schilling.
        Mr. Schilling. No.
        The Clerk. Mr. Schilling votes no.
        Ranking Member Velazquez.
        Ms. Velazquez. Aye.
        The Clerk. Ranking Member Velazquez votes aye.
        Mr. Schrader.
        Mr. Schrader. Aye.
        The Clerk. Mr. Schrader votes aye.
        Mr. Critz.
        Mr. Critz. Aye.
        The Clerk. Mr. Critz votes aye.
        Ms. Clarke.
        Ms. Clarke. Aye.
        The Clerk. Ms. Clarke votes aye.
        Ms. Chu.
        Ms. Chu. Aye.
        The Clerk. Ms. Chu votes aye.
        Mr. Cicilline.
        Mr. Cicilline. Aye.
        The Clerk. Mr. Cicilline votes aye.
        Mr. Richmond.
        [No response.]
        The Clerk. Mr. Richmond.
        [No response.]
        The Clerk. Ms. Hahn.
        Ms. Hahn. Aye.
        The Clerk. Ms. Hahn votes aye.
        Mr. Peters.
        Mr. Peters. Aye.
        The Clerk. Mr. Peters votes aye.
        Mr. Owens.
        Mr. Owens. Aye.
        The Clerk. Mr. Owens votes aye.
        Mr. Keating.
        Mr. Keating. Yes.
        The Clerk. Mr. Keating votes aye.
        Chairman Graves. Any Member wish to change their vote?
        Seeing none----
        Ms. Velazquez. Mr. Chairman, as a point of clarification,
    by voting on Ms. Hahn's amendment we are voting on an amendment
    that was voted on Cicilline, and so the vote on this amendment,
    what it does it makes sure that Mr. Cicilline's amendment takes
    precedent over Ms. Hahn's amendment, is it not?
        Chairman Graves. No, Ms. Hahn's amendment has been amended.
        Ms. Velazquez. Yeah. So, in fact, they are voting on the
    language of Mr. Cicilline.
        Chairman Graves. Well, they are voting on the language of
    Ms. Hahn. It has been amended by Mr. Cicilline.
        Clerk, please report the----
        The Clerk. Twelve ayes, 11 noes.
        Chairman Graves. What was it?
        The Clerk. Twelve ayes, 11 noes.
        Chairman Graves. On this vote the ayes are 12, the noes are
    11. The amendment is agreed to.
        With that, the question is on H.R. 4206 as amended. All
    those in favor say aye.
        [A chorus of ayes.]
        Chairman Graves. All opposed no.
        [A chorus of noes.]
        Chairman Graves. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have
    it. H.R. 4206 is agreed to without objection. A quorum being
    present, the bill is favorably reported to the House without
    objection. Without objection the Committee staff is authorized
    to correct punctuation and make other necessary technical
    corrections and conforming changes.
        With that, that is the five bills. Thanks for everybody
    being here. The markup is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:16 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]