[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 166 (Tuesday, October 30, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H12170-H12188]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SMALL BUSINESS CONTRACTING PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS ACT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 773 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 3867.
{time} 1203
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 3867) to update and expand the procurement of the Small Business
Administration, and for other purposes, with Mr. Holden in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) and the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Chabot) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, in recent years, the Federal marketplace has seen
phenomenal growth. However, while procurement opportunities are
increasing, agencies are failing to meet their small business, women,
service-disabled veterans, minority and low-income contracting goals.
This has not only cost small businesses billions of dollars in lost
opportunities but deprives the government of a valuable supplier.
Our Nation's entrepreneurs play an important role in the procurement
system, providing diversity, competition, and ensuring we get the best
value for the taxpayers' dollar. To help them get a start, there is an
array of contributing programs offering technical assistance,
purchasing flexibility and targeted benefits. Unfortunately, due to
legislative neglect, under funding and mismanagement by several
administrations, the programs have fallen far short of their full
potential, leaving many small businesses outside of the Federal
marketplace.
The Small Business Contracting Program Improvements Act, introduced
by myself and Representative Mary Fallin, will change that by making
important improvements to women, minority, HUBZone and service-disabled
veteran contracting programs. H.R. 3867 will immediately implement the
Women's Procurement Program that has languished in the current
administration's endless delays. It also updates the economic criteria
for the 8(a) program, reflecting current fiscal realities. The last
time Congress addressed the 8(a) program was almost 20 years ago, when
a gallon of gas was 90 cents and the average cost of a home was less
than $90,000. For too long we have forced minority businesses to
operate under antiquated financial standards that in many cases were
simply setting them up to fail.
Most importantly, this legislation will give our service-disabled
veterans top priority when it comes to contracting. For those men and
women returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, many with life-altering
injuries, this bill will provide the tools to start a new endeavor and
begin a new life. These changes would go a long way to addressing many
of the program's shortcomings that have frustrated our Nation's small
business owners.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 3867 also fights fraud in the Federal marketplace.
Contracting opportunities are a privilege, not a right. The Small
Business Contracting Improvement Act makes that clear. For the first
time, we are imposing a business code of conduct on all participants,
requiring the Federal Government to verify that individuals are who
they claim and empowering small firms to police their own programs.
This will restore integrity to these critical programs.
Through modernizing programs and increasing accountability, H.R. 3867
brings SBA's contracting programs into the 21st century. It is for this
reason that this legislation has attracted remarkably broad support,
including the National Federation of Independent Business, the
Associated General Contractors, the American Legion, Veterans of
Foreign Wars, AMVETS, the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the
National Black Chamber of Commerce, the U.S. Women's Chamber of
Commerce, the International Franchise Association, as well as the
National Defense Industrial Association and the Aerospace Industries
Association.
This is a measured approach that balances the need to give program
flexibility within the realities of current agency buying strategies.
It is good for small business, good for the agency, and, most
importantly, good for taxpayers.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3867, the Small Business
Contracting Program Improvements Act. I strongly support the provisions
in the bill that help those Americans, veterans of our Armed Forces,
who have provided the great sacrifices to defend our freedom and our
way of life. However, there are other provisions that are sufficiently
problematic that makes it impossible for me to support the overall
bill.
In 1997, Congress established the Historically Underutilized Business
Zone, or HUBZone program. The program is designed to assist areas of
low income and high unemployment by providing incentives for government
contractors to relocate in these areas and expand their operations. By
making it easier for small businesses located in HUBZones to win
Federal contracts, Congress expected more government contractors to
relocate in these areas and provide an important component to their
revitalization.
[[Page H12171]]
As anyone who has traveled through many urban and rural districts
realizes, they have a large number of HUBZones. Unfortunately, H.R.
3867 could make it more difficult for HUBZone firms to win government
contracts and thereby detract from the ability of this program to help
revitalize urban and rural areas that need greater economic
development.
Mr. Chairman, while I concur with the Chair of the committee that we
need to ensure that only firms eligible for the HUBZone program
participate, it is unnecessary to take punitive action against HUBZone
firms as a result of a few bad actors. I am sure that if we scrutinize
each of the procurement programs, we could find a few bad actors in
each. That justifies taking appropriate legal action against the bad
actors. It does not, in our view, necessitate punishing the firms that
complied with the letter and spirit of the law.
It also is important to note that a number of the issues raised in
this legislation are being addressed by the administrator of the SBA. I
certainly understand the frustration that Members of Congress have when
the executive branch does not implement legislation in a timely manner.
Nevertheless, one aspect of this bill involves a program that has not
been implemented for 7 years. While that normally would suggest further
legislative action, the administrator, we believe, is doing everything
possible at this point to issue rules, a process that can take time. In
addition, the program is the subject of a lawsuit in which the
plaintiffs have not sought any subsequent court action for nearly 2
years since the Federal Court ruled that the SBA violated the
Administrative Procedure Act and failed to implement the program.
Mr. Chairman, I also would point out that the bill as reported out of
committee, in our opinion, would only complicate the implementation of
the procurement program. While I understand that the chairwoman will be
offering an amendment to correct that problem, it does so by
classifying 92 percent of the industries in the United States as
historically underrepresented by women businesses and Federal
procurement. While I concur that women are historically
underrepresented in the Federal procurement arena, the amendment
paints, we believe, with a broad, over-inclusive brush, and may include
numerous industries in which businesses are not underrepresented by
women entrepreneurs.
I also need to point out that the bill would classify individuals as
economically disadvantaged if they have assets exclusive of their
primary residence and their business up to $550,000. So over a half
million dollars. According to research by our staff, roughly half the
Members of Congress, half the Members of this body would qualify as
economically disadvantaged under that standard. I find it very
difficult to believe that the average American would consider a Member
of Congress to be economically disadvantaged.
These are only some of our concerns about the bill that we have
before us here today. While some of these concerns are technical in
nature, my primary dispute with the bill is that it continues,
unfortunately, to segment the small business government contracting
arena. The result is that, in our opinion, rather than growing
opportunities for all small businesses, it pits all of these deserving
groups against one another. That, in our view, undermines their ability
to speak as a united front in debates over Federal procurement policy
that would promote all of their interests.
Despite my disagreement with the chairwoman, I do not doubt her
sincere desire to improve the SBA contracting programs. The Chair and
her staff, particularly Michael Day and Adam Minehardt, should be
commended for their efforts in trying to find a solution that I, in
good conscience, could have supported. However, the philosophical gap
was simply too large to span. Therefore, I cannot support this
legislation. I would urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to a member of the
Small Business Committee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Sestak).
Mr. SESTAK. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill for two
goods that are within it. The first has to do with our servicemembers,
those that have become disabled because of their service. This bill,
for the first time, gives priority, even if it's just one company that
is veteran-owned and has the service-disabled owning that company, even
if there are other competitors. I think this is extremely important,
particularly in this time of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
{time} 1215
I say that because in World War II, on average, our soldiers had 182
days of combat. In between horrific battles of Guadalcanal, Iwo Jima or
the Battle of the Bulge, there was dwell time in which our
servicemembers had time to rest before the next onslaught.
In the war in Iraq, our servicemembers go outside the wire every day
into combat for 15 months. We are seeing a higher rate of post-
traumatic stress disorder coming back than we have seen in any war.
Some say over 30 percent. That will feed into our society.
So that this bill addresses the fact that our society owes something
to those who wear the cloth of this Nation, particularly in such a
challenging war, I speak up in support of it.
The second is women business owners. The fact that the goal has been
for years that 5 percent of all Federal contracts will go to women
business owners, we have only met the goal of 3.4 percent. I believe
this bill goes a large step towards helping those, particularly the
economically disenfranchised, to be able to have industries that are
underrepresented, to now have the competition remain with women
business owners. And if they are substantially underrepresented, it can
then open up to those women business owners who are not economically
disadvantaged. So I speak up in support of this bill both for veterans
and for women.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York
(Ms. Clarke), a member of the committee and a cosponsor of the bill,
for 2 minutes.
Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Chairman, first I would like to thank the gentlewoman
from New York (Ms. Velazquez) for her leadership in bringing this bill
to the floor today and her steadfast commitment to the small businesses
of our Nation.
I support the Small Business Contracting Program Improvements Act,
which encourages participation by qualified small businesses and
improves key sections of the Small Business Act to prevent fraud in the
SBA's contracting programs.
H.R. 3867 requires the Small Business Administration to immediately
implement the Women's Procurement Program after 7 years of no action by
the administration to put the program in action.
It will allow agencies to limit competition for Federal contracts
only to women business owners in industries that have been closed to
them. This legislation now requires SBA to evaluate industries where
women entrepreneurs are economically disadvantaged and gives the SBA
authority to waive any restrictions where women-owned enterprises are
substantially underrepresented.
I believe this bill will finally correct the imbalance in the number
of women-owned businesses nationally when compared to their presence in
the Federal marketplace.
H.R. 3867 also strengthens the HUBZone program by requiring
construction contracts to be performed within a reasonable distance of
the particular HUBZone the contractor is to benefit. It will limit
construction contract awards being performed more than 150 miles from
the primary office location of the HUBZone-approved company.
The Small Business Contracting Program Improvements Act modernizes
the 8(a) program to update and revise qualification requirements and
ensure that 8(a) contracts go to qualified companies.
This bill provides an opportunity for all qualified small businesses
to have a fair opportunity in the Federal marketplace. I want to thank
Chairwoman Velazquez for her steadfast commitment to the women,
minority-owned and disabled veterans and disadvantaged small businesses
of America. I
[[Page H12172]]
strongly support this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to do
likewise.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, we have no further speakers, and I continue
to reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Reyes), an original cosponsor of the legislation and
chairman of the Intelligence Committee.
Mr. REYES. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this
time.
I rise in support H.R. 3867, the Small Business Contracting Program
Improvements Act of 2007. I would like to give special recognition to
our distinguished chairman of the Small Business Committee, Chairwoman
Velazquez, for her tireless work over the years on behalf of America's
small business owners, many of whom reside in my district of El Paso,
Texas.
I would also like to commend Congressman Bruce Braley who, in just
his first year in Congress and as chairman of the Small Business
Contracting Subcommittee, has proven to be an outstanding fighter for
small businesses.
H.R. 3867 expands opportunities for small businesses owned by
veterans. And veterans, and in particular disabled veterans who own
businesses, are going to be watching very closely how Members vote on
this bill here today. It also expands opportunities for women who will
also look at how people support their efforts in the small business
community. Minorities are watching very closely who votes for this
legislation, and all others who constitute the most critical force for
economic growth in our country.
While I support this bill as a whole, I today want to speak
specifically about the provisions of this bill that modernize and
update the 8(a) program at the Small Business Administration. In 1968,
Congress established 8(a) to assist small businesses owned by citizens
who are socially and economically disadvantaged. Over the years, the
8(a) program has helped ten of thousands of businesses grow and prosper
by allowing entrepreneurs valuable access to Federal contracts.
A large part of the program's success is a provision that makes
companies with 8(a) certification eligible for smaller government
contracts on a sole-source basis. In 1968, those smaller contracts were
defined as contracts not exceeding $3 million in value for services or
$5 million in value for manufacturing. Unfortunately, in the nearly 40
years since, these limits have barely risen, leaving our small
businesses an ever-shrinking slice of the Federal contracting pool.
Earlier this year I introduced H.R. 1611, the 8(a) Modernization Act,
to turn the clock forward for the thousands of small businesses that we
have unfortunately left behind. This bill does two things: one, it
increases the allowable net worth for 8(a) participants; and, two, it
increases the limit on sole-source contracts for 8(a) companies.
H.R. 3867 includes both of these essential changes which are
important not only to many small businesses in my district, but to
countless American entrepreneurs around the country, including our
veterans.
Mr. Chairman, this is a good bill. I am proud to be an original
cosponsor of it, and I urge all of my colleagues to give it their full
support. Again I thank Chairwoman Velazquez for the time to speak here
today and for her untiring leadership on behalf of small businesses.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Baca), chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.
(Mr. BACA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BACA. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support H.R. 3867, the Small
Business Contracting Program Improvements Act. I want to thank my
colleague, Chairperson Velazquez, for her leadership.
Small business is the backbone of our economy. And I state, small
business is the backbone of our economy. Over 4 million minority
businesses represent almost 20 percent of all firms in this country.
They generate nearly $7 billion annual revenue and employ almost 5
million workers. And I state, 5 million workers.
Minorities make up 32 percent of the population of this country, but
they only represent 18 percent of all small businesses. This bill will
close the gap, and I state, will close the gap by improving the Small
Business Administration's small and minority business procurement
programs and will help disabled veterans, women, minority businesses,
both Hispanic, black, Asians and others, and provides small business
minority businesses the assistance they need to grow and prosper.
Like in the Inland Empire where the majority of businesses are small
businesses and represent the largest growth and the engine that drives
the economy in the State of California, SBA 8(a) programs, which open
the doors to more than half of all Federal minority business contracts,
have not been updated since 1988.
This bill revamps the program to improve 8(a) firms' ability to
secure in the Federal sector. It is time to level the playing field so
the small minority business firms have equal access to Federal
contracts. Every dollar invested in the 8(a) program results in over $4
million in contracts to minority entrepreneurs. This translates into
more jobs across the Nation. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield to Mrs. Tubbs Jones from Ohio,
the chairwoman of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, 2
minutes.
Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, it gives me great pleasure to come
to the floor in support of this great legislation. I want to say I am
so proud of the Chair of the Small Business Committee. She was my first
ranking member when I came to the Congress back in 1999, and I had the
opportunity to serve on the Small Business Committee along with
Financial Services.
We have all been talking about small businesses and how important it
is, and it is all right to talk about it. But if you don't do anything
about it, that presents a problem.
I think about the district that I represent, the greater Cleveland
area, and the need we have to do economic development in the City of
Cleveland. I am so glad this legislation focuses in on some of those
areas. I represent a district that is 52 percent African American, and
it is important that African American businesses in my congressional
district have an opportunity to sit at the public too and receive some
of those dollars in terms of developing their businesses.
One of the things that has happened over the years is being a
minority business has gotten so good, there are people who perpetrate.
That means they pretend they are a minority business. They will get a
minority to stand in the front of their business, and the business is
really a majority business. Or they will get a woman to stand in front,
and it is really a majority business. And this legislation focuses in
on the fraud.
I am so happy because there are so many businesses that deserve an
opportunity to do business with the Federal Government. In addition,
there are so many other areas of focus that this chairwoman has put a
focus on around small business.
If we really believe that small business is the engine that pushes
and grows America, let's give small businesses the train to push it. I
thank her for her leadership. I thank her for an opportunity to speak
this afternoon. I encourage all of my colleagues from the Democrats, as
well as the Republican, who truly believe that small business needs a
leg up to support this legislation.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I have no further speakers and I am
prepared to close if the gentleman is prepared to close.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, we have already stated our concerns about
the bill in particular, but I would again emphasize the fact that the
chairwoman did reach out, and her staff did as well. But
philosophically, this was a bridge too far. We want to thank them again
for working in a cooperative manner. This is a committee that under the
Chair's direction has worked very much with the minority, and we want
to thank them and hope that we
[[Page H12173]]
can continue to work together on bills in the future.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, the improvements made under H.R. 3867
are commonsense changes that would modernize and increase program
accountability. Coupled with the sweeping reform the House passed
earlier this year to our procurement system, this bill will have an
immediate impact on every facet of the small business community,
including women, minorities and service-disabled veterans.
It is for these reasons H.R. 3867 has some of the most diverse
support of any bill coming out of the committee this year, ranging from
small business trade groups including NFIB, the International Franchise
Association and the Associated General Contractors to minority
advocates such as the Black, Hispanic and Women's Chambers of Commerce.
It also has the support of veterans groups, including the American
Legion, VFW and AMVETS, as well as Aerospace Industries Association and
the National Defense Industrial Association.
With the passage of H.R. 3867, we increase opportunities for
entrepreneurs to become valuable suppliers to the Federal Government,
recognizing their contribution to the economy.
I just would like to take a moment to thank the staff that worked on
this legislation: from the Small Business Committee majority staff,
Adam Minehardt, LeAnn Delaney and Michael Day; from the minority staff,
Barry Pinclis and Kevin Fitzpatrick; and Nate Webb from Ms. Fallin's
staff.
I strongly urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 3867, Small Business
Contracting Program Improvements Act.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, two weeks ago, the House agreed nearly
unanimously to pass H.R. 3678, the Internet Tax Freedom Act Amendments
Act. Most significantly, that bill would extend the Internet tax
moratorium and grandfather protections for 4 years, clarify the
treatment of gross receipts taxes, and revise the definition of
Internet access.
As my distinguished colleague from North Carolina, Congressman Watt,
stated on the floor that day, the House bill was ``an excellent example
of what can occur when we work together--on both sides of the aisle--to
deal with highly complex issues.''
Our bipartisan legislation was supported by industry groups such as
the Don't Tax Our Web Coalition, as well as by various government
organizations like the National Governors Association, the Federation
of Tax Administrators, the National Conference of Mayors, and the
National Conference of State Legislatures. It was also supported by a
wide range of labor and union groups. And with that broad support, the
House passed H.R. 3678 by a vote of 405-2.
The Senate has returned the bill to us with some amendments, and so
now we are considering it again. There are four changes:
First, the Senate version extends the moratorium on State and local
taxes on Internet access, with the grandfather protections, for 7
years, until November 1, 2014, rather than the 4 years in the House
bill.
Second, the Senate version gives 7 months for certain States to
adjust to a phase-out of additional grandfather protection they have
been claiming.
Third, the Senate version expands the definition of Internet access
to prohibit taxation of certain services which are fee-based, not
packaged with Internet access, and offered from sources other than
providers of Internet access.
Fourth, the Senate version prohibits a State from reimposing Internet
access taxes under a grandfather clause if the State had eliminated
those taxes more than 2 years ago.
While these lengthier time periods, expanded definitions, and tighter
restrictions on the States go beyond where the House drew the line, I
believe the new line is within reasonable bounds, and responds to many
of the same considerations that motivated the House in crafting the
version passed 2 weeks ago.
Like the House bill, the Senate version is designed to allow
businesses sufficient time to plan, ensure that consumers continue to
benefit from tax-free access to the Internet during this period, while
enabling Congress to revisit the moratorium in light of developments in
the States or in technology--as Congress had done each time it has
extended the original moratorium--in 2001, 2004 and in this bill.
The Senate version remains true to the essential goals of the House
bill, including our refinements to the definition of Internet access
and our decision to provide a temporary extension of the moratorium.
Like the House bill, it is designed to minimize adverse effects on
State and local government revenue, to treat businesses fairly, and to
keep Internet access affordable to consumers.
Nonetheless, we must be mindful of the potential misinterpretation of
the new definition of Internet access. Therefore, I state our intent in
revising the definition. H.R. 3678:
Alters the current definition of ``Internet access'' by making it
clear that the prohibition on State and local taxation extends to that
portion of a service that connects a user to the Internet and enables a
user to navigate the Internet for the purpose of gaining access to the
content, information and services that are available over the Internet
(section 1105(5)(A) of the Internet Tax Freedom Act as amended by this
bill). This new definition eliminates existing language that could have
been interpreted to allow an Internet service provider to bundle
content, information, and services that might otherwise be taxable with
Internet access and claim that the entire package is exempt.
Preserves in subparagraph B of the new definition of Internet access
changes made to the definition in the Internet Tax Nondiscrimination
Act (P.L. 108-435) regarding the taxation of certain
telecommunications. The language is modified in this bill only as to
form to fit the new definition of Internet access as contained in this
bill. The provision is intended to insure that all technologies used to
access the Internet (e.g. cable, satellite, wireless, DSL, etc.) and
the components used to provide the access are subject to the moratorium
and protected from taxation by State and local governments. As noted in
the Committee Report accompanying the bill that ultimately became Pub.
L. No. 108-435 (Senate Report 108-155, 108th Congress, 1st Session, p.
4), the definition ``is not meant to affect States and local taxation
of traditional telecommunications services and other services that are
not used to provide Internet access. For example, the moratorium does
not allow an Internet access provider to claim or to seek immunity from
State or local taxes for the provision of other services--such as cable
television programming--that are separate from Internet access. Nor
does the moratorium exempt telecommunications services provided over
the same facilities that are not used to provide Internet access.''
Clarifies in subparagraph C that services incidental to and provided
with a connection to the Internet are not taxable. Such services are
generally offered for free and provide the user with basic services to
make the Internet functional for the user.
Addresses in subparagraph D concerns that the existing definition
allows goods or services that are used or delivered over the Internet
to become subject to the moratorium if they are offered as a package
with Internet access. In 2004, concerns about the bundling provision
led to a specific exception from the moratorium for voice-over-
internet-protocol services. This section defines the VOIP exception of
the current law as one of the services that is specifically excluded
from Internet access and makes it clear that neither VOIP nor any other
good or service that uses the Internet is subject to the moratorium.
Since VOIP is specifically excluded from the definition of Internet
access, the existing exception for VOIP was removed as redundant.
Includes in the new definition in subparagraph E certain services
that would be subject to the moratorium under subparagraph C if offered
with a service described in subparagraph A, are part of the moratorium
even though they are fee-based and offered separately from a service
described in subparagraph A. The list of services under this
subparagraph is meant to be limited and exhaustive.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 3678 as amended by the Senate remains a good,
strong bill that provides much needed clarity to the communications and
Internet industries, and strikes an appropriate balance in addressing
the needs of States and local governments while helping keep Internet
access affordable.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join
me in supporting this bill as the Senate has sent it back to us.
Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I would like to take a moment to
thank Small Business Committee Chairwoman Nydia Velazquez and Ranking
Member Steve Chabot for all the great work they have done in the Small
Business Committee this year.
As Chairman of the Small Business Subcommittee on Contracting and
Technology and a cosponsor of this legislation, I applaud their efforts
on the Small Business Contracting Improvements Act of 2007. This act
proposes important improvements to the Small Business Administration's
small and minority business procurement programs.
Today I am proud to introduce an amendment with Congressman Peter
Welch on an issue that could have a potential impact in my district.
This amendment requires the Small Business Administration to conduct a
study on the effectiveness of the HUBZone program in reaching rural
areas. Rural areas make up a big part of my District and I want to
ensure that my constituents are not overlooked when it comes to federal
contracting opportunities.
[[Page H12174]]
H.R. 3867 will help small businesses. In the Small Business
Subcommittee on Contracting and Technology's first hearing, we heard
witnesses representing women-owned businesses describe how the federal
government was failing to keep its commitment to them. They talked not
only about how the 5 percent goal for women-owned businesses was not
being met, but also about how the Women's Procurement Program, which
was enacted in 2000, has yet to be implemented by the SBA. This bill
will ensure the Women's Procurement Act is finally implemented.
I am pleased this legislation also expands procurement opportunities
for small businesses owned by service-disabled veterans. Additionally,
it strengthens community development through changes to the HUBZone
program and makes important updates to the 8(a) program, which is one
of the most important vehicles for minority business participation in
federal contracting.
The SBA Office of Advocacy has found that although minorities make up
32% of the population in this country, they constitute only 18% of
businesses. It is clear we must provide additional opportunities to
these small minority businesses to close this gap.
By law, federal organizations are required to support small
businesses. However, over the past 5 years, total government
contracting has increased by 60% while small business contracts have
decreased by 55%. This suggests that the SBA's procurement initiatives
are not bringing work from the large business share to the small
business share, but rather are forcing small businesses to compete for
an increasingly smaller piece of the pie.
It is essential that small businesses have access to the over $400
billion per year federal marketplace. The Small Business Contracting
Improvements Act nicely complements H.R. 1873, the Small Business
Fairness in Contracting Act, a bill I introduced in April that later
passed the House on May 10th by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 409-
13. My bill will give small businesses more opportunities to compete
for federal contracts, raising the small business federal contracting
goal from 23% to 30%. This means that all of the programs included in
the Small Business Contracting Improvements Act will have greater
opportunities to compete for federal contracts.
Thank you once again, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to all of my
colleagues who join me today in standing up for the interests of small
businesses.
Ms. CASTOR. Mr. Chairman, the Small Business Contracting Improvements
Act and this rule will open up greater opportunities to small business
owners across this Nation. Small businesses are the backbone of our
local communities. In my hometown of Tampa, Florida, more of my
neighbors and folks I represent work for small businesses than any
other type of business--and we value what they do because it gives our
community character and diversity.
I want to thank Congresswoman Velazquez for bringing this legislation
to the House floor today. In America, small businesses account for 50
percent of our gross domestic product. Last year, the federal
government spent over $400 billion on goods and services and only about
20 percent went to small businesses--approximately $80 billion in
contracts. Our actions today will assist these talented small
businesses obtain a better, fair share of federal government contracts.
The Small Business Contracting Improvements Act also strengthens and
modernizes contracts for small businesses and sets standards to protect
the integrity and consistency. Despite a 50-year-old mandate, small
businesses owned by disabled veterans, female entrepreneurs, and
minorities have not received a fair share of federal contracts. Back
home in Tampa, there are 47 disabled veteran businesses, 512 state-
certified minority-owned businesses, and over 77,000 small businesses.
I am proud that we will act to expand their opportunities, with others
across the country so that they can thrive and flourish.
Although the Congress passed the Women's Procurement Program 7 years
ago, the Bush Administration failed to follow through. According to
Margot Dorfman, CEO of the U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce, each year
of delay in the implementation of the Women's Procurement Program, has
cost women-owned businesses billions of dollars in contract award
opportunities.
Businesses owned by disabled veterans currently receive only a small
fraction of federal contracts as well. We can expect to see an
immediate and substantial increase in opportunities for these business
owners.
And for businesses that go into economically distressed neighborhoods
like ``HUBZones,'' this bill will ensure further community development
through the strengthening of the HUBZone requirements. For example,
Carl Calhoun, in South St. Petersburg explained to me that had it not
been for the chance to compete for federal contracts that he would not
have gotten the capital necessary to start his family-owned and -
operated business that manufactures premium bedding (mattresses, box
springs and foundations).
Mr. Chairman, this important small business bill and this rule will
update and expand opportunities and encourage participation by
qualified small businesses. We will remove barriers that prevent
deserving businesses in my Tampa Bay district, and others across the
country, from achieving the goal of full participation and a fair share
of federal contracts.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong
support of H.R. 3867, the Small Business Contracting Program
Improvements Act.
I want to thank Chairwoman Velazquez for introducing this important
legislation, and for all of her hard work in getting it to the floor
today.
This bill is important to all Americans, because small business keeps
this country working.
The Federal Government has numerous programs to assist America's
small businesses, but problems remain, and H.R. 3867 addresses several
of them.
In particular, I support the bill's efforts to crack down on large
firms that masquerade as small businesses.
In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, we learned about a particular
multinational corporation that listed itself as a small business and
gained disaster recovery contracts set aside for small businesses.
When we checked further, we found that this firm had 17 divisions and
had generated $4.5 billion in revenue in its North American operation
alone.
That surely doesn't look like any small business I've ever seen.
Morever, we learned that this was not the first time that this
multinational company had been awarded contracts that were set aside
for small businesses.
In fact, another government agency had given them an award for
outstanding ``small business performance''.
H.R. 3867 creates penalties for companies that misrepresent
themselves as being owned by ``a service-disabled veteran.''
This is a good first step at cracking down on companies that
misrepresent themselves to improperly gain government contracts.
At the same time, the Small Business Administration needs to step up
and do more.
SBA must full its responsibility to enforce the laws and allow small
businesses the opportunities that Congress has said they should have.
Until the laws we pass are truly enforced, small business will never
be able to fulfill their economic promise.
I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to the
Small Business Contracting Program Improvements Act (H.R. 3867). The
aims of this legislation are noble. The purpose of this bill is to make
a variety of changes--some long overdue--to several of the sub-small
business federal contracting goals.
I commend the authors of H.R. 3867 for strengthening the procurement
set-aside program for service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses
in Title I. I also praise the effort to finally get the women's
procurement program off the ground. During my tenure as chairman of the
Small Business Committee, I was proud of my bipartisan work to pressure
the SBA to implement this initiative. However, I remind my colleagues
that under the new leadership of the administrator of the Small
Business Administration, SBA, Steven Preston, more action has been
taken in the past year to implement the women's procurement program
than in the previous seven since the program was first created. The SBA
is near completion of a final rule, which will pass constitutional
muster, on the women's procurement program. Thus, I counsel continued
patience and I hope that Title III in H.R. 3867 will not be needed.
However, I am disappointed that the increase in the size in contracts
available to small manufacturers awarded without competition is not
significantly increased. While Section 204 of H.R. 3867 provides a
long-overdue inflationary increase to the contract limitation level for
other small businesses, from $3 million to $5.1 million, the size for
small manufacturers is increased by just $500,000--from $5 million to
$5.5 million. This small increase diminishes the value of this benefit
to U.S. small manufacturers, particularly as compared to other small
businesses. To keep up with inflation and provide an equivalent
benefit, this contract limitation should be increased to $8.5 million
for small manufacturers.
This bill also unfortunately pits two sets of small businesses
against each other--a minority small business development program 8(a)
versus a procurement preference program that encourages small
businesses to develop and hire local workers in economically-distressed
areas of the country, otherwise known as Historically Underutilized
Business, HUB, Zones. When I was chairman of the Small Business
Committee, I never brought a bill to the House floor that helped one
set of small businesses at the expense of another group of small
businesses, particularly those
[[Page H12175]]
firms that are committed to redeveloping economically-distressed areas
in both urban and rural America.
H.R. 3867 makes the 8(a) program more attractive while putting more
hurdles in front of the HUBZone program. This is ironic because the
Federal government has never met the 3 percent goal for HUBZones since
its creation in 1996 but routinely meets and exceeds the 5 percent goal
for minority or Small Disadvantaged Businesses, SDBs, of which 8(a)
firms is a part.
A key blow to the HUBZone program is contained in Section 101(b) of
H.R. 3867. This provision makes the HUBZone program discretionary or
optional on the part of Federal contracting officers. This will only
further discourage the use of HUBZone firms by the government to
fulfill its procurement needs.
H.R. 3867 also requires an on-site inspection by SBA personnel of a
small business to confirm HUBZone status prior to the award of their
second program-related contract. Because of the limited resources at
the SBA, this could delay the completion of contracts by weeks, if not
months, while the HUBZone firm awaits this audit. Again, a Federal
contracting official would be disinclined to use a HUBZone firm if it
meant a longer time before a Federal agency would receive the good or
service that was put out to bid. The non-partisan Congressional Budget
Office, CBO, estimates that this provision alone would cost $62 million
over the next 5 years to complete 5,000 on-site visits that would be
performed each year. There are other ways to accomplish the same goal
of making sure that HUBZone firms are in compliance with all the
requirements of the law, including a closer review by the SBA of
HUBZone applications, an expedited protest process by other small
businesses, and enhanced criminal and civil penalties for false or
misleading statements.
Finally, H.R. 3867 prohibits HUBZone construction firms from
participating in projects more than 150 miles from its headquarters
location. This would put a severe competitive disadvantage to HUBZone
firms located in rural areas from performing work on Federal Government
construction contracts located far away.
In the northern Illinois congressional district I am proud to
represent, two entire mostly rural counties--Carroll and Stephenson--
are HUBZones. Also, HUBZones are located in certain urban parts of
Winnebago County, mostly in the city center areas of Rockford along the
Rock River that have suffered from the closure of numerous
manufacturing facilities. This bill would put a further competitive
disadvantage to any HUBZone firms located in the 16th District to
compete for Federal business located even as close as the nearest major
Federal procuring center in Illinois--Scott Air Force Base, which is
about 300 miles away from Rockford and Freeport, Illinois.
While claiming to correct alleged abuses and fraud in the HUBZone
program, H.R. 3867 opens up the 8(a) program to potential abuse by
increasing the economic disadvantage threshold test above the average
rate of inflation and applying this test only once upon entry into the
program. The current economic disadvantage threshold level, which has
not been changed since 1988, is $250,000. I agree that this level needs
to be increased to compensate for inflation. However, H.R. 3867 raises
this level to $550,000 even though the rate of inflation since 1988
would produce a result of $440,000, according to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics. Also, the SBA currently applies this wealth test annually
to ensure that the 8(a) program truly serves economically disadvantaged
small business owners. Eliminating this yearly test could potentially
lead to fraud if a wealthy person seeking entry into the 8(a) program
is creative in shifting around their assets. H.R. 3867 would also allow
multi-millionaires to remain in the 8(a) program for 10 years once they
pass the first economic disadvantage test.
Most critically, H.R. 3867 does not deal with the fundamental problem
in the 8(a) program cited in numerous SBA Office of Inspector General
reports that 50 percent of the dollars obligated against 8(a) contracts
went to a mere 1.7 percent of the 8(a) firms and over 70 percent of the
eligible firms received no 8(a) contract benefit at all. Finally, H.R.
3867 also does not deal with the problem of large Alaska Native
Corporations, ANCs, being able to participate in the 8(a) program and
receive sole-sourced multi-million dollar contracts.
Because of these and other problems, the Bush Administration has
issued a statement strongly opposing H.R. 3867, which I include for the
Record. Thus, I respectfully urge my colleagues to oppose this
legislation in order for these problems to be fixed.
Statement of Administration Policy--H.R. 3867--Small Business
Contracting Program Improvements Act
The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 3867, which would
modify the small business procurement programs of the Small
Business Administration. The Administration appreciates the
intent of H.R. 3867 to improve these programs and reduce the
potential for fraud and abuse. However, the Administration
believes that a number of the bill's elements would be
burdensome or undesirable. In addition, some provisions of
the bill raise significant constitutional concerns. The
Administration looks forward to working with Congress to
remedy the issues identified below.
The bill also eliminates the upper asset limit on economic
disadvantage for continued participation in the program,
essentially allowing an individual regardless of their wealth
or income to continue participating in the program for a full
10 years. The bill would raise the asset-test bar for
eligibility of individuals for the 8(a) program from $250,000
to $550,000, excluding equity in their home or their
business. As the 8(a) program is designed to reach
economically disadvantaged small business owners who have
diminished credit opportunities, the Administration believes
opening the program to small business owners with higher net
worth will divert 8(a) contracting opportunities well beyond
the original intent of the program.
H.R. 3867 would place a number of burdensome requirements
on the HUB Zone contracting program. The bill would prohibit
rural and Native American HUB Zone firms from obtaining
construction contracts more than 150 miles from their HUB
Zone principal office. The bill would also require on-site
evaluation of all HUB Zone firms prior to the award of their
second program-related contract. This provision would create
a large burden on the Small Business Administration, as these
firms are widely distributed and often located in rural
areas. The firms are already required to certify their status
prior to award of a contract, and false certification is a
felony with significant penalties. Also, the Small Business
Administration currently has a protest mechanism in place to
ensure the eligibility of firms for HUB Zone contracts.
The Administration is supportive of sections of H.R. 3867
that punish false representation of a firm as being owned by
service-disabled veterans and provisions that attempt to
assist such firms in the Federal contracting process.
However, the Administration is concerned about provisions
that would require that certain small business preference
programs take priority over other small business preference
programs.
H.R. 3867 would also increase dollar thresholds for
setting-aside non-competitive contracts in several of these
programs. Competition is a proven way of obtaining the best
performance and value for the government. Accordingly, any
non-competitive thresholds increase should be based on the
actual rate of inflation as reflected in regulatory changes
instituted by the SBA.
While the Administration supports opportunities for women-
owned small businesses (WOSBs) to compete for Federal
contracts, it opposes the bill's constitutionally suspect
creation of gender-based set-asides. In order to withstand
applicable equal protection standards, determinations of
under-representation that form the basis of set-asides must
be carefully controlled to assure that the pool of WOSBs
deemed available for the contracting opportunities in
question is limited to businesses that are eligible to
perform those contracts. The bill's provisions for the
identification of industries in which WOSBs are under
represented does not appear to satisfy that standard.
Additionally, authorizing individual agencies to make
determinations of under representation that will result in
contract set-asides based on sex will exacerbate such
constitutional concerns, since it is unlikely that such
determinations will be based upon the kind of thorough
statistical analysis required by the courts to justify such
set-asides under applicable case law.
Additionally, the bill's apparent expansion of the business
categories that will be eligible for race- or ethnicity-based
preferences in Federal contracting programs is subject to
strict scrutiny under governing equal protection standards.
Unless these provisions are supported by a sufficiently
current legislative record demonstrating that they are
narrowly tailored to further a compelling government
interest, such provisions may be vulnerable to constitutional
challenge.
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 3867, the Small
Business Contracting Program Improvements Act.
This bill expands procurement opportunities for small businesses
owned by service-disabled veterans, women entrepreneurs, and socially
disadvantaged business owners. These firms remain under-represented in
the Federal contracting marketplace and have yet to receive their fair
share of Federal Government contracts.
H.R. 3867 assists small businesses owned by service-disabled veterans
by requiring agencies to award sole-source contracts to these firms if
they are identified as being capable of performing the contracts. These
businesses currently receive less than one percent of Federal
Government contracting dollars. Authorizing agencies to enter into
sole-source contracts with service-disabled veteran-owned firms will
raise the likelihood of these firms obtaining Federal contracts.
Moreover, H.R. 3867 provides an inflationary adjustment to the
limitation on contracts by increasing the size of available contracts
awarded without competition to $5.1 million.
This bill directs the Small Business Administration, SBA, to comply
with an Executive
[[Page H12176]]
Order requiring the SBA to provide service-disabled veteran-owned
companies with information and assistance on Federal contracting as
well as assist other agencies in their strategies to expand contracting
opportunities for them.
Passage of this bill is also important for our women-owned
businesses. In 2000, Congress enacted the Women's Procurement Program
to expand opportunities for Federal contracts to women business owners
within industries in which they have been significantly under-
represented. On behalf of women-owned businesses, the U.S. Women's
Chamber of Commerce sued the SBA over the delay in implementing the
program and won their lawsuit in 2005. Seven years after the Women's
Procurement Program was enacted into law, however, the SBA has yet to
establish regulations that would implement this vital program. I share
Chairwoman Velazquez's frustration with this delay and her admonishment
to the SBA to remedy the situation.
H.R. 3867 requires the SBA to implement the Women's Procurement
Program immediately. The bill makes economically disadvantaged women
entrepreneurs eligible for restricted competition contracts and gives
the SBA the authority to waive this requirement in industries that are
substantially under-represented by women-owned businesses. Today,
women-owned small businesses capture only about 3 percent of Federal
small-business contracting dollars. We need this legislation to
encourage women entrepreneurs to participate in the Federal contract
marketplace.
H.R. 3867 expands and modernizes the 8(a) Business Development
Program, which has not been amended since 1988. The 8(a) program
currently assists over 9,000 small businesses owned by socially and
economically disadvantaged individuals, including about 200 firms in my
State of Hawaii. H.R. 3867 makes two main improvements to this program:
it provides for an inflationary increase in net worth limitations to a
maximum of $550,000 for program participants and extends the duration
of program participation from 9 to 10 years. Increasing the net worth
ceiling will bring stronger firms into the 8(a) program.
Finally, I support this bill because it addresses contracting
problems and increases oversight over unqualified businesses by setting
standards that protect the integrity and consistency in application of
contract assistance programs. H.R. 3867 mandates government-wide goals
for procurement contracts awarded to small businesses. In addition, it
requires the SBA to perform the necessary checks on program applicants
and participants to confirm their business integrity and
qualifications. This is important given recent findings by the SBA
Inspector General of fraud and abuse in the Historically Underutilized
Business Zone (HUBZone) program.
Chairwoman Velazquez has noted that the Federal Government failed to
meet its small and minority business goals for a 6th year in a row,
costing entrepreneurs $4.5 billion in lost opportunities. H.R. 3867 is
another step in the right direction to help our small businesses, and I
thank Chairwoman Velazquez for her commitment and strong leadership in
sponsoring this important legislation.
I urge my colleagues to support this measure.
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support
of H.R. 3867, the Small Business Contracting Program Improvements Act.
I would specifically like to focus on Title V of the bill which would
make changes to the 8(a) program. The 8(a) program is the last
remaining federal initiative focusing on the development of minority-
owned businesses through the award of federal contracts. Despite the
fact that minorities make up one-third of the U.S. population,
minority-owned businesses account for only 18 percent of all U.S.
companies. This bill provides a strong step forward in increasing
minority entrepreneurship.
It is of great concern to me that 8(a) hasn't been updated since
1988, nearly 20 years ago. This bill would finally modernize the 8(a)
program to reflect the changing economy. I am pleased at the
similarities between the bill before us and legislation that I
introduced this spring, H.R. 2532, the Minority Owned Venture
Empowerment Act or MOVE Act. Like my legislation, businesses would have
the opportunity to participate in the program for 10 years. This 1-year
program extension would provide businesses more time to successfully
grow and graduate out of the program. Additionally, similar to my
proposal, this bill would raise the net worth restriction of the small
business owner so that successful minority businesses are not shut out
of the program prematurely.
We must make more of an effort to encourage minority, women and
veteran entrepreneurship. This bill would ensure that these businesses
can compete fairly in the federal marketplace, grow their enterprises
and create new jobs. I urge all members to support the legislation
before us.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 3867, the
Small Business Contracting Program Improvements Act. Enjoying broad
based and bi-partisan support, this bill will help modernize the
contacting programs run by the U.S. Small Business Administration, SBA,
raise the profile of veteran, minority and women entrepreneurs, and
help combat fraud, waste and abuse in government contracting.
Of particular note, Section 402 of H.R. 3867 strengthens the
Historically Underutilized Business Zone, HUBZone, program and promotes
community economic development. That is, HUBZone registered small
businesses cannot obtain a construction contract by means of a HUBZone
set-aside unless the construction project is located in or near the
HUBZone in which the small business concern maintains its principal
place of business.
Guam, my district, will be home to a significant amount of federally
funded construction and other work associated with the planned increase
in the presence of U.S. Armed Forces on our military bases. The
provisions of H.R. 3867 will help ensure small businesses on Guam can
successfully compete for the contracts associated with the military
build-up. I support H.R. 3867.
{time} 1230
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered read for amendment
under the 5-minute rule.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 3867
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Small
Business Contracting Program Improvements Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
TITLE I--ENSURING GOVERNMENT CONTRACT OPPORTUNITIES FOR SMALL BUSINESS
CONCERNS OWNED AND CONTROLLED BY SERVICE-DISABLED VETERANS
Sec. 101. Expanding procurement opportunities.
Sec. 102. Penalties for misrepresentation.
Sec. 103. Implementation of Executive Order 13360.
TITLE II--PROTECTING TAXPAYERS AND ENSURING PROGRAM CONSISTENCY
Sec. 201. Requiring business integrity of small business concerns.
Sec. 202. Establishment of goals.
Sec. 203. Small business concern subcontracting policy.
Sec. 204. Increased size of available contracts.
TITLE III--EXPANDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR WOMEN ENTREPRENEURS
Sec. 301. Implement the women's procurement program.
TITLE IV--STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Sec. 401. On-site verification.
Sec. 402. Limitation on construction contracts.
Sec. 403. Allowing small business concerns that are not HUBZone program
participants to protest HUBZone awards.
TITLE V--MODERNIZING THE 8(a) PROGRAM
Sec. 501. Modernizing the section 8(a) program net worth limitations.
Sec. 502. Extension of the section 8(a) program term.
Sec. 503. Report on implementation.
Sec. 504. Allowing small business concerns that are not section 8(a)
program participants to protest section 8(a) awards.
TITLE VI--OTHER MATTERS
Sec. 601. Affiliation for certain franchises.
TITLE I--ENSURING GOVERNMENT CONTRACT OPPORTUNITIES FOR SMALL BUSINESS
CONCERNS OWNED AND CONTROLLED BY SERVICE-DISABLED VETERANS
SEC. 101. EXPANDING PROCUREMENT OPPORTUNITIES.
(a) Service-Disabled Veterans.--Section 36(a) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657f(a)) is amended--
(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking
``may'' and inserting ``shall''; and
(2) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and the contracting
officer'' and all that follows through ``contracting
opportunity''.
(b) HUBZone.--Section 31(b)(2)(B) of such Act (15 U.S.C.
657a(b)(2)(B)) is amended by striking ``shall'' and inserting
``may''.
SEC. 102. PENALTIES FOR MISREPRESENTATION.
Section 16(d)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
645(d)(1)) is amended by inserting ``a `small business
concern owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans',''
before ``or a `small business concern owned and controlled by
women' ''.
SEC. 103. IMPLEMENTATION OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 13360.
Section 36 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657f) is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
[[Page H12177]]
``(f) Implementation of Executive Order 13360.--The
Administrator shall--
``(1) provide small business concerns owned and controlled
by service-disabled veterans with information and assistance
concerning participation in Federal contracting;
``(2) advise and assist other agencies in their strategies
to expand procurement opportunities for such concerns; and
``(3) make training assistance on Federal contract law,
procedures, and practices available to such concerns.''.
TITLE II--PROTECTING TAXPAYERS AND ENSURING PROGRAM CONSISTENCY
SEC. 201. REQUIRING BUSINESS INTEGRITY OF SMALL BUSINESS
CONCERNS.
The Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 et seq.) is amended
by adding at the end the following new section:
``SEC. 38. REQUIRING BUSINESS INTEGRITY OF SMALL BUSINESS
CONCERNS.
``(a) Section 8(a) Program Background Check.--No applicant
may be approved for participation in the section 8(a) program
unless the Administrator first performs a background check on
the applicant and determines that the applicant does not lack
business integrity.
``(b) HUBZone Program Background Check.--No award of a
second contract under the authority of section 31(b)(2)(A) or
31(b)(2)(B) may be made unless the Administrator first
performs a background check on the applicant and determines
that the applicant does not lack business integrity.
``(c) Random Background Check.--The Administrator shall
have random background checks performed on owners and
officers of small business concerns that have been awarded a
contract under section 8(m), 36(a), or 36(b) to determine
whether such owners and officers lacks business integrity.''.
SEC. 202. ESTABLISHMENT OF GOALS.
(a) Establishment of Government-Wide Goals.--Section
15(g)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(g)(1)) is
amended by striking the first sentence and inserting ``The
President shall annually establish Government-wide goals for
procurement contracts awarded to small business concerns,
small business concerns owned and controlled by service-
disabled veterans, qualified HUBZone small business concerns,
small business concerns owned and controlled by socially and
economically disadvantaged individuals, small business
concerns participating in the program established by section
8(a), and small business concerns owned and controlled by
women.''.
(b) Technical Corrections.--Section 15 of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644) is amended--
(1) in subsection (g) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) Each agency shall, in consultation with the
Administrator, establish goals for the usage, as prime
contractors, of small business concerns that participate in
the program under section 8(a).''; and
(2) in subsection (h) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Each prime contractor shall, in consultation with the
Administrator, establish goals for the usage, as
subcontractors, of small business concerns that participate
in the program under section 8(a).''.
SEC. 203. SMALL BUSINESS CONCERN SUBCONTRACTING POLICY.
Section 8(d)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
637(d)(1)) is amended by striking the first sentence and
inserting ``It is the policy of the United States that small
business concerns, small business concerns owned and
controlled by veterans, small business concerns owned and
controlled by service-disabled veterans, qualifying HUBZone
small business concerns, small business concerns owned and
controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged
individuals, small business concerns participating in the
program established by section 8(a), and small business
concerns owned and controlled by women, shall have the
maximum practicable opportunity to participate in the
performance contracts let by any Federal agency, including
contracts and subcontracts for subsystems, assemblies,
components, and related services for major systems.''.
SEC. 204. INCREASED SIZE OF AVAILABLE CONTRACTS.
(a) Section 8(a) Program.--Section 8(a)(1)(D)(i)(II) of the
Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a)(1)(D)(i)(II)) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``$5,000,000'' and inserting
``$5,500,000''; and
(2) by striking ``$3,000,000'' and inserting
``$5,100,000''.
(b) HUBZone Program.--Section 31(b)(2)(A)(ii) of such Act
(15 U.S.C. 657a(b)(2)(A)(ii)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``$5,000,000'' and inserting
``$5,500,000''; and
(2) by striking ``$3,000,000'' and inserting
``$5,100,000''.
(c) Service-Disabled Veteran Program.--Section 36(a)(2) of
such Act (15 U.S.C. 657f(a)(2)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``$5,000,000'' and inserting
``$5,500,000''; and
(2) by striking ``$3,000,000'' and inserting
``$5,100,000''.
TITLE III--EXPANDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR WOMEN ENTREPRENEURS
SEC. 301. IMPLEMENT THE WOMEN'S PROCUREMENT PROGRAM.
Subsection (m) of section 8 of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 637(m)) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraphs (1) through (4) and inserting
the following:
``(1) Definition.--In this subsection, the term `small
business concern owned and controlled by women' has the
meaning given such term in section 3(n), except that
ownership shall be determined without regard to any community
property law.
``(2) Authority to restrict competition.--
``(A) In general.--In accordance with this subsection, a
contracting officer may restrict competition for any contract
for the procurement of goods or services by the Federal
Government to small business concerns owned and controlled by
women, if--
``(i) each of the concerns is not less than 51 percent
owned by 1 or more women who are economically disadvantaged
(and such ownership is determined without regard to any
community property law);
``(ii) the contracting officer has a reasonable expectation
that 2 or more small business concerns owned and controlled
by women will submit offers for the contract;
``(iii) the contract is for the procurement of goods or
services with respect to an industry identified pursuant to
paragraph (4);
``(iv) in the estimation of the contracting officer, the
contract award can be made at a fair and reasonable price;
and
``(v) each concern is certified in a manner described in
subparagraph (B).
``(B) Acceptance of certification.--For purposes of
subparagraph (A)(v), a contracting officer is required to
accept a small business concern's certification as a small
business concern owned and controlled by women when such
certification is made by--
``(i) a Federal agency or a State or local government;
``(ii) a national certifying entity approved by the
Administrator; or
``(iii) the small business concern, when such concern
certifies to the contracting officer that it is a small
business concern owned and controlled by women and provides
adequate documentation in accordance with standards
established by the Administrator to support such
certification.
``(3) Waiver.--With respect to a small business concern
owned and controlled by women, the Administrator may waive
paragraph (2)(A)(i) if--
``(A) such concern is in an industry identified pursuant to
paragraph (4); and
``(B) the Administrator determines that such concern is in
an industry in which small business concerns owned and
controlled by women are substantially under-represented in
Federal contracting.
``(4) Identification of industries.--
``(A) In general.--Not less often than every five years,
the Administrator shall conduct a study to identify, for
purposes of paragraphs (2)(A)(iii) and (3)(A), industries in
which small business concerns owned and controlled by women
are under-represented in Federal contracting. The parameters
for the study shall be as follows:
``(i) For purposes of this paragraph, the Administrator
shall identify an industry if, and only if, the share of
Federal contracts awarded to small business concerns owned
and controlled by women in such industry is small relative to
the prevalence of business concerns owned and controlled by
women in the pool of business concerns in such industry that
have at least one employee.
``(ii) The study shall measure utilization and availability
by--
``(I) using the two best available data sources;
``(II) including only business concerns that have at least
one employee; and
``(III) measuring only Federal contracts awarded for
amounts over $25,000.
``(iii) The study shall include four sets of disparity
measurement tables to compute disparity ratios. The four sets
are--
``(I) all business concerns in the United States relative
to the number of Federal contracts awarded to small business
concerns owned and controlled by women;
``(II) small business concerns owned and controlled by
women that have demonstrated an interest in or that have
secured Federal contracts relative to the number of Federal
contracts awarded to small business concerns owned and
controlled by women;
``(III) all business concerns in the United States relative
to the dollar amounts of Federal contracts awarded to small
business concerns owned and controlled by women; and
``(IV) small business concerns owned and controlled by
women that have demonstrated an interest in or that have
secured government contracts relative to the dollar amounts
of Federal contracts awarded.
``(B) Determination by head of department or agency.--Until
such time as the Administrator completes the identification
of industries required by subparagraph (A), the determination
as to whether an industry is one in which small business
concerns owned and controlled by women are under-represented
in Federal contracting shall be made by the head of the
department or agency for which the contract is to be
performed.
``(C) Deadline.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this subparagraph, the Administrator shall--
``(i) ensure the completion of the first study required by
subparagraph (A);
``(ii) approve national certifying entities for the
purposes of paragraph (2)(B)(ii);
``(iii) establish procedures required by paragraph (5)(A);
and
``(iv) establish standards described in paragraph
(2)(B)(iii).'';
(2) in paragraph (5), by striking ``(2)(F)'' in each place
it appears and inserting ``(2)(B)''; and
[[Page H12178]]
(3) in paragraph (5), by adding at the end the following
new subparagraph:
``(D) Protests by small business concerns.--For purposes of
this paragraph, the term `interested party' shall include any
small business concern.''.
TITLE IV--STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SEC. 401. ON-SITE VERIFICATION.
Section 31(b) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657a(b))
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(5) On-site verification of status.--
``(A) Verification.--When a small business concern that has
previously been awarded a contract under paragraph (2)(A) or
(2)(B) is to be awarded a second contract under paragraph
(2)(A) or (2)(B), the Administrator shall perform an on-site
inspection to determine whether such small business concern
is a qualified HUBZone small business concern. This paragraph
does not require such an inspection before the award of a
third or subsequent contract. This paragraph does not prevent
a second contract from being awarded before such inspection
is completed.
``(B) Notification by small business concern.--The
Administrator shall require a small business concern to
notify the Administrator, prior to being awarded a second
contract under paragraph (2)(A) or (2)(B), of such business
concern's attempt to be awarded a second contract under
paragraph (2)(A) or (2)(B). Not later than 90 days after the
date of the enactment of this subparagraph, the Administrator
shall establish procedures to implement this subparagraph.''.
SEC. 402. LIMITATION ON CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS.
Section 31(b) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657a(b))
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(6) Limit hubzone program construction contracts in or
near a hubzone.--A small business concern may not obtain a
construction contract by reason of the HUBZone program unless
the construction project is located in or near the HUBZone in
which the small business concern has its principal place of
business. The Administrator shall prescribe standards for
determining when a project is located `near' a HUBZone for
purposes of this paragraph, except that under no
circumstances can a project located more than 150 miles from
a HUBZone be located `near' that HUBZone.''.
SEC. 403. ALLOWING SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS THAT ARE NOT
HUBZONE PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS TO PROTEST HUBZONE
AWARDS.
Section 31(c) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657a(c))
is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) Protests by small business concerns.--For purposes of
this subsection, the term `interested party' shall include
any small business concern.''.
TITLE V--MODERNIZING THE 8(a) PROGRAM
SEC. 501. MODERNIZING THE SECTION 8(A) PROGRAM NET WORTH
LIMITATIONS.
(a) Modifications to 8(a) Program.--Notwithstanding any
provision of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 et seq.),
the Administrator shall administer the program under section
8(a) of such Act with the following modifications:
(1) Determination for term of program.--For the purpose of
this section, an individual who has been determined by the
Administrator to be economically disadvantaged at the time of
program entry shall be deemed to be economically
disadvantaged for the term of the program.
(2) Matters excluded.--In determining personal net worth,
the Administrator shall exclude from such determination the
following:
(A) The value of any investment of an economically
disadvantaged owner in the small business concern, except
that such value shall be taken into account under this
paragraph when comparing such concerns to other concerns in
the same business area that are owned by other than socially
disadvantaged individuals.
(B) The equity of an economically disadvantaged owner in a
primary personal residence.
(3) Maximum net worth.--When considering an individual's
net worth for the purpose of determining the degree of
diminished credit and capital opportunities of such
individual, the Administrator shall consider an individual
net worth of $550,000 or less as tending to show diminished
credit and capital opportunities.
(b) Effective Date for Modifications to the 8(a) Program.--
This section shall apply with respect to small business
concerns that apply to the program under section 8(a) of the
Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a)) after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 502. EXTENSION OF THE SECTION 8(A) PROGRAM TERM.
(a) Program Term.--The program term for the program under
section 8(a) of the Small Business Act shall be 10 years. The
first 6 years shall be the developmental phase, and the last
4 years shall be the transitional phase.
(b) Effective Date for Modifications to the 8(a) Program.--
(1) In general.--This section shall apply with respect to
small business concerns that apply to the program under
section 8(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a))
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) Transitional rule.--A small business concern
participating in the program under section 8(a) of such Act
(15 U.S.C. 637(a)) may participate for not more than 10
years.
SEC. 503. REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION.
Section 155 of the Small Business Reauthorization and
Manufacturing Assistance Act of 2004 (15 U.S.C. 657g) is
amended by adding at the end the following: ``Annually,
concurrent with the submission of the Small Business
Administration's budget request to the Congress, the
Administrator shall submit to the Committee on Small Business
and Entrepreneurship of the Senate and the Committee on Small
Business of the House of Representatives a report detailing
progress the Administrator has made towards the
implementation of this section.''.
SEC. 504. ALLOWING SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS THAT ARE NOT
SECTION 8(A) PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS TO PROTEST
SECTION 8(A) AWARDS.
Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a))
is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(22) Rules similar to the rules of paragraphs (5) and (6)
of subsection (m) shall apply for purposes of this
subsection.''.
TITLE VI--OTHER MATTERS
SEC. 601. AFFILIATION FOR CERTAIN FRANCHISES.
Section 3(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(a))
is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) Special rule relating to franchises in the temporary
employee services industry.--In determining whether a
franchisee is affiliated with a franchisor in the temporary
employee services industry, the Administrator shall--
``(A) disregard--
``(i) whether the franchisor finances the payroll of the
temporary staffing personnel (including billing, collecting,
and remitting client fees); and
``(ii) whether the temporary staffing personnel are treated
as employees or independent contractors of the franchisor for
tax or other purposes; and
``(B) consider the processing of payroll and billing by a
franchisor as customary and common practice in the temporary
employee services industry that does not provide probative
weight.''.
The CHAIRMAN. No amendment to the bill is in order except those
printed in House Report 110-407. Each amendment may be offered only in
the order printed in the report, by a Member designated in the report,
shall be considered read, shall be debatable for the time specified in
the report, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an
opponent of the amendment, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall
not be subject to a demand for division of the question.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Ms. Velazquez
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed
in House Report 110-407.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 1 offered by Ms. Velazquez:
At the end of title I, add the following:
SEC. 104. PRIORITY FOR SEVERELY DISABLED VETERANS.
In developing regulations to implement section 101, the
Administrator shall give a priority to those certified
service-disabled veterans that are severely disabled.
Amend section 201 to read as follows:
SEC. 201. REQUIRING BUSINESS INTEGRITY OF SMALL BUSINESS
CONCERNS.
Section 8 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637) is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(o) Requirement of Business Integrity.--No small business
concern may receive any benefit under section 8(a), 8(m),
31(b)(2)(A), 31(b)(2)(B), 36(a), or 36(b) unless the
Administrator first performs a background check on the owners
and officers of such small business concern and determines
that the owners and officers do not lack business integrity.
For purposes of such a determination, previous criminal
convictions will create a presumption of a lack of business
integrity.''.
At the end of title II, add the following (and amend the
table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 205. EXPANDING PROTEST AUTHORIZATION.
Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a))
is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(22) Rules similar to the rules of paragraphs (5) and (6)
of subsection (m) shall apply for purposes of this
subsection.
``(23) For the purposes of challenging the eligibility of a
small business concern to receive an award under section
8(a), 8(m), 31(b)(2)(A), 31(b)(2)(B), 36(a), or 36(b), the
term `interested party' shall include any small business
concern.''.
In section 8(m)(4) of the Small Business Act as proposed to
be added by section 301, strike subparagraph (B) and insert
the following:
``(B) Underrepresented industries.--Until such time as the
Administrator completes the identification of industries
required by subparagraph (A), the following industries, as
identified by their 2-Digit North American Industry
Classification System Code, are deemed underrepresented by
[[Page H12179]]
women in Federal contracting: 11 (Forestry), 21 (Mining), 22
(Utilities), 23 (Construction), 31 (Manufacturing), 32
(Manufacturing), 33 (Manufacturing), 42 (Wholesale Trade), 44
(Retail Trade), 45 (Retail Trade), 48 (Transportation), 49
(Transportation), 51 (Information), 52 (Finance and
Insurance), 53 (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing), 54
(Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services), 56
(Administrative and Support, Waste Management, and
Remediation Services), 61 (Education Services), 62 (Health
Care and Social Assistance), 71 (Arts, Entertainment, and
Recreation), 72 (Accommodation and Food Services), and 81
(Other Services).''.
Strike sections 403 and 504.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 773, the gentlewoman from
New York (Ms. Velazquez) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, this amendment makes changes to the
underlying bill to address outstanding issues in the bill. It ensures
those veterans that are most severely disabled will have access to
contracts. It also strengthens the business integrity standard and
creates parameters to carry out the women's procurement program.
Probably the most critical change in this amendment is the priority
created for severely disabled veterans. The underlying bill already
ensures that service-disabled veterans have greater access to
contracts, but this takes it a step further.
It provides that agencies who are carrying out the service-disabled
veteran contracting program give special consideration to those
returning entrepreneurs that have the most serious of injuries. It is
simply the right thing to do for all these soldiers have given for
their country.
This amendment also provides taxpayers with greater protection by
making certain the SBA performs criminal background checks prior to
entering a program. It provides that those with criminal convictions
are presumed to lack the business integrity required for participation.
Finally, we worked with the minority to create a more workable
standard for allowing the SBA to carry out the women's procurement
program. This amendment specifies the industries that the Rand
Corporation determined, in accordance with direction from the National
Academies of Sciences, were underrepresented by women businesses.
These measures will strengthen the bill to ensure a variety of
deserving small businesses have better access to Federal contracts.
I urge adoption of the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time
in opposition to the gentlelady's amendment, even though I do not
oppose the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Ohio is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, her amendment makes some needed technical
changes to the bill. Nevertheless, as I pointed out in my statement
previously, we believe that this proposed solution to the failure of
the SBA to implement the women's procurement is, in our view,
overinclusive and should be further revised as the legislative process
moves forward, but we do not oppose the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank the gentleman from
Ohio for working with me on this amendment. I urge adoption of the
amendment, and I yield back my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Akin
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed
in House Report 110-407.
Mr. AKIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Akin:
At the end of title V, add the following new section (and
amend the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 505. ASSISTANCE STUDY.
(a) Study.--The Administrator of the Small Business
Administration shall conduct a study to determine what
changes would be required to provide greater Federal
contracting assistance to participants in the program created
by section 8(a) of the Small Business Act that have less
equity in their business concerns than other participants in
the program.
(b) Report.--Not later than 6 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of the
Senate and the Committee on Small Business of the House of
Representatives a report detailing the results of the study
described in subsection (a).
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 773, the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Akin) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. AKIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer this amendment to the Small
Business Contracting Program Improvements Act. As many involved in the
Federal contracting world know, the 8(a) program currently serves small
businesses owned by citizens who are socially and economically
disadvantaged.
Since the 1960s, the 8(a) program has remained the primary vehicle
through which minority-owned businesses enter the Federal marketplace.
There is no doubt that since its inception the 8(a) has helped many
minority-owned businesses grow their firms, enabling them to become
real players in the Federal contracting world. In fact, over the course
of the program, nearly 20,000 companies have received almost $100
billion in Federal contracts.
During committee markup of this bill, I expressed my reservations to
Chairwoman Velazquez regarding certain provisions in the bill that
exclude the equity in a business. I'm concerned that this provision
undermines the argument concerning the competitive capacity of the
business owners. I will explain.
Many owners reinvest their earnings into their businesses, thus
increasing the value of the business. If the 8(a) program is a business
development program targeted toward socially and economically
disadvantaged firms, why should the business owner with a valuable
asset be permitted in the program and benefit from its existence? I
would argue that the scarce resources available to assist these
business owners be devoted to those business owners that are truly
economically disadvantaged.
My amendment is a straightforward amendment that I hope will address
some of these concerns. Essentially, the amendment would ask the
administrator of the Small Business Administration to conduct a study
to determine what changes would be required to provide greater Federal
contracting assistance to participants in the 8(a) program that have
less equity in their business concerns than other participants in the
program.
I appreciate Chairwoman Velazquez's willingness to work with me on
this important issue, and I believe that adoption of my amendment is
one step towards ensuring that minority-owned small businesses who
truly need assistance can continue to benefit from the opportunities
provided to them by the 8(a) program.
I would urge my colleagues to assist and support this amendment.
In closing, my point on this is the following: As a business is small
and most in need of the 8(a) program, we want to make sure that they
can get as many of these programs as possible, and that will build
their business up. As the business then prospers and grows through the
years, they will continue to get these different 8(a) kinds of
contracts, which give them essentially a 10 percent advantage.
But as the business becomes bigger and stronger, what I'm interested
in doing is creating a sliding scale so that those valuable contracts
will be guaranteed to go to the most needy businesses, and as a
business gets stronger and stronger, the number or the percentage of
those contracts will tend to diminish as they become stronger and more
able to survive on their own.
I think that's a concept that has been understood and to some degree
approved within the committee. The question is how do we mechanically
work that out, and the purpose of this amendment is to give ourselves a
little time to actually figure out mathematically how do you make sure
that those contracts go to the most needy, and as
[[Page H12180]]
people become less needy, that they have less and less dependence on.
I very much appreciate the chairwoman's willingness to work with us
on this, and hopefully we can figure out mechanically some way to do
that that everybody could agree to.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank my colleague from
Missouri, a member of the Small Business Committee, for offering this
amendment. I share the gentleman's concern about the concentration of
contracts in the 8(a) program.
In fact, these businesses are only in the program for 9 years, so it
is important that they make that time count. Unfortunately, according
to partial year data for 2006, the top 10 companies received 40 percent
of the work; 93 percent of companies received no contracts.
The gentleman's amendment requires the SBA to conduct a study to
determine how best to provide additional contracting help to these less
successful 8(a) participants. I appreciate his interest in the 8(a)
program and his willingness to work with us to find a solution to a
long-standing program.
I agree with my colleague that, while a more successful firm is apt
to receive more work than a less experienced company, the purpose of
the program is business development. Given this, the SBA needs to
provide increased contractual assistance to the companies that need it
the most.
The gentleman's amendment would allow us additional time to work
together to craft a solution to ensure that 8(a) businesses, regardless
of their financial strength, will be able to earn contracts. I look
forward to working with the gentleman to perfect this language, and I
appreciate his cooperation.
We are prepared to accept this amendment, and I will yield to Mr.
Chabot for any comments he may have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. We agree with the
comments both in the gentleman's points he made in his presentation as
well as the gentlelady's, and we support the amendment as well.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I urge support of this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Akin).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Welch of Vermont
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed
in House Report 110-407.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Welch of Vermont:
Title IV, add at the end the following (and amend the table
of contents accordingly):
SEC. __. STUDY ON EFFECTIVENESS OF HUBZONE PROGRAM IN
REACHING RURAL AREAS.
The Administrator of the Small Business Administration
shall carry out a study on the effectiveness of the HUBZone
program in reaching rural areas to determine whether there
are needy areas that do not qualify under the program and
whether there are areas that currently qualify under the
program that are inconsistent with the program's original
intent. Not later than 6 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to
Congress a report containing the results of the study and any
recommendations that the Administrator considers appropriate
for alternative ways to evaluate eligibility for HUBZones in
rural areas.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 773, the gentleman from
Vermont (Mr. Welch) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Vermont.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
First, let me thank Chairwoman Velazquez and her staff and Mr. Chabot
and the work that he has done, not just helping me on this amendment
but the extraordinary productivity of the Small Business Committee. It
has been an oasis of bipartisan cooperation and accomplishment in this
legislative session.
I'd also like to thank the cosponsor of this amendment, my colleague
from Iowa, Congressman Bruce Braley, a member of the Small Business
Committee.
We've heard about the HUBZone program, that it provides assistance to
small businesses located in historically underutilized business zones,
or HUBZones, through limited competition contracts, sole source awards,
or price evaluation preferences in full and open competitions. The
Federal Governmentwide contracting goal for HUBZone small businesses
is, as you know, Mr. Chairman, 3 percent. It's a very effective
program.
Across the country, more than 11,000 firms operate and employ people
in distressed areas; 56 of these are located in Vermont. Eligible areas
cover more than 7,000 urban census tracts, 900 rural and suburban
areas.
Historically, the HUBZone program has encountered some difficulties
in rural areas, specifically in the way the program is defined. The
current definition limits what SBA can do in looking at large areas
versus small, and it makes it tough on rural States, like Vermont and
many other rural parts of the Nation.
In Vermont, for example, the entire Northeast Kingdom is a HUBZone,
as well as all of Lamoille County. Other than that, only part of
Burlington, Rutland and St. Albans are in the program, and this has
left out some obviously what would appear to be eligible communities in
towns like Springfield, Brattleboro, Bennington, Barre, Bellows Falls,
and other parts of Rutland City.
Small businesses critical in Vermont, just like everywhere else,
create two out of every three new jobs, produce 39 percent of the gross
national product, and is responsible for more than half of the Nation's
technological innovation.
My amendment with Mr. Braley is very simple. It would direct the SBA
to conduct a study on how the HUBZone program is working to reach rural
areas. The study should examine how HUBZone is defined, whether that
definition works in rural areas as well as it does in urban and
suburban areas. It makes specific recommendations of possible
alternatives to better capture eligible or needy communities that so
often exist in rural areas. Not only does it call on the administration
to review whether needy communities are being left out, it also
assesses whether areas within the program comply with the program's
original intent.
Mr. Braley and I urge our colleagues to support this amendment.
{time} 1245
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, while I am not opposed to the amendment,
I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, it is becoming increasingly concerning
that companies may be receiving HUBZone contracting preferences
inappropriately.
Since 2003, the SBA Inspector General has released two reports
identifying the potential for contracting fraud in this program. Most
recently, in 2006, the IG has found that more than 80 percent of
companies are not eligible 3 years after they were approved. In nearly
20 States, we have identified multimillion dollar properties in areas
designated as HUBZone. If a company located in one of these zones
employed people who lived in similar conditions, they would be eligible
for contracting preferences over small businesses.
The gentleman's amendment addresses the issue that some areas of the
country are designated HUBZone. That should not be. At the same time,
this will also require the SBA to examine why some deserving areas are
not being designated appropriately. To resolve this inconsistency, the
amendment requires the SBA to carry out a study that includes
recommendations for alternative ways to evaluate HUBZone eligibility.
[[Page H12181]]
There is no rational reason why some of the most affluent areas in
the country are eligible for government contracting preferences, while
truly deserving areas are overlooked.
We are prepared to accept this amendment, and I will yield to Mr.
Chabot for any comments he may have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentlelady for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, we have no opposition to this amendment. We would thank
Mr. Welch of Vermont for his hard work on this and his leadership on
the committee.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I urge support of this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Mica
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed
in House Report 110-407.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Mica:
Add at the end of title VI the following (and amend the
table of contents accordingly):
SEC. ___. CLARIFICATION OF APPLICABILITY OF SMALL BUSINESS
SET-ASIDES.
Section 15 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(q) Clarification of Applicability.--For purposes of any
small business set-asides authorized under this section, the
term `contract' shall not exclude any acquisition or order
under any Federal Supply Schedule or Multiple Award
Schedule.''.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 773, the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Mica) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman and my colleagues, I have this amendment No. 4
which would clarify the small business set-aside provisions of the
Small Business Act and require that it, in fact, apply to Federal
contracts not excluding Federal supply schedule and multiple award
scheduled holders.
Now, this is a mandatory provision, and I have accepted some of the
objections from my side of the aisle in not moving forward with this
particular provision. I do have the next amendment in line, which does
deal with a similar issue, and I would like to ask unanimous consent to
withdraw the amendment at this time.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Florida?
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the right to object.
I am surprised that the gentleman is withdrawing his amendment since
I was prepared to accept the amendment. I think this is a problem that
needs to be addressed. I am willing to work with the gentleman to
address this issue.
Mr. MICA. If I may, if the gentlelady would yield, I look forward to
working with you. I am delighted that your side of the aisle was
willing to accept this amendment. I would like to work and move forward
with you in a bipartisan effort.
But in order to get one of the two amendments to work with my side of
the aisle in fairness and not pass a mandatory provision, I am prepared
to withdraw the amendment and work with the gentlelady and the
committee and thank everyone for their consideration.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Mica
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 printed
in House Report 110-407.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Mica:
At the end of title VI, add the following (and amend the
table of contents accordingly):
SEC. ___. SENSE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON
ACQUISITIONS CONDUCTED UNDER THE GENERAL
SERVICES ADMINISTRATION'S FEDERAL SUPPLY
SCHEDULE.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The Small Business Act was adopted by Congress to
ensure that small business concerns receive fair access to,
and a fair share of, Federal government contracts and
subcontracts.
(2) There is a disagreement between the General Services
Administration and the Small Business Administration on
whether the Small Business Act applies to the acquisitions
under the General Services Administration's Federal Supply
Schedule, which account for over $30,000,000,000 in
procurement dollars awarded each year.
(3) As demonstrated in proceedings of the White House
Acquisition Advisory Panel, small businesses hold 79.6
percent of contracts under the Federal Supply Schedule, but
receive only 37.1 percent of dollars awarded under the
Federal Supply Schedule, and this disparity has a significant
impact on the competitive viability of small business
concerns in government contracting.
(b) Sense of the House.--Therefore, it is the sense of the
House of Representatives that small business set-asides
should not be excluded from any acquisitions under the
General Services Administration's Federal Supply Schedule.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 773, the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Mica) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman and Members of the House, Mr. Chabot and the
Chair of the Small Business Committee, I am pleased to present another
amendment, as I indicated in withdrawing the first amendment, that is
not mandatory in nature, but does bring to light and address some of
the problems that we have had with an interpretation of acquisitions
under the GSA Federal supply schedule, some different interpretation.
This amendment would state that it is, in fact, a sense of the House
of Representatives that small business set-asides should not be
excluded from any acquisitions under the General Services
Administration Federal supply schedule.
=========================== NOTE ===========================
On Page H12181, October 30, 2007 the following appeared: that
small business setasides should be excluded from any
The online version should be corrected to read: that small
business set-asides should not be excluded from any
========================= END NOTE =========================
Let me explain, if I may, for just a moment here. The Small Business
Act was adopted by Congress to, in fact, ensure that small businesses
would receive fair access and a fair share of Federal Government
contracts and subcontracts. In fact, section 15 of the act requires
that all contracts below $100,000 be reserved for small businesses.
But, unfortunately, there are some questions that have been raised.
The Small Business Act also requires set-aside opportunities for
service-disabled veterans, for businesses in distress, and companies
owned by women and disadvantaged persons. However, again, here is where
some of the problem lies. There is a disagreement between GSA, the
General Services Administration, and SBA on whether the small business
set-aside applies to acquisitions under the Federal GSA Federal supply
schedule.
Because of this GSA-SBA disagreement on provisions of the Small
Business Act, some small businesses, in fact, are being excluded from
GSA contracting opportunities; and that's not our intent.
What's taken place on September 4, 2007, just a short time ago, SBA
issued an opinion that Small Business Act set-aside requirements do
apply to the GSA schedule. My amendment today would only state that it
is a sense of the House of Representatives that the small business set-
aside should not be excluded from any acquisition under GSA's Federal
supply schedule.
We tried to send a polite message. Part of my reason for being here
is one of the small business persons in my district, Raul Espinosa, he
is a St. Augustine small business owner, his company is a small
business, again, in the heart of my district. He has a company called
Fit Net Purchasing Alliance and Fit Net, is, in fact, a disadvantaged
minority and emerging small business. They operate as a buying group
specializing but not limited to athletic, wellness and rehab market
segments.
This small business operator brought this to my attention, and it is
a great example of how this system should work. When the agencies don't
work, when you have lack of understanding and definition and law, or in
procedures, it's small businesses and someone like Raul Espinosa who
has brought to my attention, as his elected representative, some of the
problems that have arisen.
[[Page H12182]]
This is a clarification amendment. We may want to go beyond this, as
the chairlady has indicated her willingness to do, and possibly from my
side of the aisle I think we can work together and make this work the
way it's intended.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. The gentleman's amendment reflects a sense of the
House that laws requiring competition among only small businesses
should apply to the General Services Administration's Federal supply
schedules.
The GSA consistently points to nearly 80 percent of contracts under
schedules going to small businesses. The reality is that as far as
dollars, small firms get less than 40 percent. With the exception of
the GSA schedules, every agency must ensure that small businesses are
the priority for contracts valued at more than $2,500 and less than
$100,000. Even when the GSA enters into a contract itself, not using
the schedules, the SBA statute applies.
Recently, the GSA's general counsel has pointed to a conflict between
the statute that authorizes the Federal supply schedules and the SBA
statute. Because Congress has not spoken to the contradiction, GSA
relies on its own interpretation.
GSA schedules represent billions of dollars in contracting
opportunities that simply aren't available to small firms because of
the GSA's incorrect interpretation of the statute. The gentleman's
amendment will provide a direction that is missing between these
conflicting statutes, an issue to be supported. Not only will small
businesses see increased dollars as a result; taxpayers will receive
lower costs due to the flexibility and efficiency that small firms are
able to offer.
Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to accept this amendment, and I will
yield to Mr. Chabot for any comments he may have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentlelady for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, we have no opposition to this amendment. We would thank
the gentleman for his hard work in offering the amendment.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I urge support for this amendment and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. MICA. How much time do I have remaining, might I inquire.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Florida has 1 minute remaining.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I won't take all of that minute, but I do
again want to thank again the gentlelady, the Chair of the SBA
Committee, and Mr. Chabot, the ranking member.
This is a great example of how government should work, having a
constituent, a small business person in my district, bring unfairness,
the lack of definition about procedures here with the SBA and GSA, two
government agencies, and try to get a resolution.
I am delighted to be here. I am trying to think back in 15 years if I
have ever brought an amendment up and have everybody agree on it like
this. I don't think so, but it's a special occasion.
Mr. CHABOT. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MICA. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. CHABOT. I was just going to say, that is the way this committee
works, right, Madam Chair?
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Yes.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Moran of Virginia
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 printed
in House Report 110-407.
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. Moran of Virginia:
Title VI, add at the end the following (and amend the table
of contents accordingly):
SEC. __. STUDY ON FRIVOLOUS PROTESTS.
(a) Study.--The Administrator of the Small Business
Administration shall conduct a study to determine, with
respect to small business contracts, whether incumbent
Federal contractors submit frivolous protests to extend the
length of current contracts before protest decisions are
resolved.
(b) Contents.--In conducting the study, the Administrator
shall--
(1) determine the number of Government Accountability
Office bid protests and Small Business Administration size
protests filed by incumbent Federal contractors with respect
to small business contracts, the number of incumbent
contracts extended because of the protest, the extra costs of
extending incumbent contracts during the protest, and the
final rulings of these protests;
(2) determine the financial impact of protests filed by
incumbent Federal contractors on small businesses that were
originally awarded the protested small business contracts,
including costs associated with defending the protests and
costs incurred by Federal agencies;
(3) identify the incumbent Federal contractors that file
the most unsuccessful protests on small business contracts;
and
(4) develop recommendations--
(A) to ease any financial burden on small businesses during
the protest of small business contracts; and
(B) to discourage frivolous protests by incumbent Federal
contractors on small business contracts.
(c) Consultation.--In conducting the study, the
Administrator shall consult with the Government
Accountability Office, any necessary Federal agencies, and
the Office of Federal Procurement Policy.
(d) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to
Congress a report on the results of the study, together with
the recommendations developed under subsection (b)(4).
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 773, the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Moran) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I first want to thank the chairwoman of the Small
Business Committee for her leadership in bringing this bill to the
floor today. I appreciate the membership on both sides of the committee
for finding an agreement on so many issues that are important to small
businesses.
They know that small businesses must overcome long odds and difficult
obstacles in navigating the waters of Federal contracting. Size
thresholds, growth requirements, endless paperwork and late contracts
payments are all part of the challenges that competing small businesses
regularly face.
Yet there is another challenge that has been brought to my attention.
Some small businesses, after being awarded a competitively bid
contract, must face frivolous protests by the incumbent contractors
just for the purposes of delaying the award of a contract. For an
incumbent contractor, there is an economic incentive to protest an
award, even if there is no substance to the challenge. The award to the
small business is thus delayed, and the current contract is retained
until the protest is concluded. It can take months or even years before
the dispute is resolved by the government.
In the meantime, the incumbent contractor can reap millions more for
the extended contract that they had been granted previously but lost
out on. These protests have serious consequences for many small
businesses. During protests, the small businesses must cover their
legal costs. Moreover, they must cover payroll and administrative costs
for the workforce that they hired for the awarding contract. That's
before they ever get paid by the Federal Government. These costs can
cripple some small businesses that run on tight budgets without built-
in overhead for the costly protests.
{time} 1300
In other words, it's an uneven playing field.
This amendment will require the Small Business Administration to
study the degree to which incumbent contractors are submitting
frivolous protests to extend the length of current contracts. It's a
problem I know exists because many of my constituent companies have, in
fact, experienced it firsthand.
The Small Business Administration's study will determine the number
and the merit of GAO and SBA protests that are filed by incumbent
contractors and analyze the number of extended contracts. It'll analyze
the
[[Page H12183]]
extra costs of extending contracts, including the costs to small
businesses that won the initial award of those contracts, and the costs
incurred by Federal agencies as a result.
Finally, it will develop recommendations to ease the financial burden
on small businesses during protests and offer recommendations to
discourage frivolous protests made to squeeze small businesses.
It's clear that not all incumbent contractors submit frivolous bids.
But it's also equally clear that there are some built-in incentives for
incumbents to submit protests that they know have little merit but,
nevertheless, will enable them to profit by the delay.
Mr. Chairman, I ask for support of this amendment so that small
businesses can cope with frivolous incumbents' protests, and I look
forward to working with the Small Business Committee on this ongoing
issue of fairness.
I will retain whatever time is left.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman for
offering this amendment.
Certainly, frivolous litigation is a problem in any scenario. Our
justice system is a valuable tool for the good-faith settling of
claims, but it is costly and time consuming, and should never be used
for purposes other than what was originally intended. If incumbent
contractors are, in fact, using the bid process size protest mechanisms
to extend the length of contracts, this problem needs to be addressed.
Small businesses face enough barriers in their efforts to enter the
Federal marketplace. Having to fight frivolous lawsuits should not be
one of them. If businesses, particularly mega-contractors, are using
their position to prevent qualified contractors from doing Federal work
by exploiting a loophole, the American taxpayer loses out.
The gentleman's amendment addresses this issue by requiring a study
to determine the number of relevant protests, the financial impact on
small businesses, and recommendations for solving any problems
discovered.
The protest process was designed to create due process, not to create
unfair advantages. This study will help to determine if there is a
problem that needs to be further addressed.
I appreciate the gentleman bringing attention to this small business
barrier, and although frivolous lawsuits can be devastating for anyone
in the business community, it can be a particular burden for smaller
companies. Adding litigation costs to an already limited cash flow is
unrealistic for many small businesses, and I will be interested to see
if this is what they're being forced to do.
It would allow our committee to fully understand if further changes
are needed.
We are prepared to accept this amendment, Mr. Chairman, and I will
yield to Mr. Chabot for any comments he may have.
Mr. CHABOT. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
We do not oppose this amendment. We would thank the gentleman and his
staff for their hard work and the research in considering this and
offering the amendment.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I urge support of this amendment, and I
yield back.
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I am prepared to yield back the balance of my
time. I do want to thank Heath Bumgardner of my staff for doing the
work on this. And I've enjoyed working with the Small Business
Committee and their staff on both sides of the aisle.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Baird
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 printed
in House Report 110-407.
Mr. BAIRD. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 7 offered by Mr. Baird:
At the end of title V, insert the following new section
(and amend the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 505. EXAMINATION OF LIST OF GROUPS THE MEMBERS OF WHICH
ARE PRESUMED TO BE SOCIALLY DISADVANTAGED FOR
PURPOSES OF SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS
PROGRAM.
The Administrator of the Small Business Administration
shall examine the list of groups the members of which are
presumed to be socially disadvantaged for purposes of the
Small Disadvantaged Business program under section 8(a) of
the Small Business Act and shall consider whether the list
should be updated to include additional groups. Not later
than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act,
the Administrator shall submit to Congress a report on the
results of the examination.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 773, the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Baird) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. BAIRD. I thank the chairwoman for the time and applaud her for
her leadership of the Small Business Committee. I also want to thank
the ranking member for his leadership as well.
I rise today with an amendment to improve and update the Small
Business Administration's Small Disadvantaged Business Program.
My amendment would direct the administrator of the Small Business
Administration to examine the list of groups under the Disadvantaged
Business Program and consider whether it should be updated to include
additional groups. This amendment does not mandate that any group be
added and would not affect those well-deserving groups already
included.
Let me explain why I believe this issue deserves our attention. The
issue was brought to my attention by an Afghani American entrepreneur
in my own district who is not eligible to receive SBA assistance under
the Small Business Development Program. After researching the matter, I
learned that the SBA does not include Afghani or Iraqi Americans in the
Small Disadvantaged Business Program.
I found this troubling, frankly. As we seek to spread democracy to
other nations around the world, we ought to consider how we are helping
or not helping individuals from those countries who have come to the
United States. For example, at a time when we are promoting the
American Dream in Afghanistan, I believe we should be doing more to
promote this dream to those of Afghani descent who have come to the
United States to seek a better way of life. The same applies to the
refugees who've helped our Nation in its Iraq mission but have been
forced to flee their own lands for having given us that very
assistance.
I hope we would all agree that as we work to spread democracy and
freedom to other nations, we should consider how we're treating
individuals from those countries who have come to the United States.
Should my amendment be accepted, I hope that the administrator will pay
special attention to those countries to which our Armed Forces have
been deployed since September 11.
Some may be surprised to learn that the SBA has not updated their
list of groups since 1989. I believe it's a good time now to revisit
this list and to ensure that this program is not excluding any group
who deserve assistance.
I would ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this commonsense
amendment. I would ask for your support.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's amendment requires the
SBA to review who should be considered socially disadvantaged for entry
into the 8(a) program and whether there should be any updates.
Prior to today, the last Congressional action on the 8(a) program
took place in 1988. For nearly 20 years, the 8(a) program has not seen
one significant change. One aspect of the program, social disadvantage,
has also remained unchanged.
[[Page H12184]]
My colleague's amendment recognizes that our country in 2007 does not
look like it did in 1988. The face of America is changing. The 8(a)
program must reflect the new look of the Nation.
This amendment addresses the concern that in several years the SBA
has not reviewed or expanded who is considered socially disadvantaged.
Given this, deserving business owners are likely being shut out.
We also know, as members of the committee, that without definite
direction the SBA is unlikely to act, let alone in a timely fashion.
The gentleman's amendment will ensure that the SBA examines the issue
and makes changes, as appropriate, within 6 months.
We are prepared, Mr. Chairman, to accept this amendment, and I will
yield to Mr. Chabot for any comments that he might have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentlelady for yielding, and I thank the
gentleman for offering his amendment. He has been willing to, I think,
stand up and make courageous stands on occasion. I think he is to be
commended for that.
Relative to this particular amendment, as I stated in my opening
statement, I have some concerns of the bill in general because of the
segmenting of various groups and sometimes pitting one against another
and being competitive with each other, and so I can't say that I
honestly would be in favor of a number of additional groups again
further segmenting this.
But this just calls for a study and doesn't implement any particular
groups or propose any additional new groups. So, for that reason, I
would not oppose the amendment, and I want to thank him for his
thoughtful consideration of this.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I urge the adoption of this amendment,
and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BAIRD. I thank the gentlelady, the Chair, and the ranking member
for their support of this. Point well taken. This does call for a
study. I think there are a number of groups under criteria that
establish this program, merit discussion and examination, and
particularly those who have come to our aid overseas. I'm familiar with
some really heart-wrenching stories of folks who have been
extraordinarily helpful to our country and face great personal hardship
in Iraq and in Afghanistan. If we can help them rebuild their lives
over here if they're forced to flee their country, that would be a
meritorious deed.
But again, this is just calling for a study and, therefore, I urge
its passage. I am grateful for the support.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite of Florida
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 printed
in House Report 110-407.
Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 8 offered by Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite of
Florida:
At the end of title VI, add the following new section (and
amend the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 602. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION LIAISON.
(a) Establishment.--The Administrator of the Small Business
Administration shall create a liaison position whose duty it
is to ensure that section 2(i) of the Small Business Act is
carried out.
(b) Functions.--In carrying out the duty described in
subsection (a), the liaison shall consult with the Assistant
Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security for United
States Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 773, the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.
Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Mr. Chair, section 2(i) of the
Small Business Act states that only those lawfully in the United States
shall receive funds under the Act.
My amendment establishes a Small Business Liaison to ensure that
section will be followed. That's what the amendment does. It mirrors
language contained in my bill, H.R. 3496, which requires the liaison to
work in tandem with the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement group.
Listen up, America. We are the land of opportunity, and small
business owners make up the backbone of our economy. However, Congress
cannot continue to encourage and foster small businesses in our Nation,
if we are not making those here legally an actual priority.
This simple amendment will ensure that small business loans and
grants are going to those who follow the immigration rules that we have
in place. Therefore, I urge the Members of this body to support this
amendment.
And I certainly want to thank the gentlelady from my former home
State of New York for working with us on this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, the amendment offered by Ms. Ginny
Brown-Waite seeks to ensure that taxpayer dollars go to small
businesses that are complying with our immigration laws and not
benefiting those that are breaking these laws.
While currently the Small Business Administration's Act prohibits the
use of funds to benefit or assist individuals that are not lawfully
within the United States, this change would allow for greater
accountability. Creating a liaison between the Small Business
Administration and the Department of Homeland Security on this matter
will increase oversight and ensure that the agency's budget is being
spent lawfully, efficiently and responsibly.
I also am grateful to have an ally in fighting this administration's
efforts to reduce resources at the Small Business Administration. The
fact is that the Small Business Administration needs personnel in
carrying out this provision, as well as other critical operations.
We share the goal of ensuring that no funds expended under the Small
Business Contracting Programs Improvement Act are used in such a
manner. Sometimes having a law on the books isn't enough, and this
amendment will go a step further in making sure that someone is there
at the SBA actively enforcing this important spending provision.
We are prepared to accept this amendment, Mr. Chairman, and now I
will yield to Mr. Chabot for any comments he may have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. And I want to
compliment and thank the gentlelady from Florida for offering this
important amendment. I think it certainly is a good addition to the
bill.
I think it's clear that most Americans would only want those that are
in this country legally to benefit from these types of taxpayer-funded
programs. So it's a very good amendment, and I want to thank you for
offering it, and we certainly will support it.
{time} 1315
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I certainly want to
thank the chairwoman for her cooperation on this. I think the key word,
the operative word, here is obviously ``accountability.'' And I think
this amendment will help to improve an already good bill.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mrs. Gillibrand
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9 printed
in House Report 110-407.
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
[[Page H12185]]
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 9 offered by Mrs. Gillibrand:
At the end of title II, add the following (and amend the
table of contents accordingly):
SEC. ___. PROHIBITION ON CONTRACT AWARDS TO CONTRACTORS IN
VIOLATION OF IMMIGRATION LAWS.
Any employer found, based on a determination by the
Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General to
have engaged in a pattern or practice of hiring, recruiting
or referring for a fee, for employment in the United States
an alien knowing the person is an unauthorized alien shall be
subject to debarment from the receipt of future Federal
contracts under this Act.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 773, the gentlewoman from
New York (Mrs. Gillibrand) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
First, I would like to thank my fellow New York colleague, Chairwoman
Velazquez, for her leadership on this bill and for her constant effort
to help our small businesses grow and prosper in America.
Small businesses are the foundation of upstate New York's economy.
Small businesses represent over 99 percent of all employers and half of
all private sector employees. More importantly, small businesses
generate up to 80 percent of new jobs in America.
The bill that is on the floor today would allow upstate New York's
small businesses to have increased opportunities to compete for Federal
contracts against larger companies. Last year small businesses received
only 21.5 percent of Federal contracts, which is much too small; and I
look forward to this bill's passing on the floor that will allow our
small businesses, especially disabled veteran-owned businesses, to
compete for Federal contracts.
My amendment to this bill is very simple: businesses that continue to
break the law by hiring illegal aliens should not be eligible for
Federal contracts.
Mr. Chairman, we must reward businesses that play by the rules and
punish those who do not. It is important that we fix our broken
immigration system, and an important component of that is to cut off
availability of jobs for undocumented workers, which can only be done
when employers refuse to hire them. There are an estimated 12 million
illegal aliens in this country; and if jobs are not available to them,
then there will not be an incentive for them to come or remain here in
America illegally. Hiring illegal aliens is against the law in America,
and my amendment ensures that employers who knowingly hire illegal
aliens cannot have access to the over $400 billion in Federal contracts
that are awarded each year. This amendment will ensure accountability
with taxpayers' money by preventing businesses who hire illegal aliens
from receiving Federal contracts.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, while I am not opposed to the amendment,
I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague from New
York for her amendment to ensure that Federal contractors are complying
with the immigration laws of our Nation. I would like to ensure that
the interpretation of the debarment provisions referenced in the
gentlewoman's amendment are consistent with the debarment process as
provided in the Federal Acquisition Regulation.
Mr. Chairman, small businesses face many obstacles in securing a
workforce, and one of them is ensuring that their employees have the
proper legal status. All of our employers are expected to comply with
our immigration laws, and they should not be forced to compete in the
Federal marketplace with those who are skirting these laws. Small
businesses should be rewarded for ensuring that their employees are
here legally.
My colleague's amendment ensures that no contractor who has a pattern
of knowingly employing unauthorized workers will receive contracts
under the Small Business Contracting Program Improvements Act.
Furthermore, contractors found to be in violation of the employment
provisions required under immigration law will face the possibility of
debarment.
Participation in SBA's procurement programs is a privilege and not a
right. As such, we expect participants to uphold the law. Those
businesses that choose not to comply should not receive the benefits of
SBA contract assistance.
I appreciate the gentlewoman's attention to this issue and commitment
to ensuring that contractors who choose to violate immigration law will
not benefit from it. While there may be disagreement on reforming our
immigration system, we all agree that employers must comply with those
laws that are on the books. This is simply a matter of fairness.
We are prepared to accept the amendment, and I will yield to Mr.
Chabot for any comments he may have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
I strongly support the gentlewoman from New York's amendment. I think
it certainly improves the bill. It's just clear, I think, many, many
Members on both sides of the aisle want to make clear that we don't
think that taxpayer dollars ought to be going for illegal immigrants.
And companies that are knowingly hiring people who are here illegally
should not be able to benefit from any Federal dollars. And I think the
gentlewoman by offering this amendment has improved the bill, and I
want to thank her for offering this.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I urge support of this amendment, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. I thank the gentleman and I thank Madam Chairman.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Gillibrand).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Lampson
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10 printed
in House Report 110-407.
Mr. LAMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 10 offered by Mr. Lampson:
At the end of title VI, add the following:
SEC. __. PROHIBITION ON BUSINESS-CLASS OR FIRST-CLASS AIRLINE
TRAVEL.
In carrying out the provisions of the Small Business
Contracting Program Improvements Act, the Small Business
Administrator or any employee may not purchase business-class
or first-class airline travel in contravention of sections
301-10.122 through 301-10.124 of title 41, Code of Federal
Regulations.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 773, the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Lampson) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. LAMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I certainly appreciate the work that the
chairwoman of the Small Business Committee and the sponsor of the Small
Business Contracting Program Improvements Act and the rest of the
committee are doing on behalf of small businesses, the lifeblood of
America.
As we consider the Small Business Contracting Program Improvements
Act, we must be mindful of how wasteful government spending impacts
hardworking American families. Citizens expect Congress to be good
stewards of taxpayer dollars; and when we allow irresponsible fiscal
practices to continue in our government, then we set a bad example for
our Nation and create a reckless blueprint for future spending.
So that's why I have introduced this amendment today. My amendment
will clarify guidelines for premium travel by Small Business
Administration employees when carrying out provisions of this act. A
recent report by the GAO demonstrates that agencies are failing to
follow Federal guidelines. This amendment will codify these regulations
in order to curb wasteful spending by Federal agencies. Ending reckless
spending is essential to regaining
[[Page H12186]]
the trust of American citizens and restoring fiscal responsibility.
This amendment also offers a direct method of guidance by referencing
the sections of the Code of Federal Regulations related to premium
travel for Federal employees. A similar amendment applying to the
Department of Commerce employees passed earlier this year as a part of
the Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations bill.
So as we continue to tackle large instances of government waste and
abuse, let's not overlook smaller steps that we can take. I encourage
support for this simple way to save taxpayer dollars and to reinstate
fiscal responsibility and good government practices.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, while I am not opposed to the amendment,
I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague from Texas
for his amendment.
Fiscal responsibility is a serious issue, and so is running an
effective government. As we are currently operating with a budget
deficit, we must do all we can to eradicate wasteful spending. Many
times we focus on larger issues of waste and abuse and forget about the
smaller problems that would be easier to solve. When we cut costs, even
just a little, it can add up to big savings.
The SBA has consistently been asked to do more with less. Placing
these restrictions on SBA funds will reduce unnecessary spending,
giving the agency more money to use to truly assist small businesses.
An agency already operating with less than its ideal budget should not
be spending crucial funds on premium travel.
I appreciate the gentleman's attention to this issue and his effort
to increase accountability in our government and require responsible
spending decisions.
Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to accept this amendment, and I will
yield to Mr. Chabot for any comments he may have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
We do not oppose this amendment. I'm more used to dealing with the
gentleman from Texas on some other issues, particularly his commitment
as chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus, and so many
other issues. We have worked together on a whole range of issues
attempting to protect children in this country. I want to thank him for
his leadership in that area, and I also thank him for offering this
amendment.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I urge support of this amendment, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LAMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I certainly appreciate the kind words of
the ranking member on the Small Business Committee. Certainly, he too
is a leader in the area of child exploitation.
As one of the cochairs of the Congressional Caucus on Missing and
Exploited Children, you do great work. We appreciate all the attention.
And I particularly appreciate the gentlewoman from New York for
allowing me to introduce this amendment and for the support that she
has given to us on it.
I urge support of the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. There being no further amendments, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Salazar) having assumed the chair, Mr. Holden, Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3867) to
update and expand the procurement programs of the Small Business
Administration, and for other purposes, pursuant to House Resolution
773, he reported the bill back to the House with sundry amendments
adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment reported from the
Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Chabot
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. CHABOT. Yes, I am, in its current form.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. CHABOT moves to recommit the bill H.R. 3867 to the
Committee on Small Business with instructions to report the
same back to the House forthwith with the following
amendment:
Strike section 101(b).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Bartlett from Maryland was previously going to offer the motion
to recommit. He's not here; so I am going to offer it in his place, and
I will be very brief.
This motion to recommit is really very simple. It reinstates the
requirement that requires the government to set aside for competition
contracts for small businesses located in HUBZones. As already noted,
there is no reason to punish HUBZone firms by eliminating a mandatory
competition requirement.
{time} 1330
This motion will ensure that HUBZone firms will be able to carry out
their purpose to redevelop low-income areas.
I also would just like to reiterate something that I said earlier
when we were dealing with the overall bill in general, and that is that
I want to again compliment the gentlelady from New York, Chairwoman
Velazquez, for reaching out to the minority, as she has in the past, in
trying to work together. There were just philosophical differences
which could not be overcome on this bill. But the committee has worked
very well together in a bipartisan manner, and I want to thank her for
that cooperation.
It is my intention to continue to work together on bills in the
future because we have supported most of the bills that come out of the
Small Business Committee, and I think that's good for small business in
this country because that's something that we do have in common, and
that is, that we believe to our core that future job growth in this
country is dependent upon the vitality of small businesses. And small
businesses in this country have a lot of things that they have to deal
with: high health insurance rates for their employees, energy costs
that have been going through the roof, a tax structure which is, at
this point, unclear as to where it's going to be in the future. That's
why many of us on this side of the aisle believe to our core that we
need to make those tax cuts that were passed back in 2001 and in 2003
permanent. We ought to allow small businesses to know what their taxes
are going to be like next year and the year after and the year after so
that they can depend upon that tax structure to grow their business and
to make investments so that they can create jobs. Because ultimately,
that's what it's all about, to keep the economy thriving so that we can
create more and more jobs for people in this country. And keeping taxes
low is probably the best thing that we can do to allow the small
business community in this country to grow and prosper.
So again, I want to thank the members of the committee, the staff,
and the gentlewoman for her cooperation and reiterate that, although a
good-faith effort was made, we do support this motion to recommit and
we do oppose and would urge my colleagues to oppose the overall bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentlewoman from New York opposed to
the motion?
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I am.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
[[Page H12187]]
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, this is simple. This motion to recommit
will take away contracts from veterans with service disabilities.
At this time, I would like to submit for the Record a letter from the
American Legion that clearly states, ``We steadfastly oppose any
amendments to alter the legislation's provisions that assist veteran-
owned businesses in section 101.''
The American Legion,
Washington, DC, October 17, 2007.
Hon. Nydia M. Velazquez,
Chairwoman, House Committee on Small Business,
Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairwoman Velazquez: On behalf of the 2.7 million
members of The American Legion I am writing to strongly
endorse the Small Business Contracting Program Improvements
Act, which is scheduled for markup in the Committee on Small
Business as early as this week. Further, we steadfastly
oppose any amendments to alter the legislation's provisions
that assist veteran-owned businesses in section 101.
Recently, the entrepreneurial needs of America's veterans
have been brought to the forefront, particularly those that
have sustained a disability as a result of their active-duty
service in the armed forces. With nearly a quarter of newly
discharged veterans considering starting their own
businesses, the importance of opening the federal marketplace
to veterans, who are entrepreneurs, has never before been so
important.
Unfortunately, there has been no appreciable progress
toward meeting the three percent service-connected disabled
veterans' government-wide contracting goal. Federal agencies
have fallen well short, accomplishing levels of only 0.2
percent in 2003; 0.4 percent in 2004; 0.6 percent in 2005;
and 0.9 percent in 2006. As a result, Congress must take
stronger action.
We are pleased that the Small Business Contracting Program
Improvements Act takes the clear and compelling action
necessary to ensure that veterans receive their fair share of
federal contracting opportunities. This legislation will
result in increases to contracts awarded to veteran-owned
companies. As the veterans' community continues to grow, the
time is now to enact this important initiative.
We thank you, Chairwoman Velazquez, for introducing this
legislation and we applaud the Committee for moving this
measure in an expeditious manner. The American Legion looks
forward to working with the Committee on this and future
legislation to assist this country's small businesses.
Sincerely,
James E. Koutz,
Chairman, National Economic Commission.
The ranking member knows that this amendment was introduced in the
committee's markup and it was defeated 16-8.
Further, let me say that the underlying bill ensures that service-
disabled veterans are given a preference in seeking Federal contracts.
These individuals have consistently been shut out of the Federal
contracts. Despite a 3 percent service-disabled veteran contracting
goal since 1999, the highest accomplishment is less than 1 percent.
These men and women have served our country, and they deserve better.
If the motion to recommit is adopted, and I want to make this clear,
if this motion to recommit is adopted, veterans will no longer be a top
priority. There will be no guarantee that service-disabled veterans
will benefit from additional contracting opportunities. Instead, we
would have competing programs, which is what we tried in this bill to
rid ourselves of. Agencies will be more inclined to overlook disabled
veterans in their award for sole source contracts.
And also, I would like to add for the Record, that this type of
change is opposed by the American Legion, the National Black Chamber of
Commerce, the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the U.S. Women's Chamber of
Commerce, and the Associated General Contractors.
This motion will block business opportunity for service-disabled
veterans. The American Legion opposed this motion, and we agree that
this motion to recommit will be making it harder for veterans to secure
Federal contracts.
You know, these are men and women coming back to our country from
Afghanistan and Iraq. These are injured, service-disabled veterans who
deserve the support of the American public and our Federal Government.
I ask Members to oppose this motion to recommit. As I mentioned, it
was defeated 16-8 in the markup. This is merely an attempt at a second
bite of the apple, and it should be defeated.
Mr. CHABOT. Would the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I would yield.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
It is our view that veterans would not be in any way adversely
affected if this motion to commit were to pass because they are already
covered by the sole source area in the bill. So we just have an honest
disagreement on this. We believe there is no way that veterans would be
adversely affected if this motion to recommit would be passed.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Let me just say to the gentleman that I don't know why
you insist this section 101 to be stricken when you clearly know that
this amendment was defeated in committee, not by Democrats, but
Democrats and Republicans. It is opposed by every veteran organization
in America.
Again, it will take Federal contracting away from disabled veterans.
You know that we have failed these veterans before, and what we are
doing is making sure that they have an opportunity to get a fair share
of Federal contracts.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair will reduce to 5 minutes
the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of passage.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 177,
nays 240, not voting 15, as follows:
[Roll No. 1016]
YEAS--177
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Tom
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gilchrest
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--240
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Castor
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
[[Page H12188]]
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Frank (MA)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--15
Carson
Cubin
Deal (GA)
Hinojosa
Hulshof
Jefferson
Jindal
Kucinich
Paul
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (NJ)
Tancredo
Weller
Wilson (OH)
{time} 1402
Messrs. EDWARDS, COHEN, GENE GREEN of Texas, THOMPSON of Mississippi,
CROWLEY, SHAYS, CUMMINGS and DENT and Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California,
Mrs. MALONEY of New York, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mrs. DAVIS of California
and Mrs. BIGGERT changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Messrs. HOBSON, JORDAN of Ohio and CANTOR changed their vote from
``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 334,
noes 80, not voting 18, as follows:
[Roll No. 1017]
AYES--334
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Butterfield
Buyer
Camp (MI)
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carter
Castle
Castor
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Drake
Edwards
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Forbes
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hayes
Heller
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Platts
Poe
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--80
Akin
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bilbray
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Boustany
Broun (GA)
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Chabot
Coble
Conaway
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, Tom
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Everett
Feeney
Flake
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hensarling
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
Kingston
Lamborn
Lewis (CA)
Linder
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCrery
McHenry
Miller, Gary
Musgrave
Myrick
Nunes
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Price (GA)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Sensenbrenner
Shadegg
Smith (NE)
Terry
Thornberry
Wilson (SC)
NOT VOTING--18
Carson
Cubin
Deal (GA)
Herger
Hinojosa
Hulshof
Jefferson
Jindal
Jones (OH)
Kucinich
Paul
Pryce (OH)
Sessions
Simpson
Stupak
Tancredo
Weller
Wilson (OH)
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised 2
minutes remain in this vote.
{time} 1408
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 1017 I was meeting
with representatives of the Turkish community. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
____________________