[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 23, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H2569-H2572]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      CONTRACTORS AND FEDERAL SPENDING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2008

  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill 
(H.R. 3033) to improve Federal agency awards and oversight of contracts 
and assistance and to strengthen accountability of the Government-wide 
suspension and debarment system, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 3033

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

        This Act may be cited as the ``Contractors and Federal 
     Spending Accountability Act of 2008''.

     SEC. 2. DATABASE FOR CONTRACTING OFFICERS AND SUSPENSION AND 
                   DEBARMENT OFFICIALS.

       (a) In General.--Subject to the authority, direction, and 
     control of the Director of the Office of Management and 
     Budget, the Administrator of General Services shall establish 
     and maintain a database of information regarding integrity 
     and performance of persons awarded Federal contracts and 
     grants for use by Federal officials having authority over 
     contracts and grants.
       (b) Persons Covered.--The database shall cover any person 
     awarded a Federal contract or grant if any information 
     described in subsection (c) exists with respect to such 
     person.
       (c) Information Included.--With respect to a person awarded 
     a Federal contract or grant, the database shall include 
     information (in the form of a brief description) for at least 
     the most recent 5-year period regarding--
       (1) any civil or criminal proceeding, or any administrative 
     proceeding to the extent that such proceeding results in both 
     a finding of fault on the part of the person and the payment 
     of restitution to a government of $5,000 or more, concluded 
     by the Federal Government or any State government against the 
     person, and any amount paid by the person to the Federal 
     Government or a State government;
       (2) all Federal contracts and grants awarded to the person 
     that were terminated in such period due to default;
       (3) all Federal suspensions and debarments of the person in 
     that period;
       (4) all Federal administrative agreements entered into by 
     the person and the Federal Government in that period to 
     resolve a suspension or debarment proceeding and, to the 
     maximum extent practicable, agreements involving a suspension 
     or debarment proceeding entered into by the person and a 
     State government in that period; and
       (5) all final findings by a Federal official in that period 
     that the person has been determined not to be a responsible 
     source under either subparagraph (C) or (D) of section 4(7) 
     of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 
     403(7)).
       (d) Requirements Relating to Information in Database.--
       (1) Direct input and update.--The Administrator shall 
     design and maintain the database in a manner that allows the 
     appropriate officials of each Federal agency to directly 
     input and update in the database information relating to 
     actions it has taken with regard to contractors or grant 
     recipients.
       (2) Timeliness and accuracy.--The Administrator shall 
     develop policies to require--
       (A) the timely and accurate input of information into the 
     database;
       (B) notification of any covered person when information 
     relevant to the person is entered into the database; and
       (C) an opportunity for any covered person to append 
     comments to information about such person in the database.
       (e) Availability.--
       (1) Availability to all federal agencies.--The 
     Administrator shall make the database available to all 
     Federal agencies.
       (2) Availability to the public.--The Administrator shall 
     make the database available to the public by posting the 
     database on the General Services Administration website.
       (3) Limitation.--This subsection does not require the 
     public availability of information that is exempt from public 
     disclosure under section 552(b) of title 5, United States 
     Code.

     SEC. 3. REVIEW OF DATABASE.

       (a) Requirement to Review Database.--Prior to the award of 
     a contract or grant, an official responsible for awarding a 
     contract or grant shall review the database established under 
     section 2.
       (b) Requirement to Document Present Responsibility.--In the 
     case of a prospective awardee of a contract or grant against 
     which a judgment or conviction has been rendered more than 
     once within any 3-year period for the same or similar 
     offences, if each judgment or conviction is a cause for 
     debarment, the official responsible for awarding the contract 
     or grant shall document why the prospective awardee is 
     considered presently responsible.

     SEC. 4. DISCLOSURE IN APPLICATIONS.

       (a) Requirement.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, Federal regulations shall be 
     amended to require that in applying for any Federal grant or 
     submitting a proposal or bid for any Federal contract a 
     person shall disclose in writing information described in 
     section 2(c).
       (b) Covered Contracts and Grants.--This section shall apply 
     only to contracts and grants in an amount greater than the 
     simplified acquisition threshold, as defined in section 4(11) 
     of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 
     401(11)).

     SEC. 5. ROLE OF INTERAGENCY COMMITTEE.

       (a) Requirement.--The Interagency Committee on Debarment 
     and Suspension shall--
       (1) resolve issues regarding which of several Federal 
     agencies is the lead agency having responsibility to initiate 
     suspension or debarment proceedings;
       (2) coordinate actions among interested agencies with 
     respect to such action;
       (3) encourage and assist Federal agencies in entering into 
     cooperative efforts to pool resources and achieve operational 
     efficiencies in the Governmentwide suspension and debarment 
     system;
       (4) recommend to the Office of Management and Budget 
     changes to Government suspension and debarment system and its 
     rules, if such recommendations are approved by a majority of 
     the Interagency Committee;
       (5) authorize the Office of Management and Budget to issue 
     guidelines that implement those recommendations;
       (6) authorize the chair of the Committee to establish 
     subcommittees as appropriate to best enable the Interagency 
     Committee to carry out its functions; and
       (7) submit to the Congress an annual report on--
       (A) the progress and efforts to improve the suspension and 
     debarment system;
       (B) member agencies' active participation in the 
     committee's work; and
       (C) a summary of each agency's activities and 
     accomplishments in the Governmentwide debarment system.
       (b) Definition.--The term ``Interagency Committee on 
     Debarment and Suspension'' means such committee constituted 
     under sections 4 and 5 and of Executive Order 12549.

     SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF INDEPENDENT AGENCIES.

        Any agency, commission, or organization of the Federal 
     Government to which Executive Order 12549 does not apply is 
     authorized to participate in the Governmentwide suspension 
     and debarment system and may recognize the suspension or 
     debarment issued by an executive branch agency in its own 
     procurement or assistance activities.

     SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

        There are authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Administrator of General Services such funds as may be 
     necessary to establish the database described in section 2.

     SEC. 8. REPORT TO CONGRESS.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator of 
     General Services shall submit to Congress a report.
       (b) Contents of Report.--The report shall contain the 
     following:
       (1) A list of all databases that include information about 
     Federal contracting and Federal grants.

[[Page H2570]]

       (2) Recommendations for further legislation or 
     administrative action that the Administrator considers 
     appropriate to create a centralized, comprehensive Federal 
     contracting and Federal grant database.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Towns) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) each will 
control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.


                             General Leave

  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 
5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3033, the Contractors and Federal Spending 
Accountability Act of 2008, will help give Federal contracting 
officials the information they need to award contracts to most 
deserving companies. The Federal Government must spend taxpayer dollars 
as efficiently and responsibly as possible, and it is our job to make 
sure that happens. This bill will help Federal officials to decide 
whether or not a company bidding for a contract is responsible enough 
to get it.
  If someone has to spend a lot of money on something, like a car, the 
responsible thing to do is to make sure that the person or dealership 
you will be doing business with is responsible and won't rip you off. 
You would want to find all the information that you can about how they 
do business.
  The Federal Government must spend taxpayer dollars as efficiently and 
responsibly as possible, and it is our job to make sure that happens. 
This bill will help Federal officials to decide whether or not a 
company bidding for a contract is responsible enough to get it.
  H.R. 3033 mandates the creation of a database that will record legal 
proceedings brought by the Federal Government and State governments 
against contractors. It will also record suspensions and debarments, 
whether previous contracts have been terminated for cause, and any 
previous finding by contracting officials that a company does not have 
a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics. All Federal 
officials who award contracts will have access to this data, and it 
will go a long way to help them make informed decisions about the 
companies they are considering.
  The bill also requires that if the database shows that someone is a 
repeat offender, two or more serious convictions or judgments for the 
same issue within 3 years, then the contracting officer has to explain 
in writing why they believe the contractor is currently responsible 
before a new contract can be awarded. This is another commonsense idea 
that will save money for the taxpayers.
  I want to thank my friend and colleague from New York, Carolyn 
Maloney, for sponsoring this bill and for putting so much work into it. 
When she was on the New York City Council, she passed a similar law. 
The New York City database, called Vendex, has been a great success, 
and it is the model of the Federal database that this bill creates.
  I also want to thank the chairman of our full committee, Congressman 
Waxman. Of course, I want to thank Ranking Member Davis, and I want to 
thank the ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. Bilbray, for his 
support as well.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3033 will be an important tool to help Federal 
officials make the best use of taxpayer dollars when awarding 
contracts. I am proud to be a cosponsor of the bill, and I urge my 
colleagues to support it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, today we rise to take up H.R. 3033, the Contractors and 
Federal Spending Accountability Act. This legislation would provide 
Federal contracting officials with information about contractors' 
performance and ethics.
  Maintaining an ethical contractor base is critical to the integrity 
of the procurement system and to our Nation's governance. This bill 
would make a number of changes to the procurement laws in an attempt to 
ensure that government only contracts with responsible firms. It will 
require the General Services Administration to establish a publicly 
accessible Web site database containing information on contractors' 
performance and ethics.
  Specifically the database would be required to include civil, 
criminal and administrative proceedings concluded by Federal and State 
Governments against Federal contractors or grant assistance recipients 
which result both in a finding of fault and a payment of $5,000 or more 
to the government within the most recent 5-year period.
  The database would also include Federal suspensions and debarments 
against a contractor and related administrative agreements, contract 
terminations for default by the contractor, and final determinations 
that a prospective contractor is not a ``responsible'' source because 
of performance, integrity, or ethics concerns.
  Further, the bill would require the contracting or grant official to 
review the database to determine if, during any 3-year period, a 
potential awardee has had, more than once, a judgment or conviction for 
an offense which would constitute a cause for debarment. And if so, the 
official must document why a prospective awardee is eligible for 
award--why the prospective awardee is ``presently responsible.''
  Additionally, the bill would require any entity seeking a Federal 
contract or grant to disclose all of the information required to be 
included in the database. Since H.R. 3033 was introduced, it has been 
much improved. The original version would have created a draconian 
enforcement measure, establishing a ``blacklist'' which would defame 
and degrade firms merely accused of wrongdoing, not necessarily 
convicted or adjudicated but simply accused.
  The Chamber of Commerce sent out a letter to Members dated April 22 
opposing this legislation. They urged Members to oppose H.R. 3033. 
While I appreciate the Chamber's efforts on these issues, and I agree 
with the concerns that they raise, the version of the bill discussed in 
their letter is the version that was reported by the committee, a bill 
which I also did not support. But it is precisely for the reason 
described in the Chamber's letter that the bill was modified before we 
agreed to bring this bill to the House floor on suspension today. I 
want to note for the Record that the issues that we raised, the 
minority raised in committee and raised by the Chamber, have been fully 
addressed. I fully support this legislation now.
  It was unclear to me what beneficial purpose would have been served 
by the collection of the information originally. But the chairman and 
the sponsor were open to our suggestions to revise the bill to include 
only concluded proceedings as opposed to mere allegations.
  However, the most problematic section of H.R. 3033, as introduced, 
was the ``two strikes and you're out'' provision. That section would 
have mandated the automatic initiation of debarment proceedings against 
firms convicted of two offenses which otherwise would be a cause for 
debarment. It is appropriate to use the debarment process to prevent 
bad actors from getting Federal contracts, but there is no need to 
limit the discretion of the government's debarment officials in 
bringing these actions at the appropriate time. It smacks of 
punishment, and punishment is not what has long been and should remain 
the intent of the suspension debarment process. That process is to 
protect the government, not to punish wrongdoers.
  I appreciate the opportunity to work with Chairman Waxman and the 
author of this legislation, Mrs. Maloney, to delete what I felt was a 
misguided concept and replace it with the provisions in the bill we are 
considering today, which requires officials to take a careful look at 
firms with multiple convictions to determine their present 
responsibility.
  As I pointed out during the markup of the bill, under the original 
``two strikes and you're out'' provision, many contractors relied upon 
by the government, for example the Boeing company, would have debarment 
proceedings initiated against them. In the relevant time period, for 
example, Boeing had been involved in the following

[[Page H2571]]

incidents which could have resulted in the initiation of debarment 
proceedings:
  In 2007, a $1.1 million settlement for alleged over billing for 
aircraft parts.
  In 2006, a $30 million payment to settle claims that the nearly 100 
neighbors of the Santa Susana Field nuclear research facility were 
sickened by decades of radioactive and toxic contamination. The 
settlement, which ended an 8-year legal battle, was supposed to remain 
confidential, but one of the plaintiffs divulged the terms to the local 
media.
  In 2004, a $615 million settlement to resolve the Darleen Druyun 
scandal and other pending investigations.
  In 2003, an $18 million settlement for alleged violations of the Arms 
Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulation, a 
settlement to the Boeing company.
  In 2003, a $6 million settlement for violations of the Arms Export 
Control Act, involving further transfer of data to China.
  In 2003, a $4 million fine for violations of the Arms Export Control 
Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulation.
  In 2003, a $2.5 million settlement for alleged defective pricing.
  In 2003, a $490,000 settlement for a qui tam action for alleged false 
claims.
  Additionally, Boeing business units were suspended from receiving new 
Federal contracts from July 24, 2003, to March 4, 2005. The suspensions 
were based on a pending criminal investigation into Boeing's unlawful 
possession and use of a competitor's proprietary documents in 
connection with the competition for a U.S. Air Force contract. Under 
the bill as introduced, this involvement would have resulted in 
automatic debarment proceedings.
  I was certain my colleagues would not have wanted that, and after I 
pointed this out, they realized it was not realistic. But not only 
would Boeing be affected, other Federal contractors with comparable 
records of involvement with the legal and administrative remedies 
available to the government would have been similarly impacted. This is 
not a sign contractors are all corrupt, it is a sign the system is 
working and bad behavior is being rooted out.
  It is difficult to argue against contracting officers having 
available to them information concerning concluded State and Federal 
civil, criminal and administrative proceedings resulting in findings of 
fault and fines as well as Federal suspensions, debarments, and default 
terminations. The value of placing such information on a public Web 
site isn't clear unless it would be to punish or intimidate firms, so I 
continue to believe our time would have been better spent on 
legislation to improve our acquisition system.
  This bill, while much improved, and while I support it, will do 
little to improve the government's ability to get the best value goods 
and services it needs at fair and reasonable prices.
  With that said, I thank Chairman Waxman, Mrs. Maloney and the staff 
for their willingness to work with us and the Armed Services Committee 
to make this a better bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from New 
York (Mrs. Maloney) who is the person who sponsored the bill and has 
done some tremendous work.

                              {time}  1200

  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his 
hard work on so many important issues to the great city of New York and 
our country.
  I rise in strong support of H.R. 3033, the Contractor and Federal 
Spending Accountability Act, legislation I have authored to help bring 
integrity and accountability to the Federal procurement system. I want 
to thank Chairman Waxman and Ranking Member Davis, Chairman Towns and 
their staffs, and my own staff, for working so hard on this 
legislation.
  The bill before us today has been modified from the version reported 
out by the committee to address concerns raised by some Members, 
including Ranking Member Davis. I want to thank him for his positive 
efforts on this bill, and for many positive efforts he has given to 
this committee in working in a collaborative way, and express my regret 
that he is retiring this year from this body.
  Also, the concerns of the Chamber of Commerce have been addressed in 
the underlying bill. H.R. 3033, as amended, will fortify the current 
Federal suspension and debarment system by establishing a centralized 
and comprehensive database on actions taken against Federal contractors 
and assist participants requiring a description of each of these 
actions.
  While the government has several separate information systems, 
currently there is no centralized comprehensive database for 
contracting officers to review prior performance and to review 
information on contractors before making an award or an additional 
contract award to contractors.
  It requires the contracting officer to document why a prospective 
awardee is deemed responsible if that awardee has two or more offenses 
which would be cause for debarment within a 3-year period. H.R. 3033, 
as amended, specifies and clarifies that a ``concluded'' proceeding is 
one in which there is a finding of fault on the part of the person and 
the payment of restitution to a Federal or State government of $5,000 
or more.
  Additionally, it improves and clarifies the role of the Interagency 
Committee on Debarments and Suspension, and requires the administrator 
of General Services to report to Congress within 180 days with 
recommendations for further action to create the database.
  This legislation has been strongly and consistently supported by the 
Campaign for Quality Construction and the Project on Government 
Oversight.
  Currently the Federal Government's watchdogs, the Federal suspension 
and debarment officials, lack the information that they need to protect 
our business interests and taxpayers' dollars.
  This system will give government procurement officers who are making 
these decisions more information about the qualifications and track 
records of the contractors. Beyond a listing of currently debarred or 
suspended persons, officials are now limited to their individual 
agency's knowledge of an entity's track record. This bill will make it 
easier for these procurement officers to prevent them giving contracts 
to those who repeatedly violate Federal laws or have poor performance, 
and it will prevent them from receiving future dollars from the Federal 
Government.
  As a New York City councilwoman, I successfully led an effort to 
reform the contracting system of New York City. Included in that effort 
was a Vendex system which checked the backgrounds and the work of the 
contractors before awarding contracts. It has been credited with saving 
the city of New York hundreds of millions of dollars.
  The United States is the largest purchaser of goods and services in 
the world, spending more than $419 billion on procurement awards in 
2006, and over $440 billion on grants in 2005. It is Congress's 
responsibility to ensure that taxpayer dollars are used wisely and not 
wasted, certainly not wasted in our contracting system, and we should 
not be giving awards to contractors who have poor performance records.
  I believe by improving the system for awarding contracts, I believe 
that this is critical for boosting the public's faith in our government 
and it will save taxpayers' dollars. I urge my colleagues to support 
this reform bill.
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. TOWNS. I yield 5 minutes to the chairman of the full committee, 
the Honorable Henry Waxman from the great State of California.
  Mr. WAXMAN. I thank the gentleman from the great State of New York, 
the able chairman of the subcommittee, for yielding to me.
  H.R. 3033, as amended, would create a centralized governmentwide 
database of information to more effectively monitor the award of 
Federal tax dollars. It would include not only information on companies 
and grantees that have been debarred by the Federal Government, but 
also information on civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings 
that have been concluded against contractors and grant recipients.
  No such comprehensive database currently exists, and creating one 
would allow more efficient monitoring of Federal procurement and 
assistance programs.

[[Page H2572]]

  This is a commonsense initiative that would allow the Federal 
Government to track fraudulent contractors and grantees and stop them 
from moving from agency to agency if they are debarred.
  The bill was introduced by Representative Maloney, and it is modeled 
on legislation that she passed for the city of New York when she was a 
city council member. That law has been very effective for the city.
  The ranking member of the Oversight Committee, Representative Tom 
Davis, raised a number of concerns with the bill as originally drafted, 
and we worked with Representative Davis and his staff to try to address 
these concerns, and I thank him for his willingness to work with us on 
this matter.
  We have also made changes reflected in the bill before us today to 
address concerns raised by other committees with certain provisions in 
the bill. As I understand it, some letters have been sent out in 
opposition to the bill without knowing that those changes have been 
made to address the concerns that were raised. The result that we have 
before us today is a measure that enjoys bipartisan support. I urge 
Members to support H.R. 3033, as amended.
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Let me just say again to Chairman Waxman and 
to the gentlelady from New York, we appreciate you working with us. We 
have a bill now that enhances the system, and we have met the 
objections of some of the groups like the U.S. Chamber and that had 
been raised on our side of the aisle. I appreciate it, and urge its 
adoption.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of 
H.R. 3033, the ``Contractors and Federal Spending Accountability Act of 
2008.'' H.R. 3033 mandates the establishment of a database that 
includes detailed information on civil, criminal, and administrative 
proceedings concluded against contractors and grant recipients by State 
and Federal governments; a listing, by contractor or grant recipient, 
of all contracts or grants that were terminated; any suspensions or 
debarments, or any agreement to resolve a suspension or debarment; any 
findings that the contractor or recipient is not a ``responsible'' 
source for Federal contracts.
  As the great justice Louis Brandeis famously wrote, ``sunlight is 
said to be the best of disinfectants.'' H.R. 3033 will shed some 
sunlight on the contracting world.
  This database will have myriad uses. Governments at all levels can 
turn to it when considering whether to award a contract or grant. 
Citizens can look to see how their tax dollars are being spent--and 
what steps are being taken to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. Job 
seekers can look up prospective employers to find out what kind of 
company they might work for. Companies can do a little due diligence 
about prospective customers or vendors. In this information age, there 
is simply no reason information such as this should not be available to 
all of us.
  My committee oversees the Department of Homeland Security. It is 
still young, as are many of its contracting professionals. But even the 
``old pros'' of the Department are new to homeland security 
contracting--because homeland security contracting itself is new. A 
database like this--that allows these officials to quickly examine the 
history of prospective, contractors--might have helped the Department 
avoid some of the contracting fiascos that have plagued it to date. I 
am hopeful it will help the Department pick the best contractors in the 
future.
  I encourage all of my colleagues to support this important 
legislation.
  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Serrano). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3033, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________