[House Report 112-146]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


112th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    112-146
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     

                                                  Union Calendar No. 93


                   SEMIANNUAL REPORT ON THE ACTIVITY


                                 of the


                      COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS

                  FIRST SESSION OF THE 112th CONGRESS






 June 24, 2011.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed
                         LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Small Business,
                                     Washington, DC, June 24, 2011.
Hon. Karen L. Haas,
Clerk, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Ms. Haas: Pursuant to clause 1(d) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives for the 112th Congress, I 
present herewith a semiannual report on the activity of the 
Committee on Small Business for the period January 5, 2011 
through June 14, 2011, including the Committee's review of 
legislation within its jurisdiction and the oversight 
activities undertaken by the Committee. The Committee on Small 
Business adopted the semiannual report on June 24, 2011, by 
voice vote.
            Sincerely,
                                                Sam Graves,
                                                          Chairman.


                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Committee Jurisdiction...........................................     1
Rules of the Committee...........................................     2
Membership and Organization......................................    15
Legislative Activities...........................................    19
Oversight Summary................................................    23
    Part A--Full Committee Hearings..............................    25
    Part B--Subcommittee Hearings................................    33
    Part C--Waste, Fraud, Abuse, and Mismanagement...............    39
Oversight Plan...................................................    41
    Part A--Committee Oversight Plan.............................    43
    Part B--Implementation of Oversight Plan.....................    49
Regulatory Review................................................    55



                                                  Union Calendar No. 93
112th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    112-146

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



 
 SEMIANNUAL REPORT ON THE ACTIVITY OF THE COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS 
                         FOR THE 112TH CONGRESS

                                _______
                                

 June 24, 2011.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

     Mr. Graves of Missouri, from the Committee on Small Business, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

    Clause 1(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives for the 112th Congress requires that each 
standing committee, not later than the 30th day after June 1, 
submit to the House a semiannual report on the activities of 
that committee, including separate sections summarizing the 
legislative and oversight activities of that committee.

              JURISDICTION AND SPECIAL OVERSIGHT FUNCTION

    Clause 1(q) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives of the 112th Congress sets forth the 
jurisdiction of the Committee on Small Business as follows--
    (1) Assistance to and protection of small business, 
including financial aid, regulatory flexibility, and paperwork 
reduction.
    (2) Participation of small-business enterprises in Federal 
procurement and Government contracts.
    Clause 3(l) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives for the 112th Congress sets forth the Special 
Oversight Function of the Committee on Small Business as 
follows--
    The Committee on Small Business shall study and investigate 
on a continuing basis the problems of all types of small 
business.

    RULES OF THE COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS FOR THE 112TH CONGRESS


                         1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The Rules of the House of Representatives, in total (but 
especially with the operations of committees rule X, cl. 1(q), 
cl. 2, cl. 3(l), and rule XI) are the rules of the Committee on 
Small Business to the extent applicable and are incorporated by 
reference. Each Subcommittee of the Committee on Small Business 
(``the Committee'') is a part of the Committee and is subject 
to the authority and direction of the Committee, and to the 
Rules of the House and the rules adopted herein to the extent 
applicable.

                   2. REFERRAL OF BILLS BY THE CHAIR

    The Chair will retain consideration of all legislation 
referred to the Committee by the Speaker. No action will be 
required of a Subcommittee before legislation is considered for 
report by the Committee. Subcommittee chairs, pursuant to the 
rules set out herein, may hold hearings on any bill referred to 
the Committee.

                           3. DATE OF MEETING

    The regular meeting date of the Committee shall be the 
second Wednesday of every month when the House is in session. 
The Chair may dispense with the meeting of the Committee, if in 
the sole discretion of the Chair, there is no need for such 
meeting. Additional meetings may be called as deemed necessary 
by the Chair or at the request of the majority Members of the 
Committee pursuant to rule XI, cl. 2(c) of the Rules of the 
House.
    At least 3 days notice of such an additional meeting shall 
be given unless the Chair, with the concurrence of the Ranking 
Minority Member, determines that there is good cause to call 
the meeting on less notice or upon a vote by a majority of the 
Committee (a quorum being present). To the extent possible, the 
three days shall be counted from the 72 hours before the time 
of the meeting. Announcements of the meeting shall be published 
promptly in the Daily Digest and made publicly available in 
electronic form.
    The determination of the business to be considered at each 
meeting shall be made by the Chair subject to limitations set 
forth in House Rule XI, cl. 2(c).
    The Chair shall provide to each Member of the Committee, to 
the extent practicable, at least 48 hours in advance of a 
meeting, a copy of the bill, resolution, report or other item 
to be considered at the meeting, but no later than 24 hours 
before the meeting. Such material also shall be made available 
to the public at least 24 hours in advance in electronic form.
    The rules for notice and meetings as set forth in Rule 3 of 
these Rules shall not apply to special and emergency meetings. 
Clause 2(c)(2) of rule XI and clause 2(g)(3)(A) of rule XI of 
the Rules of the House, as applicable, shall apply to such 
meetings.
    A record vote of the Committee shall be provided on any 
question before the Committee upon the request of any Member of 
the Committee. A record of the vote of each Member of the 
Committee on a matter before the Committee shall be available 
in electronic form within 48 hours of such record vote, and, 
with respect to any roll call vote on any motion to amend or 
report, shall be included in the report of the Committee 
showing the total number of votes cast for and against and the 
names of those Members voting for and against.
    The Chair of the Committee shall, not later than 24 hours 
after consideration of a bill, resolution, report or other item 
cause the text of the reported item and any amendment adopted 
thereto to be made publicly available in electronic form.

                      4. ANNOUNCEMENT OF HEARINGS

    Public announcement of the date, place, and subject matter 
of any hearing to be conducted by the Committee shall be made 
no later than 7 calendar days before the commencement of the 
hearing. To the extent possible, the seven days shall be 
counted from 168 hours before the time of the Committee's 
hearing.
    The Chair, with the concurrence of the Ranking Minority 
Member, or upon a vote by the majority of the Committee (a 
quorum being present), may authorize a hearing to commence on 
less than 7 calendar days notice.

A. Witness Lists

    Unless the Chair determines it is impracticable to do so, 
the Committee shall make a tentative witness list available at 
the time it makes the public announcement of the hearing. If a 
tentative witness list is not made available at the time of the 
announcement of the hearing, such witness list shall be made 
available as soon as practicable after such announcement is 
made. A final witness list shall be issued by the Committee no 
later than 48 hours prior to the commencement of the hearing.

B. Material for the Hearing

    The Chair shall provide to all Members of the Committee, as 
soon as practicable after the announcement of the hearing, a 
memorandum explaining the subject matter of the hearing and any 
official reports from departments and agencies on the subject 
matter of the hearing. Such material shall be made available to 
all Members of the Committee no later than 48 hours before the 
commencement of the hearing unless the Chair, after 
consultation with the Ranking Minority Member, determines that 
certain reports from departments or agencies should not be made 
available prior to the commencement of the hearing. Material 
provided by the Chair to all Members, whether provided prior to 
or at the hearing, shall be placed on the Committee website no 
later than 48 hours after the commencement of the hearing 
unless such material contains sensitive or classified 
information in which case such material shall be handled 
pursuant to Rule 15 of the Committee's Rules.

              5. MEETINGS AND HEARINGS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

A. Meetings

    Each meeting of the Committee or its Subcommittees for the 
transaction of business, including the markup of legislation, 
shall be open to the public, including to radio, television, 
and still photography coverage, except as provided by House 
Rule XI, cl. 4. If the majority of Members of the Committee or 
Subcommittee present at the meeting, determine by a recorded 
vote in open session that all or part of the remainder of the 
meeting on that day shall be closed to the public because the 
disclosure of matters to be considered would endanger national 
security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement 
information, or would tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate 
any person or otherwise would violate any law or rule of the 
House; provided however, that no person other than Members of 
the Committee, and such congressional staff and such executive 
branch representatives they may authorize, shall be present in 
any meeting which has been closed to the public.
    The Chair and Ranking Minority Member are ex officio 
Members of all Subcommittees for the purpose of any meeting or 
hearing conducted by a Subcommittee.

B. Hearings

    Each hearing conducted by the Committee or its 
Subcommittees shall be open to the public, including radio, 
television and still photography coverage. If the majority of 
Members of the Committee or Subcommittee present at the 
hearing, determine by a recorded vote in open session that all 
or part of the remainder of the hearing on that day shall be 
closed to the public because the disclosure of matters to be 
considered would endanger national security, would compromise 
sensitive law enforcement information, or would tend to defame, 
degrade, or incriminate any person or otherwise would violate 
any law or rule of the House; provided however, that the 
Committee or Subcommittee may by the same procedure also vote 
to close one subsequent day of hearings. Notwithstanding the 
requirements of the preceding sentence, a majority of those 
present (if the requisite number of Members are present under 
Committee rules for the purpose of taking testimony) may vote: 
(i) to close the hearing for the sole purpose of discussing 
whether the testimony or evidence to be received would endanger 
the national security, would compromise sensitive law 
enforcement information, or violate rule XI, cl. 2(k)(5) of the 
House or (ii) to close the hearing, as provided by clause 
2(k)(5) of rule XI of the House.
    The Chair and Ranking Minority Member are ex officio 
Members of all Subcommittees in any hearing conducted by a 
Subcommittee. Members of the Committee who wish to participate 
in a hearing of the Subcommittee to which they are not Members 
shall make such request to the Chair and the Ranking Minority 
Member of the Subcommittee at the commencement of the hearing. 
The Chair, after consultation with the Ranking Minority Member 
of the Subcommittee, shall grant such request.
    No Member of the House may be excluded from non-
participatory attendance at any hearing of the Committee or any 
Subcommittee, unless the House of Representatives shall by 
majority vote authorize the Committee or Subcommittees, for 
purposes of a particular subject of investigation, to close its 
hearing to Members by the same procedures designated to close 
hearings to the public.
    Members of Congress who are not Members of the Committee 
but would like to participate in a hearing shall notify the 
Chair and the Ranking Minority Member and submit a formal 
request no later than 24 hours before the commencement of the 
meeting or hearing.
    To the maximum extent practicable, the Committee shall 
provide audio and video coverage of each hearing or meeting for 
the transaction of business in a manner that allows the public 
to easily listen and view the proceedings and shall maintain 
the recordings of such coverage in a manner easily accessible 
to the public.

                              6. WITNESSES

A. Statement of witnesses

    Each witness who is to appear before the Committee or 
Subcommittee shall file an electronic copy of the testimony 
with the Committee and the Ranking Minority Member no later 
than 48 hours before the commencement of the hearing. In 
addition, the witness shall provide 75 copies of the testimony 
by the commencement of the hearing. The Chair may waive the 
requirement of the witness providing 75 copies in which case 
the Committee or Subcommittee shall provide the 75 copies.
    Each non-governmental witness shall provide to the 
Committee and the Ranking Minority Member, no later than 48 
hours before the commencement of the hearing, a curriculum 
vitae or other statement describing their education, 
employment, professional affiliation or other background 
information pertinent to their testimony.
    As required by rule XI, cl. 2(g) of the Rules of the House, 
each non-governmental witness before the commencement of the 
hearing shall file with the Chair a disclosure form detailing 
any contracts or grants that the witness has with the federal 
government.
    The failure to provide the materials set forth by the 
deadlines set forth in these rules may be grounds for excluding 
both the oral and written testimony of the witness unless 
waived by the Chair of the Committee or Subcommittee.
    The Committee will provide public access to printed 
materials, including the testimony of witnesses in electronic 
form on the Committee's website no later than 24 hours after 
the hearing is adjourned. Supplemental material provided after 
the hearing adjourns, shall be placed on the Committee website 
no later than 24 hours after receipt of such material.

B. Number of witnesses and witnesses selected by the minority

    For any hearing conducted by the Committee or Subcommittee 
there shall be no more than four non-governmental witnesses of 
which the Ranking Minority Member of the Committee or 
Subcommittee (as appropriate) is entitled to select one witness 
for the hearing. Witnesses selected by the Ranking Minority 
Member of the Committee or Subcommittee shall be invited to 
testify by the Chair of the Committee or Subcommittee (as 
appropriate). Rule 6(A) shall apply with equal force to 
witnesses selected by the Ranking Minority Member of the 
Committee or Subcommittee.
    The limitations set forth in the preceding paragraph shall 
not apply if the Committee holds a hearing to honor the work of 
the small business community in conjunction with the annual 
celebration of Small Business Week. Witness limitations for 
such a hearing shall be determined by the Chair in consultation 
with the Ranking Minority Member.

C. Interrogation of witnesses

    Except when the Committee adopts a motion pursuant to 
subdivisions (B) and (C) of clause 2(i)(2) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House, Committee Members may question witnesses 
only when they have been recognized by the Chair for that 
purpose.
    The Chair and Ranking Minority Member of the Committee or 
Subcommittee shall face no limitation on the length of the time 
that they may question a witness. After recognition by the 
Chair, other Members shall have the opportunity, as set forth 
in rule XI, cl. 2(j) of the Rules of the House, to question 
each witness on the panel for a period not to exceed five 
minutes.
    For any hearing, the Chair of the Committee or Subcommittee 
may offer a motion to extend the questioning of a witness or 
witnesses by Members other than the Chair or Ranking Minority 
Member identified in the motion for more than five minutes as 
set forth in rule XI, cl. 2(j)(B).
    The Chair of the Committee or Subcommittee shall commence 
questioning followed by the Ranking Minority Member. 
Thereafter, questioning shall alternate between the majority 
and minority Members by the time in which the Member arrived at 
the hearing after the gavel has been struck to commence the 
hearing, with the first arriving having priority over Members 
of his or her party. If Members arrive simultaneously or are 
there prior to the gavel being struck to commence the hearing, 
order of questioning shall be based on seniority.
    In recognizing Members to question witnesses, the Chair may 
take into consideration the ratio of majority and minority 
Members present in such a manner as to not disadvantage the 
Members of either party.

                              7. SUBPOENAS

    A subpoena may be authorized and issued by the Committee in 
the conduct of any investigation or series of investigations or 
activities to require the attendance and testimony of such 
witness and the production of such books, records, 
correspondence, memoranda, papers and documents, as deemed 
necessary. Such subpoena shall be authorized by a majority of 
the full Committee. The requirement that the authorization of a 
subpoena require a majority vote may be waived by the Ranking 
Member of the Committee. The Chair may issue a subpoena, in 
consultation with the Ranking Minority Member, when the House 
is out for session for more than three legislative days.

                               8. QUORUM

    A quorum, for purposes of reporting a measure or 
recommendation, shall be a majority of the Committee Members. 
For purposes of taking testimony or receiving evidence, a 
quorum shall be one Member from the Majority and one Member 
from the Minority. The Chair of the Committee or Subcommittee 
shall exercise reasonable comity by waiting for the Ranking 
Minority Member even if a quorum is present before striking the 
gavel to commence the hearing. For hearings held by the 
Committee or a Subcommittee in a location other than the 
Committee's hearing room in Washington, DC, a quorum shall be 
deemed to present if the Chair of the Committee or Subcommittee 
is present.

                      9. AMENDMENTS DURING MARK-UP

    Any amendment offered to any pending legislation before the 
Committee must be made available in written form by any Member 
of the Committee. If such amendment is not available in written 
form when requested, the Chair shall allow an appropriate 
period for the provision thereof. Such period shall not 
prejudice the offering of such amendment.
    For amendments to be accepted during mark-up, there is no 
requirement that the amendments be filed prior to commencement 
of the mark-up or prepared with the assistance of the Office of 
Legislative Counsel. Even though it is not necessary, Members 
seeking to amend legislation during mark-up should draft 
amendments with the assistance of the Office of Legislative 
Counsel and consult with the Chair or Ranking Member's staff 
(as appropriate) in the preparation of such amendments.

                    10. POSTPONEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS

    The Chair in consultation with the Ranking Minority Member 
may postpone further proceedings when a record vote is ordered 
on the question of approving any measure or matter or adopting 
an amendment. The Chair may resume postponed proceedings, but 
no later than 24 hours after such postponement, unless the 
House is not in session or there are conflicts with Member 
schedules that make it unlikely a quorum will be present to 
conduct business on the postponed proceeding. In such cases, 
the Chair will consult with Members to set a time as early as 
possible to resume proceedings but in no event later than the 
next meeting date as set forth in Rule 3 of these Rules. When 
proceedings resume on a postponed question, notwithstanding any 
intervening order for the previous question, an underlying 
proposition shall remain subject to further debate or amendment 
to the same extent as when the question was postponed.

              11. NUMBER AND JURISDICTION OF SUBCOMMITTEES

    There will be five Subcommittees as follows:

The Subcommittee on Agriculture, Energy and Trade

    This Subcommittee (which will consist of seven (7) 
Republican Members and five (5) Democratic Members) will 
address policies that enhance rural economic growth, increasing 
America's energy independence and ensuring that America's small 
businesses can compete effectively in a global marketplace.
     Oversight of agricultural policies.
     Oversight of environmental issues and regulations 
(including agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency 
and the Army Corps of Engineers).
     Oversight of energy issues, including expansion of 
domestic resources whether they are renewable or non-renewable.
     Oversight of international trade policy with 
particular emphasis on agencies that provide direct assistance 
to small businesses, such as: the Small Business 
Administration's (SBA) Office of International Trade, the 
Department of Commerce's United States Export Assistance 
Centers, the Department of Agriculture's Foreign Agricultural 
Service, and the Export-Import Bank.
     Oversight of infringement of intellectual property 
rights by foreign competition.

The Subcommittee on Healthcare and Technology

    This Subcommittee (which will consist of eight (8) 
Republican Members and five (5) Democratic Members) will 
address how healthcare policies may inhibit or promote economic 
growth and job creation by small businesses. In addition, the 
Subcommittee will examine small business job growth through the 
creation and adoption of advanced technologies.
     Oversight of the implementation of the Patient 
Protection and Affordable Care Act.
     Oversight of availability and affordability of 
healthcare coverage for small businesses.
     Oversight of general technology issues, including 
intellectual property policy in the United States.
     Oversight of United States telecommunications 
policies including, but not limited to, the National Broadband 
Plan and allocation of electromagnetic spectrum.
     The Small Business Innovation Research Program.
     Small Business Technology Transfer Program.

The Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Tax and Capital Access

    This Subcommittee (which will consist of seven (7) 
Republican Members and five (5) Democratic Members) will 
evaluate the operation of the financial markets in the United 
States and their ability to provide needed capital to small 
businesses. In addition, the Subcommittee will review federal 
programs, especially those overseen by the SBA, aimed at 
assisting entrepreneurs in obtaining needed capital. Since the 
tax policy plays an integral role in access to capital, this 
Subcommittee also will examine the impact of federal tax 
policies on small businesses.
     Oversight of capital access and financial markets.
     Implementation of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street 
Reform and Consumer Protection Act.
     SBA financial assistance programs, including 
guaranteed loans, microloans, certified development company 
loans, and small business investment companies.
     Oversight of the Department of Agriculture 
Business and Industry Guaranteed Loan program.
     Oversight of general tax policy affecting small 
businesses.
     The management of the SBA disaster loan program.

The Subcommittee on Investigations, Oversight and Regulations

    This Subcommittee (which will consist of seven (7) 
Republican Members and five (5) Democratic Members) will probe 
the efficient operation of government programs that affect 
small businesses, including the SBA, and develop proposals to 
make them operate in a more cost-effective manner. This 
Subcommittee also will review the regulatory burdens imposed on 
small businesses and how those burdens may be alleviated.
     Oversight of general issues affecting small 
businesses and federal agencies.
     Oversight of the management of the SBA.
     Oversight of the SBA Inspector General.
     Implementation of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
     Oversight of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs at the Office of Management and Budget.
     Use of the Congressional Review Act.
     Transparency of the federal rulemaking process as 
required by the Administrative Procedure and Data Quality Acts.
     Implementation of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

The Subcommittee on Contracting and Workforce

    This Subcommittee (which will consist of seven (7) 
Republican Members and five (5) Democratic Members) will assess 
the federal procurement system, including those programs 
designed specifically to enhance participation by small 
businesses in providing goods and services to the federal 
government. The Subcommittee will examine various programs 
designed to provide technical assistance to small businesses, 
whether specifically aimed at federal contractors or small 
businesses in general. Finally, the Subcommittee will review 
the broad scope of workforce issues that affect the ability of 
small businesses to obtain and maintain qualified employees.
     Oversight of government-wide procurement practices 
and programs affecting small businesses.
     Oversight of federal procurement policies that 
inhibit or expand participation by small businesses in the 
federal contracting marketplace.
     All contracting programs established by the Small 
Business Act, including HUBZone, 8(a), Women-, and Service 
Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Programs.
     Technical assistance provided to federal 
contractors and perspective contractors through SBA personnel, 
Offices of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization, and 
Procurement Technical Assistance Centers.
     The SBA Surety Bond guarantee program.
     Oversight of all federal policies that affect the 
workforce including, but not limited to, the roles of the 
Department of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board.
     SBA entrepreneurial development and technical 
assistance programs unrelated to participation in the federal 
government contracting.

                 12. POWERS AND DUTIES OF SUBCOMMITTEES

    Each Subcommittee is authorized to meet, hold hearings, 
receive evidence, and report to the Committee on any matters 
referred to it. Prior to the scheduling of any meeting or 
hearing of a Subcommittee, the Chair of the Subcommittee shall 
obtain the approval of the Chair of the Committee.
    No hearing or meeting of a Subcommittee shall take place at 
the same time as the meeting or hearing of the full Committee 
or another Subcommittee, provided however, that the 
Subcommittee Chairs may hold field hearings that conflict with 
those held by other Subcommittees of the Committee.

                          13. COMMITTEE STAFF

A. Majority staff

    The employees of the Committee, except those assigned to 
the Minority as provided below, shall be appointed and 
assigned, and may be removed by, the Chair of the Committee. 
The Chair shall fix their remuneration and they shall be under 
the general supervision and direction of the Chair.

B. Minority staff

    The employees of the Committee assigned to the Minority 
shall be appointed and assigned, and their remuneration 
determined, as the Ranking Minority Member of the Committee 
shall determine.

C. Subcommittee staff

    There shall be no separate staff assigned to Subcommittees. 
The Chair and Ranking Member shall endeavor to ensure that 
sufficient committee staff is made available in order that each 
Subcommittee may carry out the responsibilities set forth in 
Rule 11, supra. 

                              14. RECORDS

    The Committee shall keep a complete record of all actions, 
which shall include a record of the votes on any question on 
which a recorded vote is demanded. The result of any vote by 
the Committee, or if applicable by a Subcommittee, including a 
voice vote shall be posted on the Committee's website within 24 
hours after the vote has been taken. Such record shall include 
a description of the amendment, motion, order, or other 
proposition, the name of the Member voting for and against such 
amendment, motion, order, or other proposition, and the names 
of Members present but not voting. For any amendment, motion, 
order, or other proposition decided by voice vote, the record 
shall include a description and whether the voice vote was in 
favor or against.
    The Committee shall keep a complete record of all Committee 
and Subcommittee activity which, in the case of a meeting or 
hearing transcript shall include a substantially verbatim 
account of the remarks actually made during the proceedings 
subject only to technical, grammatical, and typographical 
corrections authorized by the person making the remarks.
    The records of the Committee at the National Archives and 
Records Administration shall be made available in accordance 
with rule VII of the Rules of the House. The Chair of the 
Committee shall notify the Ranking Member of the Committee of 
any decision, pursuant to rule VII, cl. 3(b)(3) or cl. 4(b), to 
withhold a record otherwise available, and the matter shall be 
presented to the Committee for a determination of the written 
request of any Member of the Committee.
    The Committee Rules shall be made publicly available in 
electronic form and published in the Congressional Record not 
later than 30 days after the Chair of the Committee is elected 
in each odd-numbered year.

           15. ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED OR SENSITIVE INFORMATION

    Access to classified or sensitive information supplied to 
the Committee or Subcommittees and attendance at closed 
sessions of the Committee or a Subcommittee shall be limited to 
Members and necessary Committee staff and stenographic 
reporters who have appropriate security clearance when the 
Chair determines that such access or attendance is essential to 
the functioning of the Committee or one of its Subcommittees.
    The procedures to be followed in granting access to those 
hearings, records, data, charts, and files of the Committee 
which involve classified information or information deemed to 
be sensitive shall be as follows:
    (A) Only Members of the House of Representatives and 
specifically designated Committee staff of the Committee on 
Small Business may have access to such information.
    (B) Members who desire to read materials that are in 
possession of the Committee shall notify the Clerk of the 
Committee in writing.
    (C) The Clerk of the Committee will maintain an accurate 
access log, which identifies the circumstances surrounding 
access to the information, without revealing the material 
examined.
    (D) If the material desired to be reviewed is material 
which the Committee or Subcommittee deems to be sensitive 
enough to require special handling, before receiving access to 
such information, individuals will be required to sign an 
access information sheet acknowledging such access and that the 
individual has read and understands the procedures under which 
access is being granted.
    (E) Material provided for review under this rule shall not 
be removed from a specified room within the Committee offices.
    (F) Individuals reviewing materials under this rule shall 
make certain that the materials are returned to the proper 
custodian.
    (G) No reproductions or recordings may be made of any 
portion of such materials.
    (H) The contents of such information shall not be divulged 
to any person in any way, form, shape, or manner and shall not 
be discussed with any person who has not received the 
information in the manner authorized by the rules of the 
Committee.
    (I) When not being examined in the manner described herein, 
such information will be kept in secure safes or locked file 
cabinets within the Committee offices.
    (J) These procedures only address access to information the 
Committee or Subcommittee deems to be sensitive enough to 
require special treatment.
    (K) If a Member of the House of Representatives believes 
that certain sensitive information should not be restricted as 
to dissemination or use, the Member may petition the Committee 
or Subcommittee to so rule. With respect to information and 
materials provided to the Committee by the Executive Branch or 
an independent agency as that term is defined in 44 U.S.C. 
3502, the classification of information and materials as 
determined by the Executive Branch or independent agency shall 
prevail unless affirmatively changed by the Committee or 
Subcommittee involved, after consultation with the Executive 
Branch or independent agency.
    (L) Other materials in the possession of the Committee are 
to be handled in the accordance with normal practices and 
traditions of the Committee.

                          16. OTHER PROCEDURES

    The Chair of the Committee may establish such other 
procedures and take such actions as may be necessary to carry 
out the foregoing rules or to facilitate the effective 
operation of the Committee.

                   17. AMENDMENTS TO COMMITTEE RULES

    The rules of the Committee may be modified, amended or 
repealed by a majority vote of the Members, at a meeting 
specifically called for such purpose, but only if written 
notice of the proposed change or changes has been provided to 
each Member of the Committee at least 72 hours prior to the 
time of the meeting of the Committee to consider such change or 
changes.

                         18. BUDGET AND TRAVEL

    From the amount provided to the Committee in the primary 
expense resolution adopted by the House of Representatives in 
the 112th Congress, the Chair, after consultation with the 
Ranking Minority Member, shall designate one-third of the 
budget under the direction of the Ranking Minority Member for 
the purposes of minority staff, travel expenses of minority 
staff and Members, and minority office expenses.
    The Chair may authorize travel in connection with 
activities or subject matters under the legislative or 
oversight jurisdiction of the Committee as set forth in rule X 
of the Rules of the House.
    The Ranking Minority Member may authorize travel for any 
Minority Member or staff of the minority in connection with 
activities or subject matters under the Committee's 
jurisdiction as set forth in rule X of the Rules of the House. 
Before such travel, there shall be submitted to the Chair of 
the Committee in writing the following at least seven (7) 
calendar days prior specifying: a) the purpose of the travel; 
b) the dates during which the travel is to occur; c) the names 
of the states or countries to be visited and the length of time 
spent in each; and d) the names of Members and staff of the 
Committee participating in such travel. Prior approval shall 
not be required of Minority Staff traveling to participate in a 
deposition, authorized by the Chair in rule 16 of these Rules 
of an individual located outside of Washington, DC metropolitan 
area.

                         19. COMMITTEE WEBSITE

    The Chair shall maintain an official Committee website for 
the purpose of furthering the Committee's legislative and 
oversight responsibilities, including communicating information 
about Committee's activities to Committee Members and other 
Members of the House. The Ranking Minority Member may maintain 
a similar website for the same purpose, including communicating 
information about the activities of the Minority to Committee 
Members and other Members of the House.

                             20. VICE CHAIR

    Pursuant to the Rules of the House, the Chair shall 
designate a Member of the Majority to serve as Vice Chair of 
the Committee. The Vice Chair shall preside at any meeting or 
hearing during the temporary absence of the Chair. The Chair 
also reserves the right to designate a Member of the Committee 
Majority to serve as the Chair at a hearing or meeting.


                  MEMBERSHIP AND ORGANIZATION OF THE 
                      COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS

                    ONE HUNDRED AND TWELFTH CONGRESS

                             FULL COMMITTEE

Rep. NYDIA M. VELAZQUEZ (NY-12), Ranking MemberRAVES (MO-6), Chairman
Rep. KURT SCHRADER (OR-5)            Rep. ROSCOE G. BARTLETT (MD-6)
Rep. MARK S. CRITZ (PA-12)           Rep. STEVE CHABOT (OH-1)
Rep. JASON ALTMIRE, (PA-4)           Rep. STEVE KING (IA-5)
Rep. YVETTE D. CLARKE (NY-11)        Rep. MIKE COFFMAN (CO-6)
Rep. JUDY CHU (CA-32)                Rep. MICK MULVANEY (SC-5)
Rep. DAVID N. CICILLINE (RI-1)       Rep. SCOTT R. TIPTON (CO-3)
Rep. CEDRIC RICHMOND (LA-2)          Rep. CHARLES J. FLEISCHMANN (TN-3)
Rep. GARY C. PETERS (MI-9)           Rep. JEFFREY M. LANDRY (LA-3)
Rep. WILLIAM L. OWENS (NY-23)        Rep. JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER (WA-3)
Rep. WILLIAM R. KEATING (MA-10)      Rep. ALLEN B. WEST (FL-22)
                                     Rep. RENEE L. ELLMERS (NC-2)
                                     Rep. JOE WALSH (IL-8)
                                     Rep. LOU BARLETTA (PA-11)
                                     Rep. RICHARD HANNA (NY-24)

             Subcommittee on Agriculture, Energy and Trade

Rep. MARK S. CRITZ (PA-12), Ranking MemberSCOTT R. TIPTON (CO-3), 
Rep. DAVID CICILLINE (RI-1)          Chairman
Rep. WILLIAM R. KEATING (MA-10)      Rep. ROSCOE G. BARTLETT (MD-6)
Rep. JUDY CHU (CA-32)                Rep. STEVE KING (IA-5)
VACANT                               Rep. CHARLES J. FLEISCHMANN (TN-3)
                                     Rep. JEFFREY M. LANDRY (LA-3)
                                     Rep. RENEE L. ELLMERS (NC-2)
                                     Rep. LOU BARLETTA (PA-11)

               Subcommittee on Healthcare and Technology

Rep. CEDRIC RICHMOND (LA-2), Ranking MemberENEE L. ELLMERS (NC-2), 
Rep. JASON ALTMIRE (PA-4)            Chairman
Rep. GARY C. PETERS (MI-9)           Rep. STEVE KING (IA-5)
VACANT                               Rep. MICK MULVANEY (SC-5)
VACANT                               Rep. SCOTT R. TIPTON (CO-3)
                                     Rep. CHARLES J. FLEISCHMANN (TN-3)
                                     Rep. JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER (WA-3)
                                     Rep. JOE WALSH (IL-8)
                                     Rep. RICHARD HANNA (NY-24)

        Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Tax and Capital Access

Rep. KURT SCHRADER (OR-5), Ranking Member JOE WALSH (IL-8), Chairman
Rep. YVETTE D. CLARKE (NY-11)        Rep. STEVE CHABOT (OH-1)
Rep. DAVID CICILLINE (RI-1)          Rep. STEVE KING (IA-5)
Rep. JUDY CHU (CA-32)                Rep. MIKE COFFMAN (CO-6)
Rep. GARY C. PETERS (MI-9)           Rep. MICK MULVANEY (SC-5)
                                     Rep. CHARLES J. FLEISCHMANN (TN-3)
                                     Rep. RICHARD HANNA (NY-24)

       Subcommittee on Investigations, Oversight and Regulations

Rep. JASON ALTMIRE (PA-4), Ranking Member MIKE COFFMAN (CO-6), Chairman
Rep. KURT SCHRADER (OR-5)            Rep. SCOTT R. TIPTON (CO-3)
VACANT                               Rep. JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER (WA-3)
VACANT                               Rep. ALLEN B. WEST (FL-22)
VACANT                               Rep. JOE WALSH (IL-8)
                                     Rep. JEFFREY M. LANDRY (LA-3)
                                     Rep. RICHARD HANNA (NY-24)

               Subcommittee on Contracting and Workforce

Rep. JUDY CHU (CA-32), Ranking MemberRep. MICK MULVANEY (SC-5), 
Rep. KURT SCHRADER (OR-5)            Chairman
Rep. MARK S. CRITZ (PA-12)           Rep. STEVE KING (IA-5)
Rep. YVETTE D. CLARKE (NY-11)        Rep. MIKE COFFMAN (CO-6)
Rep. CEDRIC RICHMOND (LA-2)          Rep. ALAN B. WEST (FL-22)
                                     Rep. JEFFREY M. LANDRY (LA-3)
                                     Rep. RENEE L. ELLMERS (NC-2)
                                     Rep. LOU BARLETTA (PA-11)
                         LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES

    Clause 1(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires that not later than the 30th day after 
June 1, a committee shall submit to the House a semiannual 
report on the activities of that committee, including a 
separate section summarizing the legislative activities of that 
committee.

  AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR AN ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF PROGRAMS 
 UNDER THE SMALL BUSINESS ACT AND THE SMALL BUSINESS INVESTMENT ACT OF 
           1958 THROUGH MAY 31, 2011, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                               (H.R. 366)

Summary
    H.R. 366 extended the programs authorized under the Small 
Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 
through May 31, 2011.
Legislative history
    Chairman Sam Graves introduced H.R. 366 on January 20, 
2011. The bill was referred to the Committee on Small Business.
    On January 25, 2011, the House considered H.R. 336 under 
suspension of the rules. At the conclusion of debate, the 
measure passed by voice vote. On the same day, H.R. 366 was 
received in the Senate. On January 26, 2011, the Senate passed 
H.R. 366 by unanimous consent. On January 31, 2011, the 
President signed the bill, and it became Public Law 112-1.

  AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR AN ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF PROGRAMS 
 UNDER THE SMALL BUSINESS ACT AND THE SMALL BUSINESS INVESTMENT ACT OF 
           1958 THROUGH MAY 31, 2012, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                (S. 990)

Summary
    S. 990 extended the programs authorized under the Small 
Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 
through May 31, 2012.
Legislative history
    Senator Mary Landrieu introduced S. 990 on May 12, 2011, 
and the bill was placed on Senate Legislative Calendar and read 
the first time. On May 16, 2011, the legislation was read the 
second time and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under 
General Orders, Calendar No. 51. On May 19, 2011, Senator 
Durbin offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute for 
Senator Landrieu. This amendment extended the Small Business 
Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology 
Transfer (STTR) Programs through May 31, 2012. Additionally, it 
extended all other programs under the Small Business Act and 
the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 that necessitated an 
extension until June 30, 2011. The Senate passed S. 990 via 
unanimous consent on May 19, 2011.
    On May 24, 2011, Chairman Graves moved to suspend the rules 
and pass S. 990, as amended. Chairman Graves amended the 
legislation to provide for an additional temporary extension of 
the programs under the Small Business Act and the Small 
Business Investment Act of 1958 through September 30, 2011. The 
House passed S. 990, as amended, on May 24, 2011, via voice 
vote.
    On the same day, Senator Reid offered a perfecting 
amendment to S. 990 in the Senate. The perfecting amendment 
stripped all of the text of S. 990 and inserted certain 
extensions relating to the Patriot Act. The Senate passed S.990 
by a recorded vote of 72-23, on May 26, 2011. The House also 
passed S. 990 on May 26, 2011, by a recorded vote of 250-153. 
On May 26, 2011, the President signed the legislation and it 
became Public Law 112-14.

  AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR AN ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF PROGRAMS 
 UNDER THE SMALL BUSINESS ACT AND THE SMALL BUSINESS INVESTMENT ACT OF 
           1958 THROUGH MAY 31, 2012, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                               (S. 1082)

Summary
    S. 1082 extends the Small Business Innovation Research 
(SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Programs 
through September 30, 2011. Additionally, it extends all other 
programs under the Small Business Act and the Small Business 
Investment Act of 1958 that necessitated an extension until 
July 31, 2011.
Legislative history
    Senator Landrieu introduced and the Senate passed S. 1082 
via unanimous consent on May 26, 2011. The House passed the 
legislation, under suspension of the rules, by a recorded vote 
of 387-33, on May 31, 2011. On June 1, 2011, the President 
signed the legislation, and it became Public Law 112-17.

        THE CREATING JOBS THROUGH SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION ACT 
                                OF 2011

                              (H.R. 1425)

Summary

    H.R. 1425, the ``Creating Jobs Through Small Business 
Innovation Act of 2011'', modernizes and reauthorizes the Small 
Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and the Small Business 
Technology Transfer (STTR) programs through September 30, 2014. 
The legislative goal of the bill is to strengthen these 
programs, ensure efficient use of taxpayer dollars, utilize the 
best science offered by small firms, use existing federal funds 
to help small firms commercialize technology, and create jobs.
    The bill, among other things, would encourage greater 
commercialization success, a primary objective of the programs, 
by instituting commercialization initiatives at federal 
agencies that administer SBIR programs. The legislation also 
increases Phase I and Phase II award sizes for both programs, 
shortens the time frame between application and notice of 
award, and reduces the time between award and dispersal of 
funds. H.R. 1425 also allows for greater participation of small 
companies regardless of their financial structure. It codifies 
in statute the programmatic flexibility that federal agencies 
need in order to administer SBIR awards in a manner that is 
most consistent with the agency's specific mission. The bill 
reduces the programs' risk of waste, fraud, and abuse by 
requiring the Small Business Administration to develop 
preventive measures and requiring the Inspector General of each 
participating agency to establish fraud detection measures and 
share best practices. The bill permits agencies to use three 
percent of their SBIR and STTR budget for administrative, 
oversight, and contract processing costs. Finally, the bill 
continues the current 2.5 percent set aside of existing federal 
extramural research dollars for the SBIR and STTR programs.

Legislative history

    Representative Renee Ellmers introduced H.R. 1425 on April 
7, 2011. Original cosponsors include Representative Sam Graves, 
Chairman of the Committee on Small Business; Representative 
Ralph Hall, Chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space 
and Technology; Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Ranking 
Member of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology; 
Representative Ben Quayle, Chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Technology and Innovation of the Committee on Science, Space 
and Technology; Representative David Wu, Ranking Member of the 
Subcommittee on Technology and Innovation of the Committee on 
Space, Science and Technology; Representative Cedric Richmond, 
Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Healthcare and Technology 
of the Committee on Small Business; and Representative Jason 
Altmire.
    The Subcommittee on Healthcare and Technology held a 
hearing on H.R. 1425 on April 7, 2011, and heard various small 
businesses' views on the legislation.
    The Committee on Small Business met in open session on May 
11, 2011, and ordered H.R. 1425, as amended, reported favorably 
to the House by a voice vote.

          THE REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2011

                               (H.R. 527)

Summary

    H.R. 527 amends the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 
1980, as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act, a law that requires federal agencies to consider 
the economic impact of the rules they propose on small 
entities. This legislation would strengthen the RFA by: 
expanding its requirements to agencies not currently covered; 
requiring more detailed analyses of regulatory impact; 
providing new authorities to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy; 
enhancing the participation of small businesses in the 
rulemaking process; strengthening the requirement for periodic 
review of regulations; and improving the ability of small 
businesses to challenge compliance with the RFA.

Legislative history

    Representative Lamar Smith, Chairman of the Committee on 
the Judiciary, introduced H.R. 527, on February 8, 2011. 
Original cosponsors included Representative Sam Graves, 
Chairman of the Committee on Small Business, and Representative 
Howard Coble, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Courts, 
Commercial and Administrative Law of the Committee on the 
Judiciary. The bill was referred to the Committee on Judiciary 
and the Committee on Small Business, for a period to be 
determined by the Speaker.
    On March 30, 2011, the Committee on Small Business held a 
hearing entitled ``Reducing Federal Agency Overreach: 
Modernizing the Regulatory Flexibility Act'' to provide an 
overview of the RFA to Committee members. Subsequently, the 
Committee held a hearing on H.R. 527 and H.R. 585, to discuss 
the merits of those bills on June 15, 2011.

        THE SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD FLEXIBILITY ACT OF 2011

                               (H.R. 585)

Summary

    H.R. 585 amends the Small Business Act to authorize the 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration 
to determine size standards for purposes of statutes other than 
the Small Business Act and Small Business Investment Act of 
1958. This ensures that decisions made by the Chief Counsel 
under the RFA are consistent with an agency's determination of 
any exemptions or other special treatment of small business.

Legislative history

    Representative Sam Graves, Chairman of the Committee on 
Small Business, introduced H.R. 585, on February 9, 2011. 
Representative Lamar Smith, Chairman of the Committee on the 
Judiciary, is an original cosponsor. The bill was referred to 
the Committee on Small Business.
    On June 15, 2011, the Committee held a hearing on H.R. 585.
                           OVERSIGHT SUMMARY

    Clause 1(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires that not later than the 30th day after 
June 1, a committee shall submit to the House a semiannual 
report on the activities of that committee, including a 
separate section summarizing the oversight activities of that 
committee. The report shall also include a delineation of any 
hearings held pursuant to clauses 2(n), (o), or (p) of rule XI, 
related to waste, fraud, and abuse in government programs.
    Part A of this section describes the hearings held in full 
committee. Part B of this section describes the hearings held 
in the subcommittees. Part C of this section describes the 
hearings that relate to the requirements of clauses 2(n), (o), 
or (p) of rule XI.
                                 PART A

                        Full Committee Hearings

                TAX PROVISIONS UNDER HEALTH CARE REFORM

    On February 9, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met in 
Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose 
of receiving testimony on ``Buried in Paperwork--A 1099 
Update.'' The hearing focused on the health care law's expanded 
1099 reporting mandate, which will require businesses to file a 
1099 form for virtually every business-to-business transaction 
of $600 or more in property and services.
    The witness for the first panel was The Hon. Daniel E. 
Lungren (R-CA). The witnesses for the second panel were: R. 
Jerol Kivett, President, Kivett's Inc., Clinton, NC, testifying 
on behalf of the National Federation of Independent Business; 
John ``Mark'' Eagleton, Managing Member, Eagleton Ventures, 
LLC, Golden, CO, testifying on behalf of the National 
Restaurant Association; Seth Shipley, Owner, Shipley's Fine 
Jewelry, Hampstead, MD, testifying on behalf of the National 
Retail Federation; and Mike Kegley, President, B.O.L.D. Homes, 
Inc., Union KY, testifying on behalf of the National 
Association of Home Builders.
    At the hearing, House Administration Committee Chairman Dan 
Lungren testified about H.R. 4, his bipartisan legislation to 
repeal Section 9006 of the health care law. Chairman Lungren 
said the expanded reporting requirement ``conveys the worst 
possible message to the small business community [and] reflects 
a disconnect with the day to day reality faced by men and women 
involved with companies in each and every one of our 
districts.'' All of the small business owners testified that 
the 1099 mandate will impose a substantial and costly paperwork 
burden.
    At the hearing's close, Chairman Graves said he would send 
a letter to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House 
Committee on Ways and Means urging the Committee to consider 
the burdens on small businesses as they move H.R. 4 and other 
legislation to relieve job destroying tax and regulatory 
burdens through the Committee.

            THE STATE OF THE U.S. ECONOMY FOR SMALL BUSINESS

    On February 16, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met 
in Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the 
purpose of receiving testimony on the state of the small 
business economy. The hearing, entitled ``Putting Americans 
Back to Work: The State of the Small Business Economy,'' 
focused on examining obstacles to small business job creation 
and economic growth and identifying specific tax, regulatory 
and health care policies that inhibit job creation and economic 
growth.
    The witnesses for the hearing were: William Phelan, 
President and Co-Founder, PayNet, Inc., Skokie, IL; Terry 
Frank, Owner, Nature's Marketplace, Oak Ridge, TN; Dixie 
Kolditz, Owner, Open-Box Creations, Cathlament, WA; and Bill 
Feinberg, President of Allied Kitchen and Bath, Ft. Lauderdale, 
FL, testifying on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
    Mr. Phelan began the testimony stating that while there has 
been a thaw in the extension of credit to small businesses, 
there are several negative factors that are continuing to 
inhibit access to credit. Ms. Frank stated that the federal tax 
burden has become too difficult to navigate by herself and 
suggested the best way to raise tax revenue is to make the 
process easier to comply with and lower the burden so that 
small business owners could reinvest that money back onto their 
businesses. Ms. Kolditz focused her testimony on importing and 
exporting regulations citing specific examples of new 
regulations that are costing her significant amounts of money 
and preventing her from expanding her business. Finally, while 
Mr. Feinberg stated that offering health care was imperative to 
recruiting and retaining the best employees, he expressed 
concern that the new Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
could impose significant regulatory and penalty burdens on his 
business. These additional burdens make him doubt he will be 
able to expand his business to as large as he feels it could 
be.

            THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION FY 2012 BUDGET

    On March 2, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met in 
Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose 
of receiving testimony from the Hon. Karen Mills, 
Administrator, United States Small Business Administration, 
Washington, DC on the President's proposed budget for the Small 
Business Administration (SBA) and the programs authorized by 
the Small Business Act and Small Business Investment Act. The 
hearing, logically enough, was entitled ``The Small Business 
Administration FY 2012 Budget.''
    The Administrator commenced her testimony by noting that 
the agency focuses its mission on providing small businesses 
with capital, contracts, and counseling. The Administrator 
noted the number of small businesses assisted by the agency. 
However, she recognized the current fiscal situation will 
require a reduction in the budget. The Administrator 
recommended a number of minor programs for elimination.
    The Committee used her testimony in preparing its views and 
estimates on the President's Budget for the SBA. Those views 
and estimates were adopted by the Committee on March 15, 2011.

FEDERAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT GRANTS FOR SMALL BUSINESSES--THE SBIR 
                                PROGRAM

    On March 16, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met in 
Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose 
of receiving testimony on the Small Business Innovation 
Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) 
Programs. The hearing, entitled ``Spurring Innovation and Job 
Creation: The SBIR Program,'' focused on the benefits of the 
SBIR and STTR programs.
    The witnesses for the hearing were: Tom Tullie, Chief 
Executive Officer, President and Chairman of EcoATM San Diego, 
CA; Dr. David Audretsch, Indiana University Bloomington, IN; 
Dr. Mike Squillante, Vice President of Radiation Monitoring 
Devices, Inc. Watertown, MA, testifying on behalf of the Small 
Business Technology Council; and Amy Comstock Rick, Chief 
Executive Officer, Parkinson's Action Network, Washington DC.
    Mr. Tullie began the testimony stating that in EcoATM's 
critical second year, they received an SBIR Phase I award that 
directly funded the development of the beginning technology 
they would later deploy in their handheld electronic automated 
recycling devices. Dr. Audretsch commented on his role in the 
National Research Council's An Assessment of the Small Business 
Innovation Research Program study that is widely recognized as 
one of the most comprehensive examinations of the SBIR program 
since its inception. Dr. Squillante provided an extensive 
overview of the SBIR program and offered suggestions as to how 
to improve it. Finally, Ms. Comstock Rick noted the large role 
the SBIR program plays in research for diseases such as 
Parkinson's Disease--especially because of the relatively few 
sufferers leads to less private funding due to a smaller 
potential market.

    FEDERAL REGULATORY OVERREACH AND COMPLIANCE WITH THE REGULATORY 
                            FLEXIBILITY ACT

    On March 30, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met in 
Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose 
of receiving testimony on the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). 
The hearing, titled ``Reducing Federal Agency Overreach: 
Modernizing the Regulatory Flexibility'' focused on introducing 
the concepts of the RFA to members of the Committee, showing 
them how the Act helps reduce regulatory burdens on small 
business, and explaining its weaknesses.
    The witnesses for the hearing were: Bill Squires, Esq., 
Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Blackfoot 
Telecommunications Group, Missoula, MT, testifying on behalf of 
the National Telephone Cooperative Association; David Frulla, 
Esq., Partner, KelleyDrye, Washington, DC; Craig Fabian, Vice 
President of Regulatory Affairs and Assistant General Counsel, 
Aeronautical Repair Station Association, Alexandria, VA; and 
Rich Draper, Chief Executive Officer, The Ice Cream Club, Inc., 
Boynton Beach, FL, testifying on behalf of the International 
Dairy Foods Association.
    Mr. Squires testified that the Federal Communications 
Commission frequently fails to comply with the RFA by treating 
small firms, such as Blackfoot, no differently than the largest 
telecommunications providers in the United States. Mr. Frulla 
noted that the RFA and the Office of Advocacy have proven 
valuable in reducing regulatory burdens on small businesses but 
needs to be overhauled. Mr. Fabian discussed litigation by the 
Aeronautical Repair Station Association challenging agency 
compliance with the RFA and the length of time it took the 
agency to comply with the court order mandating such 
compliance. Mr. Draper testified that small businesses, like 
his own, had significant difficulty dealing with regulatory 
creep and the cumulative effect of disparate agency 
regulations.
    Mr. Graves noted that the hearing would be part of the 
Committee's record as it considers modifications that 
strengthen the RFA.

            FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS AND SMALL BUSINESS EXPORTS

    On April 6, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met in 
Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose 
of receiving testimony on ``Help Wanted: How Passing Free Trade 
Agreements Will Help Small Businesses Create New Jobs.'' The 
hearing focused on the benefits and importance of passing the 
pending free trade agreements to small businesses. Lowering 
trade barriers will spur small business exports, which will 
then lead to job creation and long-term economic growth.
    The witnesses included: Bill Patterson, Founder and Chief 
Engineer, TEI Rock Drills, Montrose, CO; Phillip Wise, Owner 
and Operator, Wise Family Farm, Harris, MO, testifying on 
behalf of the National Pork Producers Council; Trevor Myers, 
CEO, Cloyes Gear & Products, Inc., Fort Smith, AR, testifying 
on behalf of the Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association; 
and Jason Speer, Vice President, Quality Float Works, Inc., 
Schaumburg, IL, testifying on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of 
Commerce.
    At the hearing, four small businesses testified on the 
importance of passing the pending free trade agreements with 
Panama, Colombia, and Korea and their ability to compete 
globally, export more products and create more U.S. jobs. Jason 
Speer from Quality Float Works stated, ``With the passage of 
the three pending trade agreements, our company and more than 
250,000 small and medium-sized companies like ours will have 
the opportunity to gain market share and provide more jobs.'' 
All small business owners testified that failing to pass the 
three pending free trade agreements would put their small 
business at a competitive disadvantage with nations who have 
trade agreements in place.
    At the hearing's close, Chairman Graves said he would 
continue to spotlight the importance of passing the free trade 
agreements to small businesses, and he encouraged the 
Administration and Congress to pass all three agreements by 
July 1, 2011.

              REFORMING AND SIMPLIFYING THE U.S. TAX CODE

    On April 13, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met in 
Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose 
of receiving testimony on ``How Tax Complexity Hinders Small 
Business Job Creation and Economic Growth.'' The hearing 
focused on the complexity of the current tax code, the 
difficulty entrepreneurs have complying with it, and the 
resulting effect on hiring and expansion.
    The witnesses were Nina E. Olson, the National Taxpayer 
Advocate, Washington, DC; Steven J. Strobel, Executive Vice 
President and Chief Financial Officer, BlueStar Energy 
Solutions, Chicago, IL, testifying on behalf of the National 
Small Business Association; Robert Kulp, Founder, Kulp's of 
Stratford, Stratford, WI, testifying on behalf of the National 
Roofing Contractors Association; and Monty W. Walker, CPA, 
Principal, Walker Business Advisory Services, Wichita Falls, 
TX.
    The witnesses agreed that tax complexity has a direct 
impact on small business viability and job growth. In her 
testimony, Nina Olson testified that ``it is essential that the 
tax system does not present an unnecessary hurdle to the 
success of these already fragile operations. In addition, 
because a substantial portion of businesses are pass-through 
entities, a real reduction in complexity will not occur unless 
individual and corporate tax reform occurs at the same time.'' 
Mr. Walker testified that understanding tax matters is 
confusing and tax compliance comes at a cost. This results in 
lost resources that could have been used for business 
operations and business development. Mr. Walker also said that 
because of tax complexity, some business owners decide to stay 
small and not expand. Mr. Strobel encouraged Congress to 
simplify the tax code, broaden the base and lower all 
individual and corporate tax rates. He said these reforms will 
create a surge in economic growth.
    At the hearing's close, Chairman Graves said he plans to 
send a letter to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House 
Committee on Ways and Means urging them to enact common sense 
tax reform that will enable our nation's small businesses to 
create jobs and spur growth in our economy.

              POLITICAL DISCLOSURE IN FEDERAL CONTRACTING

    On May 12, 2011, the Committee on Small Business and 
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform met in Room 2154 
of the Rayburn House Office Building to receive testimony on 
the April 13, 2011 draft Executive Order (EO) entitled, 
``Disclosure of Political Spending by Government Contractors.'' 
The EO directs agencies to require contractors to disclose 
political expenditures and contributions, including those to 
third parties, made within two years of all proposal 
submissions in an official contracting certification, and to 
certify their acknowledgement that full disclosure of this 
information is a precondition to contract award.
    The first panel witness was the Hon. Daniel Gordon, 
Administrator, Office of Federal Procurement Policy. The second 
panel consisted of Alan Chvotkin, Executive Vice President and 
Counsel, Professional Services Council, Arlington, VA; D. Mark 
Renaud, Partner, Wiley Rein LLP, Washington, DC; ML Mackey, 
CEO, Beacon Interactive Systems of Cambridge, MA, testifying on 
behalf of the National Defense Industrial Association; the Hon. 
Marion Blakey, CEO, Aerospace Industries Association, 
Arlington, VA; and the Hon. Bradley A. Smith, Josiah H. 
Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault Designated Professor of Law, 
Capital University Law School, Columbus, Ohio, testifying on 
behalf of the Center for Competitive Politics; and Lawrie 
Hollingsworth, President, Asset Recovery Technologies, Inc., 
Annapolis, MD, testifying on behalf of the U.S. Women's Chamber 
of Commerce.
    Administrator Gordon declined to answer questions about the 
proposed EO, but testified that the Administration remains 
fully committed to a merit-based contracting process rooted in 
the highest levels of integrity and transparency, and 
simultaneously asserted that, ``[t]here is no place for 
politics in federal acquisition.''
    Mr. Chvotkin opposed the EO, stating that political 
contributions do not currently impact federal contract awards, 
that contributions would not help contracting officers make 
awards, and that much of the information required by the EO is 
currently publicly available. As an expert on pay to play laws, 
Mr. Renaud explained that the ``President's proposal actually 
create several new problems where none existed before'' by 
injecting disclosure into the procurement process and creating 
an expensive recordkeeping requirement for small firms. Ms. 
Mackey stated that, as a small business owner, she had no 
problem with disclosure per se, but that it should be separate 
from contract consideration and should not be injected into the 
workplace. Ms. Blakey agreed that ``Political contributions 
should never be considered by any procurement officer when 
making a decision to either award or deny a contract to any 
entity.'' Mr. Smith, as a former Commissioner of the Federal 
Elections Commission, summarized that the proposed EO, 
``imposes junk disclosure requirements that serve no good 
purpose; [c]hills protected political activity; [and] seems 
motivated by simple partisan politics.'' Ms. Hollingsworth, 
while concerned by the administrative burdens the EO would 
place on small businesses, disagreed with the rest of the panel 
and testified that disclosure would level the playing field for 
small business.

            GOVERNMENT WASTE AND DUPLICATION IN SBA PROGRAMS

    On May 25, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met in 
Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose 
of providing oversight on duplication in the U.S. Small 
Business Administration's (SBA's) entrepreneurial development 
programs. The hearing, entitled ``Promoting Entrepreneurship 
and Job Creation by Decreasing Duplication at SBA,'' focused on 
four programs at SBA dealing with entrepreneurial development. 
Those programs are the Small Business Development Companies 
(SBDC), the Service Corps for Retired Employees (SCORE), 
Women's Business Centers (WBCs) and Veterans' Business Outreach 
Centers (VBOCs).
    The witnesses were William Shear, Director, Financial 
Markets and Community Investment, U.S. Government 
Accountability Office (GAO), Washington DC; Arnold Baker, 
President and Founder, Baker Ready Mix and Building Materials, 
New Orleans, LA, testifying on behalf of the National Black 
Chamber of Commerce; Jody Keenan, Director, Virginia Small 
Business Development Center Network, Fairfax, VA, testifying on 
behalf of the Association of Small Business Development 
Centers; and Denise Pickett, Executive Vice President, American 
Express OPEN, New York, NY.
    Mr. Shear discussed the GAO's efforts to uncover waste and 
duplication in the federal government, including a recent GAO 
report pointing to 80 economic development programs that exist 
in four federal agencies costing taxpayers $6.2 billion in 
fiscal year 2010. Mr. Shear testified that the four agencies 
identified in their report appear to have taken some actions to 
implement collaborative practices, but they have offered little 
evidence that they have developed compatible policies or 
procedures. Mr. Shear testified that when you have separate 
infrastructures to deliver similar services it could lead to 
inefficiencies and confusion for small businesses. Mr. Baker 
testified that SBA has sustained too many cuts to its programs 
over the last several years and that the agency cannot afford 
further cuts. He argued that a better funded and better staffed 
field infrastructure at SBA is critical for continued 
improvement of this nation's economy. Ms. Keenan testified that 
the SBDC network is on the front line of providing services to 
entrepreneurs. She indicated that SBDCs serve all types of 
businesses and would very easily be able to deliver services to 
the small business community currently being served by other 
entrepreneurial development programs funded by SBA. Ms. Pickett 
testified about the programs that American Express offers to 
small business owners and stated that the public sector needs 
to work together with both the private sector and non-profits 
to meet to meet the needs of business owners.

                  ACCESS TO CAPITAL FOR SMALL BUSINESS

    On June 1, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met in 
Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose 
of receiving testimony on small business access to capital. The 
hearing entitled ``Access to Capital: Can Small Businesses 
Access The Credit Necessary To Grow and Create Jobs?'' provided 
a forum for lenders and business owners to discuss the current 
economic environment and how they are working together to 
support private sector job growth.
    The witnesses included William Hall, a Dairy Queen 
Franchisee, Ft. Worth, Texas, testifying on behalf of the 
National Franchise Association; Lynn Ozer, Executive Vice 
President, Susquehanna Bank, Pottstown, PA, testifying on 
behalf of the National Association of Government Guaranteed 
Lenders (NAGGL); Robert Kottler, Executive Vice President, 
Director of Retail and Small Business Banking, Iberia Bank, 
Lafayette, LA, testifying on behalf of the Consumer Bankers of 
American; and Dennis Jacobe, Chief Economist, Gallup, 
Washington, DC.
    Mr. Hall testified about his struggle to obtain capital in 
recent years and the needs of small businesses to obtain 
capital to maintain operations as well as grow. He cited a $2 
billion shortfall in available loans, which if filled could 
create more than 332,000 new jobs in the franchise industry. 
Ms. Ozer testified that the economic circumstances of the last 
several years, combined with increased federal banking 
regulations, have created the ``perfect storm of circumstances 
that together serve to stifle banks' abilities to make credit 
available to small businesses.'' Loan underwriting standards 
are significantly tighter today than they were just a few years 
ago. Many banks are taking advantage of the SBA 7(a) program 
since it takes less capital to support an SBA loan then it does 
a conventional loan. Mr. Kottler testified that over the last 
few years, his bank has seen weaker demand for small business 
loans, but they are starting to see an increase. Factors 
affecting credit demand are lower sales and collateral value, 
mainly in the housing sector. To increase demand, lenders are 
working closer with borrowers, and many banks have instituted 
``second look'' programs for those borrowers who are initially 
denied credit. Mr. Jacobe testified that the downfall in the 
housing industry and the recent financial crisis have caused 
huge disruptions in the financial services sector that have 
resulted in the continued economic ``soft patch.'' Citing 
research performed by the Gallup Organization, Mr. Jacobe 
reported that business owner optimism is down from early 2011, 
getting credit is slightly less difficult and small business 
owners are hiring fewer employees than they need.
                                 PART B

                         Subcommittee Hearings

          SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS CREATING INNOVATION AND JOBS

    On April 7, 2011, the Subcommittee on Healthcare and 
Technology of the Committee on Small Business met in Room 2360 
of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose of 
receiving testimony on draft legislation reauthorizing the 
Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business 
Technology Transfer (STTR) Programs. The hearing, entitled 
``The Creating Jobs Through Small Business Innovation Act of 
2011'' focused on improving the SBIR and STTR programs via the 
legislation.
    The witnesses for the hearing were: Glenn Norem, Executive 
Chairman Totus Lighting Solutions, Inc., Lakeway, TX; Terry 
Brewer, Ph.D., President, Brewer Science, Inc., Rolla, MO; 
Albert Link, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Economics, 
University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, NC; and 
Scott Koenig, Ph.D., Chairman of the Board, Applied Genetics 
Technology Corporation (AGTC) and CEO of MacroGenics, Inc., 
Rockville, MD, testifying on behalf of the Biotechnology 
Industry Organization.
    Dr. Norem began the testimony by stating that the current 
Small Business Administration (SBA) rules regarding the 
participation of majority owned venture-backed small businesses 
has handicapped his business's access to capital. He stated 
that because of the rule, his company has had to make the 
choice between participation in the SBIR program or accepting 
venture capital investment. Dr. Brewer stressed the importance 
of the SBIR program on emerging as well as established 
companies and suggested that the SBIR program be a catalyst for 
American manufacturing. Dr. Link detailed the findings of the 
National Research Council's An Assessment of the Small Business 
Innovation Research Program of which he was a part. Dr. Koenig 
focused his testimony on the SBA's venture capital rule, 
contrasting two unique therapies two different companies have 
developed; one that succeeded (the company MedImmune and the 
treatment called Synagis) prior to the SBA's 2003 decision to 
limit the participation of venture-backed companies in the SBIR 
program and one that has been shelved (the company AGTC and the 
treatment for Pompe's disease) because the company had too much 
venture capital support under the current rules.

            THE EFFECT OF HIGH GAS PRICES ON SMALL BUSINESS

    On April 14, 2011, the Subcommittee on Agriculture, Energy 
and Trade of the Committee on Small Business met in Room 2360 
of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose of 
receiving testimony on ``Drilling for a Solution: Finding Ways 
to Curtail the Crushing Effect of High Gas Prices on Small 
Business.'' The hearing focused on the negative impacts of 
rising fuel costs on small business and policies that should be 
implemented to decrease the United States' dependence on 
foreign oil and ease the cost burden on small businesses.
    The witnesses were Jim Ehrlich, Executive Director, 
Colorado Potato Administrative Committee, Monte Vista, CO; Rick 
Richter, owner of Richter Aviation, Maxwell, CA, testifying on 
behalf of the Agricultural Aviation Association; Dick Pingel, 
owner of Finally Trucking, Inc., Plover, WI, testifying on 
behalf of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, 
Inc.; and Robert Weiner, Professor of International Business, 
Public Policy, Public Administration and International Affairs, 
George Washington University, Washington, DC.
    The witnesses spoke about the impacts of increasing fuel 
costs within their industries and other small businesses, and 
agreed that the United States government should encourage 
increases in domestic energy development to reduce dependency 
on foreign sources and decrease fuel costs. Mr. Weiner stated, 
``[t]o foster investment and future production [of oil] it is 
important to establish and implement clear, stable policy in 
the areas that affect petroleum the most--taxes and 
regulation.'' Mr. Ehrlich noted that ``for every $0.10 increase 
in gas prices there is a net loss of $5 billion dollars to the 
United States economy,'' and pointed to the fact that the 
``total energy cost of an irrigated potato crop in the San Luis 
valley can be as great as fifty percent of total production.'' 
Mr. Pingel testified that despite the fact that most owner-
operators earn less than $40,000 a year in income, ``each time 
the price of a gallon of diesel fuel increases by a nickel, a 
trucker's annual costs increase by $1,000.'' He also advocated 
fuel-efficiency driver training in lieu of costly government 
regulations. Finally, Mr. Richter encouraged Congress to 
prevent the EPA from promulgating new regulations on avgas. If 
these standards are put into place, it would effectively ground 
over 50 percent of agricultural aircraft, as there are no 
acceptable substitutes for piston-powered engines.

                SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARDS REGULATION

    On May 5, 2011, the Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Tax 
and Capital Access of the Committee on Small Business met in 
Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building to receive 
testimony on the U.S. Small Business Administration's (SBA) 
proposed rule, ``Small Business Size Standards: Professional, 
Scientific and Technical Services,'' 74 Fed. Reg. 14323 (March 
16, 2011). The proposed rule addresses industries within North 
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Sector 54, 
Professional, Scientific and Technical Services, and one 
industry in NAICS Sector 81, Other Services. It would increase 
the small business size standards for 35 industries and one 
sub-industry, reduce the number of available size standards 
from 41 receipt and employee based standards to 16 standards, 
and bundle NAICS codes together to form common industry group 
size standards.
    The witnesses were Walter J. Hainsfurther, FAIA, President, 
Kurtz Associates Architects of Des Plaines, IL, testifying on 
behalf of the American Institute of Architects (AIA); John 
Woods, Partner, Wood Peacock Engineering Consultants of 
Alexandria, VA, testifying on behalf of the American Council of 
Engineering Companies (ACEC); Roger Jordan, Vice President, 
Professional Services Council (PSC) of Arlington, VA; and 
Odysseus Lanier, Partner, McConnell Jones Lanier & Murphy LLP 
of Houston, TX, testifying on behalf of the American Institute 
of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA).
    The witnesses agreed growth in the size standards is 
necessary to reflect economic conditions, but each disagreed 
with changes proposed by SBA. Mr. Hainsfurther testified that 
raising the standard for architectural firms from $4.5 million 
from $19 million, due to the use of common group size 
standards, would result in over 97% of architectural firms 
qualifying as small businesses, and stated that an employee 
based standard would better represent his industry. Mr. Woods 
testified that ACEC needed more time to respond to the SBA 
proposal, since the proposed rule would result in ``more than 
90% of the nation's engineering industry . . . [being] 
classified as small business[es].'' Mr. Jordan protested the 
use of common size standards when those standards 
``eliminate[d] legitimate small businesses from being able to 
qualify.'' Mr. Lanier testified that SBA was not using the best 
industry data, and that the methodology did not address whether 
a firm was dominant in its field.
    At the hearing's close, Chairman Walsh said he plans to 
submit the hearing record to SBA for inclusion in the 
administrative record, and to request that SBA extend the 
comment period on the rulemaking.

              ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGULATIONS

    On May 12, 2011, the Subcommittee on Oversight, 
Investigations and Regulations of the Committee on Small 
Business met in Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building 
for the purpose of receiving testimony on ``Green Isn't Always 
Gold: Are EPA Regulations Stifling Small Business?'' The 
hearing focused on the negative impacts of the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations on small 
businesses.
    The witnesses were Glenn Johnston, Vice President of 
Regulatory Affairs, Gevo, Inc., Englewood, CO; John Ward, 
Chairman, Citizens for Recycling First, Broomfield, CO; and 
Bradford Muller, Vice President of Marketing & Corporate 
Communications, Charlotte Pipe and Foundry Company, Charlotte, 
NC, testifying on behalf of the American Foundry Society.
    The witnesses spoke about the impacts of various EPA 
proposed and final rules and how they negatively impact their 
industries, most specifically as they relate to the Clean Air 
Act and the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act. Witnesses 
also spoke about how EPA has neglected to take into account the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act when promulgating regulations, 
despite significant direct and indirect burdens experienced by 
small businesses. In his remarks, Mr. Muller stated, ``on the 
question of whether the EPA Regulations are harming small 
businesses .  .  . [t]he answer is unequivocally yes.''
    Mr. Ward, a former member of the National Coal Council and 
American Coal Council, testified that between 1999 and 2009, 
138 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions were decreased 
through the use of coal fly ash in concrete products, and that 
designating these byproducts as hazardous waste would only 
serve to increase waste and pollutant emissions.
    Mr. Johnston indicated that biofuels with broad market 
applications as a solvent and a gasoline blendstock cannot 
compete with ethanol due to EPA policies. ``Gevo and the 
Advanced Biofuels industry in general believe that the EPA 
should review its regulatory regime and to the extent possible 
should assure that biofuels other than ethanol have equal and 
unfettered access to the market,'' he said.

                 GOVERNMENT CONTRACTORS' TAX COMPLIANCE

    On May 26, 2011, the Subcommittee on Contracting and 
Workforce of the Committee on Small Business met in Room 2360 
of the Rayburn House Office Building to receive testimony on 
the effects of implementing Section 511 of the Tax Increase 
Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-222. 
As revised and implemented, the provision requires that 
payments by federal, state and local governmental entities for 
goods and services made after December 31, 2013 be subject to 
3% income tax withholding in order to address the tax gap.
    The first panel witness was the Hon. Wally Herger (R-CA). 
The second panel consisted of Brian George, Deputy Director, 
Office of Cost, Pricing & Finance, U.S. Department of Defense 
(DoD), accompanied by Dave McDermott, Director, Standards and 
Compliance, Defense Finance and Accounting Service, DoD, and 
the Hon. Curtis M. Loftis Jr., Treasurer of the State of South 
Carolina. The third panel witnesses were Mike Murphy, 
President, Turner Murphy Construction of Rock Hill, SC, 
testifying on behalf of the Associated General Contractors; Ian 
Frost, Principal, EEE Consulting, Inc. of Mechanicsville, VA, 
testifying on behalf of the American Council of Engineering 
Companies; and James M. Gaffney, Vice President, Goshen 
Mechanical Inc. of Malvern, PA, testifying on behalf of the 
Quality Construction Alliance; and Kara M. Sacilotto, Partner, 
Wiley Rein LLP, Washington, DC. Over thirty additional groups 
submitted testimony for the record.
    Congressman Herger expressed his support for repeal of 
Section 511, and encouraged passage of H.R. 674, which would 
eliminate the 3% withholding provision.
    Messrs. George and McDermott provided information regarding 
the 2008 DoD study which found that implementation of Section 
511 would cost DoD $17 billion and deny the Department full 
small business participation, competition, and innovation. Mr. 
Loftis denounced the provision as an unfunded mandate that 
would create unnecessary budget stress on state and local 
governments while simultaneously harming small businesses.
    Each of the small business witnesses testified that the 3% 
withholding provisions exceed their profit margins and thereby 
prevent them from expanding or creating jobs. Ms. Sacilotto, as 
a government contracts attorney, explained that the unintended 
consequences costs of the Section 511 on the procurement system 
outweighed any recaptured revenue.
    Chairman Mulvaney concluded the hearing by promising to 
work with the Committee on Ways and Means to repeal Section 
511. A copy of the hearing transcript will be sent to the 
Committee on Ways and Means once it is available.

      HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY IMPLEMENTATION AND REGULATION

    On June 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Healthcare and 
Technology of the Committee on Small Business met in Room 2360 
of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose of a 
hearing entitled, ``Not What the Doctor Ordered: Health IT 
Barriers for Small Medical Practices.'' The hearing focused on 
the implementation of health IT by small physician practices, 
barriers that small practices have encountered and possible 
solutions to those barriers.
    The witnesses were: Farzad Mostashari, M.D., M.Sc., 
National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC), 
Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC; Karen 
Trudel, Acting Director, Office of E-Health Standards and 
Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), 
Baltimore, MD; Sasha Kramer, M.D., Olympia, WA, testifying on 
behalf of the American Dermatological Society; Denise Elliott, 
D.P.M., Marrero, LA, testifying on behalf of the American 
Podiatric Medical Association; Andrew Slavitt, Chief Executive 
Officer, OptimumInsight, Eden Prairie, MN; and David L. Baumer, 
Ph.D., Professor of Law and Technology, North Carolina State 
University, Raleigh, NC.
    Dr. Mostashari testified that the Regional Extension 
Centers offer training and technical assistance to small 
practices that are working toward meaningful use of Electronic 
Health Records (EHR). Ms. Trudel said CMS and the states have 
made incentive payments to 1139 eligible professionals who have 
successfully adopted EHRs.
    The second panel's witnesses agreed that health information 
technology can help to boost a medical practice's quality of 
care, but that barriers can prevent smaller practices from 
adopting it. Dr. Elliott noted that more than 65% of 
podiatrists practice in one or two person groups, and requiring 
them to implement electronic health records for Medicare is an 
undue financial burden. Dr. Kramer purchased a system by a 
company that was acquired by another company whose software is 
not compatible. Now she is facing the purchase of a new system. 
Mr. Slavitt said the purchase and design of technology have 
taken a back burner to all of the compliance reporting 
requirements'' needed to qualify for federal incentive 
payments. Dr. Baumer testified that the efficiency gains are 
offset by the possible increased risks to the privacy of 
medical records and recommended legal safe harbors for small 
firms to protect them from lawsuits.

          DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION REGULATION OF TRUCKING

    On June 14, 2011, the House Committee on Small Business' 
Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations and Regulations met 
in Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the 
purpose of receiving testimony on ``Do Not Enter: How Proposed 
Hours of Service Trucking Rules Are a Dead End for Small 
Businesses.'' The hearing focused on the Federal Motor Carrier 
Safety Administration's proposed rule on Hours of Service for 
property-carrying truckers.
    The witnesses were Paul James, President, Rex Oil Company, 
Denver, CO; James Burg, Owner, James Burg Trucking, Warren, MI; 
J.D. Morrissette, President, Interstate Van Line Operations, 
Inc., Springfield, VA; and Rusty Rader, Co-Owner, J.J. Kennedy, 
Inc., Fombell, PA.
    The witnesses discussed how this proposed regulation would 
harm their industries by reducing allowed duty times for 
property-carrying trucks, hindering the ability for owner-
operators and other small businesses to transport goods 
nationwide. In his remarks, Mr. Burg stated, ``[t]hese changes, 
if finalized, would have a profoundly negative impact on small 
businesses, would restrict productivity, and would result in 
greater congestion and increased emissions. These impacts are 
significant since there are some 500,000 trucking companies in 
the United States and 99 percent of these companies are small 
businesses.'' Mr. Morrissette spoke to the complexities of the 
proposed rule: ``[t]he proposed hours of service changes are 
complicated, difficult to understand and difficult for the 
customer to appreciate .  .  . the current rules should 
continue to apply.'' Mr. Rader testified to the challenges that 
would be created as a result of changed restart provisions: 
``[b]y mandating a driver's off duty time to include at least 
two consecutive periods of midnight to 6 a.m., reduces the 
number of hours available to meet construction and delivery 
schedules to an unacceptable level. Not every work day takes 
place during daylight hours, making this proposed change overly 
restrictive.'' Mr. James said, ``[w]ith fewer hours to drive 
each day, many companies would be forced to hire additional 
drivers or delay deliveries to the following day .  .  . [t]he 
daily reduction in driving hours would thus decrease overall 
safety by putting less experienced drivers on the road.''


                                 PART C

                 Waste, Fraud, Abuse and Mismanagement

    Of the hearings delineated above, the following were 
devoted specifically to an examination of programs within the 
Committee's jurisdiction with a focus on potential 
mismanagement, waste, fraud and/or abuse.

  HEARING ON THE FY 2012 BUDGET FOR THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

    During the March 2, 2011 full Committee hearing on the 
President's FY 2012 budget request for the Small Business 
Administration (SBA), at which Administrator Karen Mills 
testified, the programs under her authority were discussed in 
detail. The members of the Committee expressed their concerns 
about several pilot programs that are not authorized, as well 
as the management of the agency related to the distribution of 
personnel and its reflection of agency priorities. Further, the 
Committee pointed to issues cited by the agency's Inspector 
General, namely the SBA's expedited loan processing initiatives 
and reliance on outside financial institutions, as well as 
contracts awarded to firms that do not meet program eligibility 
criteria. These concerns are laid out in greater detail in the 
Committee's FY 2012 budget views and estimates letter that was 
adopted by the Committee on March 15, 2011.

            HEARING ON ENTREPRENUERIAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

    The Committee hearing on May 25, 2011 examined duplication 
in the SBA's entrepreneurial development programs. The hearing 
focused on a report by the Government Accountability Office 
citing 80 economic development programs throughout the 
Department of Commerce, the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, the Department of Agriculture and SBA. The 
Committee specifically focused on four programs at the SBA 
dealing with entrepreneurial development. Those programs are 
the Small Business Development Companies (SBDC), the Service 
Corps for Retired Employees (SCORE), Women's Business Centers 
(WBCs) and Veterans' Business Outreach Centers (VBOCs). In a 
March 15, 2011 letter to the Senate Committee on Small Business 
and Entrepreneurship, the SBA's Inspector General pointed to 
overlap in these SBA programs, reporting that 104 of the 109 
WBCs listed on SBA's website are located within 25 miles of 
either an SBDC or SCORE chapter. Additionally, of the 16 
Veterans Business Opportunity Centers, seven are located at the 
same college or university as an SBDC. Of the remaining 
veterans' centers, six have an SBDC within 10 miles, two are 
less than 20 miles from an SBDC and the remaining center is 33 
miles away. The Inspector General also noted that the 
Department of Commerce Minority Business Development agency has 
41 outreach centers providing similar services as SBDCs. All of 
these 41 centers have a SBDC or SCORE chapter within 25 miles. 
The Committee is examining these programs for consolidation or 
elimination, in line with the recommendations made in its FY 
2012 budget views and estimates letter.

       HEARINGS ON THE SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH PROGRAM

    The Committee held two hearings on the Small Business 
Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology 
Transfer (STTR) Programs. The full Committee held a general 
hearing to provide an overview of the programs on March 16, 
2011. The Subcommittee on Healthcare and Technology held a 
hearing on April 7, 2011 to examine a draft legislative 
proposal to reauthorize and modernize the programs. Included in 
the draft proposal were provisions designed to eliminate waste 
and fraud in the programs. For example, the legislation 
establishes an interagency committee to recommend greater 
efficiencies in the programs; requires the Comptroller General 
of the United States to conduct an audit of the SBIR and STTR 
programs; seeks to amend the SBIR and STTR Policy Directives to 
include measures to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse, including 
GAO studies on various measures of effectiveness; and requires 
the Offices of Inspector General for participating agencies to 
submit annual reports on fraud elimination in the programs. 
Ultimately, these provisions were included in legislation (H.R. 
1425) that the Committee marked up and reported favorably on 
May 11, 2011.
                 OVERSIGHT PLAN FOR THE 112TH CONGRESS

    Clause 2(d) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives for the 112th Congress requires that each 
standing committee, in the first session of a Congress, adopt 
an oversight plan for the two-year period of the Congress and 
submit the plan to the Committee on Oversight and Government 
Reform and the Committee on House Administration.
    Clause 1(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires each committee to submit to the House, 
not later than the 30th day after June 1, a semiannual report 
on the activities of that committee. Moreover, that report 
shall include a summary of the oversight plan submitted under 
clause 2(d) of rule X and summary of the actions taken with 
respect to such plan; and a summary of any additional oversight 
activities undertaken by the committee.
    Part A of this section contains the Oversight Plan of the 
Committee on Small Business for the One Hundred Twelfth 
Congress, which the Committee considered and adopted on January 
26, 2011.
    Part B of this section contains a summary of the actions 
taken to implement that plan.
                                 PART A

           Oversight Plan of the Committee on Small Business 
                  for the One Hundred Twelfth Congress

                              ----------                              


     January 26, 2011. Approved by the Committee on Small Business

                              ----------                              

    Mr. Graves, from the Committee on Small Business, submitted 
to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the 
Committee on House Administration the following:

                                 REPORT

    Rule X, cl. 2(d)(1) of the Rules of the House requires each 
standing Committee to adopt an oversight plan for the two-year 
period of the Congress and to submit the plan to the Committees 
on Government Reform and House Administration not later than 
February 15 of the first session of the Congress. Under rule X, 
the Committee has oversight authority to investigate and 
examine any matter affecting small business. This Report 
reflects that broad oversight jurisdiction.
    Pursuant to rule X, cl. 2(d)(1)(F), this oversight plan 
also includes from proposals to cut or eliminate programs that 
are inefficient, duplicative, outdated, or more appropriately 
administered by State or local governments.
Oversight of Federal capital access programs
    The Committee will conduct the hearings and investigations 
into Small Business Administration (SBA) and other federal 
agencies that provide capital to America's entrepreneurs that 
may include any or all of the following as well as matters 
brought to the attention of the Committee subsequent to the 
filing of this Report:
     Effectiveness of the capital access programs to 
generate jobs in the fastest growing small businesses.
     Whether lenders are meeting their goals to lend to 
small businesses and create jobs.
     Risk to the taxpayers of the capital access 
programs and if those risks are not reasonable, then 
elimination of those programs.
     Adequacy of SBA oversight of its lending partners 
to ensure that federal taxpayers are properly protected.
     Capabilities of the SBA information technology to 
manage the loan portfolio.
     Appropriateness of ad hoc guidance documents in 
regulating lenders and borrowers.
     The exercise of discretion by SBA to create pilot 
programs and the risk they pose to the taxpayer and whether 
such authority should be curtailed or eliminated.
     Whether SBA disaster loan program and its 
oversight ensures that small businesses are able to revive to 
rebuild communities without unduly placing the federal taxpayer 
at risk.
     Efficacy and duplication of federal capital access 
programs offered by the Department of Agriculture to small 
businesses in rural areas.
     Utilization by small businesses of export capital 
programs at the Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private 
Investment Corporation.
     Effectiveness of the Small Business Lending Fund 
and State Small Business Credit Initiative created by Pub. L. 
No. 111-240, the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010.
     Impact of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 
Consumer Protection Act, Pub. L. No. 111-203 on small business 
access to capital.
    In performing oversight, the Committee will focus on 
particularly risky aspects of financial assistance programs 
including, but not limited to, commercial real estate 
refinancing, premier certified lenders, participating security 
small business investment companies, small business lending 
companies, express lenders, loan programs utilizing simplified 
lending applications, and disaster loans offered by private 
lenders through interest rate subsidies.

Oversight of SBA and other Federal entrepreneurial development programs

    The Committee will conduct the hearings and investigations 
into the SBA programs that provide training and advice to small 
businesses that may include any or all of the following as well 
as matters brought to the attention of the Committee subsequent 
to the filing of this Report:
     Examining effectiveness of SBA entrepreneurial 
development programs in creating jobs.
     Determining whether certain programs should be 
eliminated as a result of their ineffectiveness or duplication 
of programs provided by other agencies.
     Suggesting methods for enhancing coordination 
among federal agencies in providing assistance to 
entrepreneurs.
     Enhancing the efficacy and utilization of the 
Manufacturing Extension Partnership at the Department of 
Commerce.
     Recommending improvements in assistance to small 
businesses that participate in the production of value-added 
agricultural products.
     Increasing effectiveness of technical assistance 
provided to small businesses involved in the production of 
renewable and non-renewable energy sources.

Oversight of Federal Government contracting matters

    The Committee will conduct hearings and investigations into 
the federal procurement system that may include any or all of 
the following as well as matters brought to the attention of 
the Committee subsequent to the filing of this Report:
     Whether fraud or other problems exist in the 
federal government contracting programs overseen by the SBA 
including the 8(a), HUBZone, service-disabled veteran, women-
owned contracting program, and Small Business Innovation 
Research program.
     Effectiveness of SBA contracting programs to 
increase participation by small businesses in federal 
procurement.
     Effectiveness of federal agency protections 
against contract bundling and consolidation.
     The accuracy and utility of SBA size standards and 
federal procurement databases.
     Operation and effectiveness of federal agency 
assistance provided to small businesses interested in federal 
procurement, including that provided by the SBA, Offices of 
Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization and Procurement 
Technical Assistance Centers.
     Development of federal acquisition policies and 
whether small businesses have sufficiently effective voice in 
development of such policies.
     Cost-effectiveness of outsourcing government work 
to private enterprise rather than expanding the government to 
provide the good or service internally (i.e., government 
insourcing).
    In performing oversight, the Committee will focus its 
efforts on uncovering abuse and misuse of the small business 
designation to obtain federal government contracts.

Oversight of SBA management

    The Committee will conduct the hearings and investigations 
into the management of the SBA that may include any or all of 
the following, as well as matters brought to the attention of 
the Committee subsequent to the filing of this Report:
     The appropriate mission of the SBA.
     Whether agency employees in the field are 
empowered to assist small businesses.
     Duplication of offices and missions at SBA 
headquarters.
     Effectiveness of personnel management to ensure 
that employees are rewarded for assisting small businesses.
     Capabilities of SBA employees to provide proper 
assistance to small business owners.
    In carrying out this oversight, the Committee will focus 
particularly on streamlining and reorganizing the agency's 
operations to provide maximum assistance to small business 
owners. Offices that primarily provide assistance or advice to 
headquarters staff that do not promote the interests of small 
businesses or protect the federal government as a guarantor of 
loans will be recommended for cuts or elimination. For some 
potential offices in which the Committee will examine, refer to 
the section title ``Reductions in Programs and Spending.''

Oversight of Federal regulatory and paperwork burdens

    The Committee will conduct hearings and investigations into 
unnecessary, burdensome, and duplicative federal rules, 
reporting and recordkeeping requirements affecting small 
businesses that may include any or all of the following, as 
well as matters brought to the attention of the Committee 
subsequent to the filing of this Report:
     Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
     Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
     Consumer Safety Products Commission.
     Department of Agriculture.
     Department of Energy, particularly the Office of 
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
     Department of the Interior, particularly the 
Bureau of Land Management and Minerals Management Service.
     Department of Labor, particularly the Occupational 
Safety and Health Administration.
     Department of Homeland Security, particularly the 
Transportation Security Administration.
     Department of Transportation, particularly the 
Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Motor Carrier 
Safety Administration.
     Environmental Protection Agency.
     Federal Communications Commission.
     Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council 
and its constituent agencies.
     Food and Drug Administration.
     Office of Federal Procurement Policy.
     Securities and Exchange Commission.
    The Committee will identify specific rules and regulations 
already issued or at the proposed rule stage to assess the 
impact on small businesses. The Committee will pay close 
attention to the effect that regulations have on the 
implementation of advanced technologies including, but not 
limited to, the deployment of broadband communications (either 
by wireline or wireless services) throughout the United States. 
Oversight of the regulatory process also will, to the extent 
relevant, examine the work of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs at the Office of Management and Budget. 
Special attention will be paid to the work performed by the 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy at the United States Small Business 
Administration to ensure that the Office is fulfilling its 
mission to advocate vigorously on behalf of America's small 
business owners in regulatory matters at federal agencies. 
Finally, this oversight will entail an examination of 
compliance by federal agencies with amendments to Executive 
Order 12,866 and memoranda on regulatory flexibility and 
regulatory compliance issued by the President on January 18, 
2011.

Oversight of Federal tax policy

    The Committee will conduct hearings and investigations into 
the federal tax code, its impact on small business, and 
Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) collection of taxes that may 
include any or all of the following, as well as matters brought 
to the attention of the Committee subsequent to the filing of 
this Report:
     Identification of tax code provisions that hinder 
the ability of small businesses to create jobs and 
recommendations for modifying those provisions to boost small 
business job growth.
     Examination of the structure of the tax code in 
order to simplify compliance for small businesses.
     Assessment of the recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements associated with tax compliance and suggestions for 
reducing such burdens on small businesses.
     Evaluation of the estate tax provisions to 
determine whether they inhibit the ability of successive 
generations to maintain successful job creating enterprises.
     Efficiencies at the IRS that improve the 
interaction between the government and small business owners.
     Inefficiencies at the IRS that force small 
businesses to divert capital from job growth to tax compliance.

Oversight of health care policy

    The Committee will conduct hearings and investigations into 
federal health care policy (such as Medicare and Medicaid) and 
the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable 
Care Act that may include any or all of the following, as well 
as matters brought to the attention of the Committee subsequent 
to the filing of this Report:
     The cost of the Patient Protection and Affordable 
Care Act to small businesses, including the self-employed.
     The impact of the Patient Protection and 
Affordable Care Act, Medicare and Medicaid on the ability of 
physicians, pharmacists, and allied health care providers to 
offer the best care possible to patients.
     Alternatives to the Patient Protection and 
Affordable Care Act that reduce health insurance costs to small 
businesses without inhibiting their ability to create jobs.
     The impact of state tort and insurance laws on the 
cost of medical care.
     Examination of increases in efficiencies that will 
improve the provision of health care while reducing costs to 
small businesses that offer their workers health insurance.

Oversight of energy policy

    The Committee will conduct hearings and investigations into 
energy policy to reduce the cost of energy and increase energy 
independence that may include any or all of the following, as 
well as matters brought to the attention of the Committee 
subsequent to the filing of this Report:
     Innovations developed by small businesses that 
increase energy independence.
     Federal regulatory policies that increase 
dependence on foreign sources of energy.
     Policies needed to incentivize production of 
energy in the United States.
     Examination of commercialization of research in 
renewable energy.
     Federal regulations or policies that increase 
energy costs for small businesses.
    The primary thrust of the Committee's efforts will focus on 
efforts to use the innovation of America's entrepreneurs to 
fuel the drive for greater energy independence.

Oversight of trade and intellectual property policy

    The Committee will conduct hearings and investigations into 
international trade and intellectual property policies of 
America and its trading partners that may include any or all of 
the following, as well as matters brought to the attention of 
the Committee subsequent to the filing of this Report:
     Impact of free trade agreements to increase 
exports by American small businesses.
     Whether the federal government is doing enough to 
protect the intellectual property rights of small businesses 
from foreign competitors.
     The impact of federal intellectual property 
policies, particularly patents and copyrights, to protect the 
innovations of American entrepreneurs.
     Efforts to increase exports by small businesses.
    The focus of oversight will emphasize the best mechanisms 
to promote and protect advanced technology innovations of small 
businesses.

Reductions in programs and spending

    In addition to the programs and policies already cited, the 
Committee will examine any and all including, but not limited 
to, programs and offices listed below in order to find areas in 
which to reduce the federal deficit:
     Small Business Lending Fund operated by the 
Department of the Treasury.
     State Small Business Credit Initiative operated by 
the Department of the Treasury.
     Patriot Express Loan Program overseen by the SBA.
     Express Loan Program overseen by the SBA.
     Emerging Leaders Initiative started by the SBA.
     Drug-Free Workplace Program.
     SBA Office of Policy.
     SBA Regional Administrators.
     Office of Advocacy Regional Advocates.
     SBA Deputy District Directors.
     SBA Office of International Trade.
     SBA Office of Native American Affairs.
    In particular, the Committee will assess whether 
reorganization and reassignment of employees to more critical 
functions at the SBA, such as positions as procurement center 
representatives, will provide a more effective agency at 
assisting small businesses generate growth.


                                 PART B

Implementation of the Oversight Plan of the Committee on Small Business 
                  for the One Hundred Twelfth Congress

A. Oversight of Federal capital access programs
    In its review of the Small Business Administration's (SBA) 
fiscal year (FY) 2012 budget request, the Committee analyzed 
the agency programs devoted to providing access to capital to 
small businesses. During a March 2, 2011 hearing on the SBA 
budget, at which the SBA Administrator testified, and as part 
of the Committee's views and estimates on the FY 2012 budget 
adopted on March 15, 2011, the Committee outlined its concerns 
with and proposals for improving the SBA programs devoted to 
small business financing, including the 7(a) Loan Program, the 
Certified Development Company Loan Program, the Microloan 
Program, the Small Business Lending Intermediary Pilot Program, 
the Small Business Investment Company Program, the Surety Bond 
Program and the Disaster Loan Program.
    On June 1, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met for a 
hearing titled, ``Access to Capital: Can Small Businesses 
Access the Credit Necessary To Grow and Create Jobs?'' The 
hearing provided a forum for lenders and business owners to 
discuss the current economic environment and how they are 
working together to support private sector job growth. 
Witnesses from the lending side discussed the demand for 
capital and current initiatives to encourage small business 
lending. Small business owners testified about the current 
economic environment and the capital that is required to expand 
and hire new workers. The value of the SBA lending programs, 
particularly the 7(a) guarantee program, was discussed in 
detail.
    On June 2, 2011, the Committee secured a commitment from 
the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to review the SBA's 
Loan Management Accounting system. This system is designed to 
manage the SBA guaranteed loan portfolio, but is severely 
outdated. The Committee's views and estimates letter on the FY 
2012 budget request, adopted by the Committee on March 15, 
2011, outlines concerns with the Loan Management Accounting 
System used by the SBA and resources devoted to it.
B. Oversight of SBA and other Federal entrepreneurial development 
        programs
    On March 15, 2011 the Committee adopted its views and 
estimates on the FY 2012 budget that outlined several 
duplicative entrepreneurial development programs at the SBA. 
This letter will be used as a template for legislation to 
consolidate and/or eliminate said programs.
    On May 25, 2011, the Committee on Small Business held a 
full committee hearing titled, ``Promoting Entrepreneurship and 
Job Creation by Decreasing Duplication at SBA.'' This hearing 
examined duplicative programs at the U.S. Small Business 
Administration (SBA), specifically focusing on the 
entrepreneurial development Programs. The panel discussed the 
overlap that occurs within SBA's entrepreneurial development 
programs and how private efforts meet the needs of businesses 
seeking professional educational opportunities.
C. Oversight of Federal Government contracting matters
    On March 16, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met for 
a hearing titled, ``Spurring Innovation and Job Creation: The 
SBIR Program.'' This hearing marked the beginning of the 
Committee's work to reauthorize the Small Business Innovation 
Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) 
programs. Last fully reauthorized in 2000, the SBIR program 
sets aside federal research and development dollars to be 
provided in the form of grants to small businesses that offer 
innovations and needed products to the federal government. As 
such, the program offers an effective way to jump start 
entrepreneurs, grow the economy, and create jobs.
    On April 7, 2011, the Subcommittee on Healthcare and 
Technology met for a hearing titled, ``The Creating Jobs 
Through Small Business Innovation Act of 2011.'' The hearing 
was the second in a series of Committee events associated with 
the reauthorization SBIR and STTR programs. This hearing 
examined a draft of legislation reauthorizing the SBIR and STTR 
programs. Witnesses discussed the benefits of specific 
provisions in the draft legislation designed to improve and 
modernize the SBIR and STTR programs.
    On April 15, 2011, the Committee sent a letter to the SBA 
requesting access to the Electronic Subcontracting Reporting 
Systems to better carry out its oversight responsibilities.
    On May 5, 2011, the Subcommittee on Economic Growth, 
Capital Access and Tax met for a hearing titled, ``Professional 
Services: Proposed Changes to the Small Business Size 
Standard.'' The Subcommittee hearing examined the impact of 
size standard regulations proposed by the SBA to redefine who 
is a small business in the professional, scientific, and 
technical services industries. The transcript of the hearing 
and written testimony was provided to the SBA via a letter 
dated May 6, 2011, to be included in the administrative record.
    On May 12, 2011, the House Committee on Small Business and 
the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform met for 
a joint hearing entitled, ``Politicizing Procurement: Will 
President Obama's Proposal Curb Free Speech and Hurt Small 
Business?'' This hearing examined the proposed Executive Order 
(``EO'') mandating the disclosure of political donations by 
government contractors as a prerequisite to receiving a 
government contract, and evaluated its impact and consequences 
upon the federal acquisition system. Specifically, the 
Committees expressed concerns that this proposed EO would 
inject politics into the procurement process, violate political 
free speech rights, and usurp the legislative power of 
Congress. This hearing followed a letter to President Obama, 
dated April 21, 2011, detailing Chairman Graves' concerns with 
the impact of the EO on small contractors.
    On May 26, 2011, the Small Business Subcommittee on 
Contracting and Workforce met for a hearing titled, ``Defer No 
More: The Need to Repeal the 3% Withholding Provision.'' The 
hearing examined the effect of Section 511 of the Tax 
Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005, which will require 
federal, state and local governments to withhold 3 percent from 
all payments for goods and services purchased from small 
businesses. The Subcommittee heard witness testimony that 
Section 511 will: cost more to implement than it would generate 
in revenue; restrict the already tight cash flow of small 
companies; and destroy jobs.
    On June 9, 2011, the Committee on Small Business and the 
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform sent a letter to 
the Department of Health and Human Services to seek information 
about a contract awarded by the Biomedical Advanced Research 
and Development Authority (BARDA). The Committees expressed 
concern about the procurement process used to select the 
recipient, which started as a small business set-aside, but was 
then cancelled, and BARDA made a sole source award.

D. Oversight of SBA management

    The Committee continues to oversee the management of the 
SBA through hearings, meetings with agency personnel, and 
industry representatives.
    On March 2, 2011 the Committee held a hearing on the SBA's 
proposed budget for FY2012. This hearing reviewed the 
administration's funding requests as well as agency management 
of key policy initiatives for the fiscal year. The Committee 
heard testimony from SBA Administrator Karen Mills. The 
information garnered at this hearing was utilized in the 
Committee's development of views and estimates on the FY 2012 
budget, subsequently adopted by the Committee and submitted to 
the House Budget Committee on March 17. 2011. The Committee's 
views and estimates letter recommends that 14 programs be 
zeroed out and three programs receive less money than the SBA 
requested for FY12. The total dollar figure is difficult to 
quantify, but is approximately $100 million in cuts or 10 
percent less than the SBA's FY12 budget request.

E. Oversight of Federal regulatory and paperwork burdens

    On February 16, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met 
for a hearing titled, ``Putting Americans Back to Work: The 
State of the Small Business Economy.'' The Committee examined 
obstacles to small business job creation and economic growth 
and attempted to identify specific tax, regulatory and health 
care policies that are inhibiting job creation and economic 
growth. The hearing set the stage for future Committee 
deliberations related to the obstacles impeding entrepreneurs' 
and small firms' ability to strengthen our economy and put 
Americans back to work.
    On March 21, 2011, the Committee sent a letter to the 
Department of Labor (DOL) regarding a rule on wage methodology 
for temporary non-agricultural employment H2B program (76 Fed. 
Reg. 3,452). The letter questioned the methodology used to 
determine the prevailing wage under the rule and the impact on 
small businesses.
    On March 30, 2011 the Committee on Small Business met for a 
hearing entitled, ``Reducing Federal Agency Overreach: 
Modernizing the Regulatory Flexibility Act.'' The purpose of 
the hearing was to examine the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act (SBREFA). This hearing laid the foundation for 
Committee consideration of RFA reform and efforts to improve 
agency compliance with the Act.
    On April 12, 2011, the Committee sent a letter to the 
Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 
regarding potential regulatory action related to the extra-
label use of cephalosporin antimicrobial drugs in food-
producing animals. Concerns were raised by agriculture 
producers, veterinarians, and consumers over the adverse impact 
the ban would have on food safety and animal health. A rule was 
proposed and revoked in 2008. The letter was sent in response 
to information suggesting the FDA is considering reissuing the 
rule.
    On April 14, 2011, the Committee sent a letter to the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy at the SBA to encourage analysis of the 
Securities and Exchange Commission's proposed rule related to 
use of conflict minerals (75 Fed. Reg. 80,948). The letter 
focused on compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act and 
the rule's impact on small entities.
    On May 12, 2011 the House Committee on Small Business 
Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations and Regulations met 
for a hearing entitled, ``Green Isn't Always Gold: Are EPA 
Regulations Harming Small Businesses?'' The hearing examined 
Environmental Protection Agency regulations that negatively 
affect small businesses, most specifically those related to the 
Clean Air Act and the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act. 
The Subcommittee heard testimony from small business owners 
about how EPA has neglected to take into account the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act when promulgating regulations despite 
significant direct and indirect burdens experienced by small 
businesses.
    On June 13, 2011, the Committee sent a letter to the 
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Grain Inspection, Packer and 
Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) regarding a proposed rule to 
amend the Packer and Stockyards Act of 1921 (75 Fed. Reg. 
35,338). The letter calls into question USDA's compliance with 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act in determining the impact of the 
regulation on small businesses involved in the beef, pork, and 
poultry industries' supply chain.
    On June 14, 2011, the Small Business Subcommittee on 
Investigations, Oversight and Regulations met for a hearing 
entitled, ``Do Not Enter: How Proposed Hours of Service 
Trucking Rules are a Dead End for Small Businesses.'' The 
hearing reviewed the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Administration's proposed rule on trucking Hours of Service and 
explored how this regulation would harm small businesses by 
reducing allowed duty times for motor carriers and thereby 
hindering the ability for owner-operators and other small 
businesses to deliver goods nationwide.

F. Oversight of Federal tax policy

    On February 9, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met 
for a hearing entitled, ``Buried in Paperwork--A 1099 Update.'' 
The hearing focused on the health care reform law's expanded 
1099 reporting mandate, which would have required businesses to 
file a 1099 form for virtually every business-to-business 
transaction of $600 or more in property and services. In a 
letter dated February 10, 2011, the Committee shared the 
information garnered at the hearing with the Chairman and 
Ranking Member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
    On April 13, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met for 
a hearing entitled, ``How Tax Complexity Hinders Small 
Businesses: The Impact on Job Creation and Economic Growth.'' 
As Congress considers the issues related to fundamental tax 
reform, the concerns of America's small businesses about tax 
reform should be part of that debate. This hearing examined the 
complexity of the current tax code, the difficulty that 
entrepreneurs have in complying with it and the resulting 
effect on hiring and economic expansion. In a letter to the 
Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee on Ways and Means 
dated April 13, 2011, the Committee shared the views of the 
witnesses who testified as relevant to the ongoing debate on 
tax reform.

G. Oversight of health care policy

    On March 22, 2011, the Committee sent a letter to the 
Department of Health and Human Services requesting information 
related to the treatment of small businesses in the Patient 
Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) (P.L. 111-148) 
waiver process. The Committee is concerned that the process for 
receiving waivers may be unfair to small firms. The Committee 
also asked the GAO to examine the waiver process. On June 14, 
2011, the GAO issued a report regarding HHS waivers of 
restrictions on annual limits on health benefits.
    On June 2, 2011, the Small Business Subcommittee on 
Healthcare and Technology met for a hearing entitled, ``Not 
What the Doctor Ordered: Health IT Barriers for Small Medical 
Practices.'' The hearing examined the adoption of health 
information technology by small medical practices. The 
Subcommittee considered witness testimony regarding the 
barriers that small providers have encountered and possible 
solutions for addressing those barriers.

H. Oversight of energy policy

    On April 14, 2011, the Small Business Subcommittee on 
Agriculture, Energy and Trade met for a hearing entitled, 
``Drilling for a Solution: Finding Ways to Curtail the Crushing 
Effect of High Gas Prices on Small Business.'' The purpose of 
this hearing was to bring to light the negative impacts of 
rising fuel costs on small business and to understand the 
effects of short- and long-term solutions such as increasing 
domestic oil production and further developing renewable energy 
sources.

I. Oversight of trade and intellectual property policy

    On April 6, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met for a 
hearing entitled, ``Help Wanted: How Passing Free Trade 
Agreements Will Help Small Businesses Create New Jobs.'' The 
hearing focused on the benefits and importance of passing the 
pending free trade agreements to small businesses. Lowering 
trade barriers will spur small business exports, which will 
then lead to job creation and long-term economic growth.

J. Reductions in programs and spending

    On March 15, 2011 the Committee reported its views and 
estimates on the FY 2012 budget that outlined several programs 
at the SBA that should be considered for reduced spending or 
eliminated altogether. The letter suggested a reallocation of 
resources, both financial and personnel, to better meet the 
agency's mission. This letter will be used as a template for 
legislation to consolidate and eliminate unnecessary or 
duplicative programs. Overall, the Committee recommended the 
elimination of 14 programs, totaling approximately $100 
million.

                           REGULATORY REVIEW

   LEGISLATIVE AND OVERSIGHT ACTIVITY RELATED TO REGULATIONS, ORDERS,
  ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS AND PROCEDURES, BY FEDERAL AGENCIES WITHIN THE
            JURISDICTION OF THE COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Regulation, order, administrative        Oversight and legislative
                 action                              activity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1099 Reporting Requirement in the        The Committee held a hearing
 Patient Protection and Affordable Care   regarding the burden on small
 Act (PPACA) (P.L. 111-148).              businesses of the expanded
                                          1099 reporting requirement in
                                          PPACA. The Committee shared
                                          the information gained in the
                                          hearing with the Committee on
                                          Ways and Means in a letter
                                          dated February 10, 2011.
                                          Ultimately, the provision was
                                          repealed (P.L. 112-15).
SBA 504 Loan Refinancing Program (76     On March 2, 2011, the Committee
 Fed. Reg. 9,213).                        held a hearing on the SBA
                                          budget request for FY 2012,
                                          and on March 15, 2011, the
                                          Committee reported its views
                                          and estimates on the FY 2012
                                          SBA budget, including a
                                          recommendation that the 504
                                          Loan Refinancing Program be
                                          considered for elimination and
                                          that no funds be allocated for
                                          the SBA to oversee this
                                          program.
Department of Labor (DOL) rule on wage   The Committee sent a letter
 methodology for temporary non-           dated March 21, 2011 to DOL
 agricultural employment H2B program      questioning the methodology
 (76 Fed. Reg. 3,452).                    used to determine the
                                          prevailing wage under the rule
                                          and the impact on small
                                          businesses.
Department of Health and Human Services  On March 22, 2011, the
 (HHS) waivers provided under the         Committee sent a letter to HHS
 Patient Protection and Affordable Care   requesting information related
 Act (PPACA). P.L. 111-148).              to the treatment of small
                                          businesses in the PPACA waiver
                                          process.
Securities and Exchange Commission's     On April 14, 2011, the
 (SEC's) rule related to conflict         Committee sent a letter to the
 minerals (75 Fed. Reg. 80,948).          Chief Counsel for Advocacy to
                                          encourage analysis of the
                                          SEC's proposed rule,
                                          compliance with the Regulatory
                                          Flexibility Act, and the
                                          impact on small entities.
Proposed Executive Order on disclosure   The Committee submitted a
 of political contributions by Federal    letter to President Obama on
 contractors.                             April 21, 2011, to express
                                          concerns about the impact of
                                          the proposed Executive Order
                                          on small contractors. On May
                                          12, 2011, the Committee held a
                                          joint hearing with the
                                          Committee on Oversight and
                                          Government Reform to review
                                          the proposal.
SBA Proposed Size Standards for North    The Subcommittee on Economic
 American Industry Classification         Growth, Tax, and Capital
 System (NAICS) Sector 54 Industries      Access held a hearing on May
 related to professional services (76     5, 2011 to review the size
 Fed. Reg. 14,323).                       standard proposal. On May 6,
                                          2011, via a letter to the SBA,
                                          the Subcommittee submitted the
                                          transcript of and written
                                          statements from the hearing
                                          for the administrative record.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)    The Subcommittee on
 regulations related to the Clean Air     Investigations, Oversight, and
 Act (42 USC, Chapter 85) and the         Regulations held a hearing on
 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act   various EPA regulations and
 of 1976 (P.L. 95-609).                   their impact on small
                                          businesses on May 12, 2011.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Grain   The Committee sent a letter
 Inspection, Packer and Stockyards        dated June 13, 2011, to the
 Administration (GIPSA) proposed rule     USDA regarding compliance with
 to amend the Packer and Stockyards Act   the Regulatory Flexibility Act
 of 1921 (75 Fed. Reg. 35,338).           in determining the impact of
                                          the regulation on small
                                          businesses involved in the
                                          beef, pork, and poultry
                                          industries' supply chain.
Tax credit for small businesses          The Committee requested a GAO
 established by the Patient Protection    analysis of the small business
 and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) (P.L.    tax credit established by
 111-148).                                PPACA.
Department of Transportation Federal     The Subcommittee on
 Motor Carrier Safety Administration's    Investigations, Oversight and
 Hours of Service regulations (75 Fed.    Regulation held a hearing on
 Reg. 82,170).                            the impact of trucking Hours
                                          of Service regulations on
                                          small businesses on June 14,
                                          2011.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Under House Rule X, the Committee on Small Business has jurisdiction
  over the protection of small business including ``regulatory
  flexibility,'' as well as jurisdiction over the participation of small
  businesses in government contracts.

                                  
