[House Report 112-339]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
112th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 112-339
_______________________________________________________________________
Union Calendar No. 228
SEMIANNUAL REPORT ON THE ACTIVITY
of the
COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS
FIRST SESSION OF THE 112th CONGRESS
December 22, 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, December 22, 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 the second semi-annual report of the
activities of the Committee covering the remainder of the first
session of the 112th Congress, including the Committee's review
of legislation within its jurisdiction and the oversight
activities taken in accordance with the oversight plan adopted
on January 26, 2011.
Sincerely,
Sam Graves,
Chairman.
Enclosure.
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Committee Jurisdiction........................................... 1
Rules of the Committee........................................... 1
Membership and Organization...................................... 13
Legislative Activities........................................... 17
Oversight Summary................................................ 21
Part A--Full Committee Hearings................................ 21
Part B--Subcommittee Hearings.................................. 35
Part C--Waste, Fraud, Abuse, and Mismanagement................. 53
Oversight Plan................................................... 57
Part A--Committee Oversight Plan............................... 57
Part B--Implementation of Oversight Plan....................... 65
Regulatory Review................................................ 75
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 December
15, 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 clause 2(k)(5)
of rule XI of the House.
The Chair and Ranking Minority Member are ex officio
Members of all Subcommittees for the purpose of 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 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 document, 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
Committee 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, included 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
Revised
FULL COMMITTEE
Rep. NYDIA M. VELAZQUEZ (NY-12), Rep. SAM GRAVES (MO-6),
Ranking Member Chairman
Rep. KURT SCHRADER (OR-5) Rep. ROSCOE G. BARTLETT (MD-6)
Rep. MARK S. CRITZ (PA-12) Rep. STEVE CHABOT (OH-1)
Rep. YVETTE D. CLARKE (NY-11) Rep. STEVE KING (IA-5)
Rep. JUDY CHU (CA-32) Rep. MIKE COFFMAN (CO-6)
Rep. DAVID N. CICILLINE (RI-1) Rep. MICK MULVANEY (SC-5)
Rep. CEDRIC RICHMOND (LA-2) Rep. SCOTT R. TIPTON (CO-3)
Rep. JANICE HAHN (CA-36) Rep. JEFFREY M. LANDRY (LA-3)
Rep. GARY C. PETERS (MI-9) Rep. JAIME HERRERA BUETLER (WA-3)
Rep. WILLIAM L. OWENS (NY-23) Rep. ALLEN B. WEST (FL-22)
Rep. WILLIAM R. KEATING (MA-10) Rep. RENEE ELLMERS (NC-2)
Rep. JOE WALSH (IL-8)
Rep. LOU BARLETTA (PA-11)
Rep. RICHARD HANNA (NY-24)
Rep. BOBBY SCHILLING (IL-17)
Subcommittee on Agriculture, Energy and Trade
Rep. MARK S. CRITZ (PA-12), Rep. SCOTT R. TIPTON (CO-3),
Ranking Member Chairman
Rep. DAVID CICILLINE (RI-1) Rep. ROSCOE G. BARTLETT (MD-6)
Rep. WILLIAM R. KEATING (MA-10) Rep. STEVE KING (IA-5)
Rep. JUDY CHU (CA-32) Rep. JEFFREY M. LANDRY (LA-3)
VACANT Rep. RENEE L. ELLMERS (NC-2)
Rep. LOU BARLETTA (PA-11)
Rep. BOBBY SCHILLING (IL-17)
Subcommittee on Healthcare and Technology
Rep. CEDRIC RICHMOND (LA-2), Rep. RENEE L. ELLMERS (NC-2),
Ranking Member 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)
VACANT Rep. JAIME HERRERA BUETLER (WA-3)
Rep. JOE WALSH (IL-8)
Rep. RICHARD HANNA (NY-24)
Rep. BOBBY SCHILLING (IL-17)
Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Tax and Capital Access
Rep. KURT SCHRADER (OR-5), Rep. JOE WALSH (IL-8),
Ranking Member 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. RICHARD HANNA (NY-24)
Rep. BOBBY SCHILLING (IL-17)
Subcommittee on Investigations, Oversight and Regulations
Vacant, Rep. MIKE COFFMAN (CO-6),
Ranking Member Chairman
Rep. KURT SCHRADER (OR-5) Rep. SCOTT TIPTON (CO-3)
VACANT Rep. JEFFREY M. LANDRY (LA-3)
VACANT Rep. JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER (WA-3)
VACANT Rep. ALLEN B. WEST (FL-22)
Rep. JOE WALSH (IL-8)
Rep. RICHARD HANNA (NY-24)
Subcommittee on Contracting and Workforce
Rep. JUDY CHU (CA-32), Rep. MICK MULVANEY (SC-5),
Ranking Member Chairman
Rep. KURT SCHRADER (OR-5) Rep. STEVE KING (IA-5)
Rep. MARK S. CRITZ (PA-12) Rep. MIKE COFFMAN (CO-6)
Rep. YVETTE D. CLARKE (NY-11) Rep. JEFFREY M. LANDRY (LA-3)
Rep. CEDRIC RICHMOND (LA-2) Rep. ALLEN B. WEST (FL-22)
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 include 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 Committee on Small Business met in open session on July
13, 2011 and ordered H.R. 527, as amended, reported favorably
to the House by a voice vote. The House passed the bill by a
recorded vote of 263-159 on December 1, 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 on Small Business held a
hearing on H.R. 585.
On July 13, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met in
open session on July 13, 2011 and ordered H.R. 585 favorably
reported to the House by a recorded vote of 13-8.
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 certifications, 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 propose 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
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 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
America; 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.
REDUCING REGULATORY BURDENS BY AMENDING THE REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY AND
SMALL BUSINESS ACTS
On June 15, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met in
Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose
of receiving testimony to review H.R. 527, the Regulatory
Flexibility Improvements Act of 2011 and H.R. 585, the Small
Business Size Standard Flexibility Act of 2011. The hearing
titled ``Lifting the Weight of Regulations: Growing Jobs by
Reducing Regulatory Burdens'' asked experts on the regulatory
process for input on improvements to both bills.
The witnesses for the hearing were: Frank Swain, Esq.,
Partner, Baker & Daniels, Washington, DC; Jane C. Luxton, Esq.,
Partner, PepperHamilton, Washington, DC; Harry J. Katrichis,
Esq., Partner, The Advocacy Group, Washington, DC; and Adam
Finkel, Ph.D., Fellow and Executive Director, Penn Program on
Regulation, University of Pennsylvania Law School,
Philadelphia, PA.
Mr. Swain testified about the history of agency compliance
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). He noted that, even
since the 1996 strengthening of the RFA, agencies continued to
avoid compliance. Mr. Swain concluded by noting support for the
changes made by H.R. 527 and H.R. 585. Ms. Luxton focused on
the failure of agencies to consider indirect effects when they
assess impacts on small businesses. She noted how significant
the change would be to have agencies consider such indirect
effects. Mr. Katrichis testified about the value of the RFA and
the history of how the Committee passed the RFA initially and
amended it in 1996. Dr. Finkel noted that the concepts behind
H.R. 527 and H.R. 585 were interesting but he thought them
unnecessary.
Mr. Graves noted that the hearing would lay the foundation
for the Committee's consideration of the legislation at a full
Committee markup.
SMALL BUSINESS ACCESS TO CAPITAL: TREASURY DEPARTMENT PROGRAMS
On June 22, 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. Timothy Geithner,
Secretary of the Treasury, on the implementation of the Small
Business Lending Fund and the State Small Business Credit
Initiative--two programs established in the Small Business Jobs
Act of 2010.
The only witness at the hearing was Secretary Geithner. The
Secretary began his testimony with a brief recap of the events
that led to the financial crisis, the resulting difficulties in
the American economy, and the responses by President Bush and,
primarily, President Obama. Secretary Geithner then noted that
small businesses faced stiffer obstacles because they were
overrepresented in businesses affected by the downturn in the
residential and commercial real estate markets. That in turn
limited the ability of small businesses to obtain capital and
credit. Secretary Geithner then explained how the Small
Business Lending Fund and State Small Business Credit
Initiative would increase capital access for small businesses.
Chairman Graves noted that the Committee would continue to
monitor the impacts of the two programs on small businesses.
INCREASING INTERNATIONAL TRADE BY SMALL BUSINESSES
On Wednesday, July 27, 2011 at 1:00 pm, the House Committee
on Small Business held a hearing titled, ``Bureaucratic
Obstacles for Small Exporters: Is our National Export Strategy
Working?'' The hearing examined the National Export Strategy
and the effect that bureaucratic obstacles are having on small
exporters. With over 20 federal agencies involved in the
exporting process, many small firms have voiced the difficulty
of maneuvering through the bureaucracy and regulations.
Witnesses on Panel I were: Hon. Marie Johns, Deputy
Administrator, United States Small Business Administration,
Washington, DC; Hon. Suresh Kumar, Assistant Secretary of
Commerce and Director General of the United States Commercial
Service, Department of Commerce, Washington, DC; and Christian
Foster, Deputy Administrator, Foreign Agriculture Service,
United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. The
witnesses on Panel II were: Mark Rice, Founder and CEO of
Maritime Applied Physics Corporation, Baltimore, MD; Mitchell
Goetze, President and COO of Goetze Candy Inc., Baltimore, MD,
testifying on behalf of the National Confectioners Association
(NCA); and Maurice Kogon, Director, California Institute for
International Trade and Development, El Camino Community
College, Hawthorne, CA.
At the hearing, the government officials testified on the
status of the National Export Initiative and the
Administration's strategy to improve agency coordination to
make the export process easier for small businesses. The
private sector witnesses offered direct examples of the
barriers that limit their ability to export, including higher
tariffs. Mr. Goetze stated ``We support the President's NEI to
double U.S. exports, and the most efficient way to do this is
through Congressional approval and the timely implementation of
the pending free trade agreements with Korea, Colombia and
Panama.''
In closing, Chairman Graves said he would continue to work
on reducing the bureaucratic obstacles faced by small business
exporters. He will also focus on improving the coordination and
efficiency within the federal trade agencies. He is planning on
sending a letter to the United States Government Accountability
Office requesting an updated report on the efficiency and
duplication of the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee.
PRIVATE WORKFORCE TRAINING INITIATIVES
On September 8, 2011 the Committee on Small Business met in
Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose
of receiving testimony on ``Innovative Approaches to Meeting
the Workforce Needs of Small Businesses.'' The hearing focused
on how private, industry-led skills certification programs are
helping meet the workforce needs of small business while
improving career and educational prospects for students and
workers. The committee heard testimony from representatives of
small businesses and skills certification programs.
The witnesses were: Jennifer McNelly, Senior Vice
President, The Manufacturing Institute, Washington, DC; Roger
Tadajewski, Executive Director, National Coalition of
Certification Centers, Kenosha, WI; Scott Watkins, CEO, Modern
Tech Squad, Bonifay, FL, testifying on behalf of the Computing
Technology Industry Association (CompTIA); and Robert Scott
Ralls, Ph.D., President, North Carolina Community College
System, Raleigh, NC testifying on behalf of the American
Association of Community Colleges.
Ms. McNelly testified about the National Association of
Manufacturers' skills certification system, which teaches
skills that may be used in any manufacturing business with a
particular emphasis on knowledge needed to work at small
manufacturers. Mr. Tadejewski discussed the cooperation between
private businesses and the development of innovative training
programs at community and technical colleges. Mr. Watkins
testified that the CompTIA skills certification program
enhanced his own skills and provided his small business with
new opportunities that would have been unavailable without the
CompTIA certification. Dr. Ralls testified that industry-led
skills credentialing programs are important to local and state-
wide economic development efforts in North Carolina and serve
as a means to attract employers to the state.
All the witnesses expressed their desire that the
government do more to promote industry-led skills certification
programs through higher and secondary education programs as
well as the Workforce Investment Act.
SMALL BUSINESSES AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING
On September 14, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met
in Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building to hold a
hearing titled ``Beyond Size Standards: Sustainability of Small
Business Graduates'' to consider two legislative proposals for
creating a medium-sized business contracting program. The first
proposal was introduced by Representative Michael Rogers (R-AL)
as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, H.R.
1540, and would have
created a pilot set-aside contracting program at the Department
of Defense for firms with fewer than 2,500 employees. The
Committee on Rules found the amendment to be non-germane, so it
was not made in order for consideration when H.R. 1540 went to
the floor. The second proposal was the Small Business Growth
Act, H.R. 1812, introduced by Representative Gerald Connolly
(D-VA) introduced to create a pilot set-aside contracting
program at the General Services Administration for firms with
fewer than 1,500 employees that were participants in the
agency's Mentor-Protege program.
The witnesses were the Hon. Gerald Connolly (D-VA), United
States House of Representatives, Washington, DC; Tonya Speed,
Founder, Washington Premier Consulting, Washington, DC,
testifying on behalf of the Mid-Tier Advocacy; Christopher
Yukins, Esq., Professor of Law, George Washington University,
Washington DC; Michael D. Frisbey, President, Government
Suppliers & Associates, Knoxville, TN, testifying on behalf of
the National Small Business Association; and Margot Dorfman,
CEO, U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce, Washington, DC.
The witnesses disagreed about the wisdom of a medium-size
business program, with Ms. Speed supporting the proposal as a
method to increase competition, create jobs and sustain the
industrial base. Professor Yukins testified that any proposal
needed to account for current trade agreements and urged
members to be mindful of the affiliation rules generally found
in small business contracting. Mr. Frisbey began his testimony
opposed to a mid-sized business pilot, but retracted his
objection if the pilot would not encroach on the 23 percent
small business prime contracting goal. Ms. Dorfman opposed any
pilot since the federal government is not currently meeting the
statutory small business prime contracting goals.
Chairman Graves stated that for any legislative proposal to
be considered favorably by the Committee, it must meet two
mandates. First, it must provide benefits to the taxpayers and
the government. Second, it must protect the ability of current
small businesses to compete for federal contracts.
REDUCING REGULATORY BURDENS THROUGH PRESIDENTIAL EXECUTIVE ORDERS
On September 21, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met
in Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the
purpose of receiving testimony on Executive Order 13,563. The
hearing titled, ``Eliminating Job-Sapping Federal Rules through
Retrospective Reviews--Oversight of the President's Efforts,''
examined President Obama's order that executive branch agencies
establish a process for reviewing their federal regulations and
eliminating those that are unnecessary, duplicative or
burdensome.
The only witness for the hearing was the Hon. Cass
Sunstein, Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC.
Administrator Sunstein commenced his testimony by noting that
he is responsible for overseeing agency compliance with the
retrospective review process. The Administrator then noted that
there already were savings associated with the removal of
certain regulations associated with telemedicine, paperwork
burdens imposed by the Department of Labor, and spill
prevention rules from the Environmental Protection Agency. The
Administrator closed by stating his interest in working with
all members of the Committee to ensure that agencies do not
skip review of regulations important to small businesses.
At the close of the hearing, the Chairman noted that he
would continue to monitor the compliance and alert the
Administrator if agencies were not complying with the
requirements to assess the impact of rules on small businesses,
especially those small businesses involved in the regulation of
the general aviation industry.
REGULATORY BURDENS OF LABOR LAWS AND REGULATIONS ON SMALL BUSINESSES
On October 5, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met in
Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose
of receiving testimony on labor law rules affecting small
businesses. The hearing titled ``Adding to Uncertainty: The
Impact of DOL/NLRB Decisions and Proposed Rules on Small
Businesses'' examined the following issues: eliminating secret
ballots for union decertification; narrowing the scope of the
bargaining unit; truncating time periods for union
representation elections; and requiring disclosure of attorney
communications to employers during unionization campaigns.
The witnesses on the only panel were: Elizabeth Milito,
Senior Executive Counsel, NFIB Small Business Legal Center,
Washington, DC; Michael Mittler, President, Miller Brothers
Machine and Tool, Wright City, MO, testifying on behalf of the
National Tooling and Machining Association and the Precision
Metalforming Association; Beverly McCauley, President, Hunt
Country Masonry Inc., Leesburg, VA, testifying on behalf of the
Mason Contractors Association of America; and Allen William
West, Jr., President, West Sheet Metal Co., Sterling, VA.
Ms. Milito testified that most small businesses are
unfamiliar with the complexities of labor law. As a result, the
rules proposed by the Department of Labor (DOL) and the
National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) will make it more
difficult for small businesses to understand their rights
during a unionizing campaign. Mr. Mittler reiterated the point
made by Ms. Millito concerning the complexity of labor law, and
stated that the new proposals are likely to lead to greater
antagonism between workers and management hindering
productivity. Ms. McCauley opined that the new rules are one-
sided in favor of union certifications even though workers may
not (if given sufficient time and information) support efforts
at unionization. Mr. West summed up his review of the recent
proposals from the DOL and NLRB as not imposing any
disadvantages on small businesses.
SPECTRUM ALLOCATION AND IMPACT ON AVIATION SMALL BUSINESSES
On Wednesday, October 12, 2011 at 1:00 pm, the House
Committee on Small Business held a hearing titled,
``LightSquared: The Impact to Small Business GPS Users.'' The
hearing examined the impact on small businesses that may result
from LightSquared's plan to provide broadband service using its
spectrum that is adjacent to the spectrum utilized by the
Global Positioning System (GPS). Thousands of small businesses
rely on an accurate GPS signal for their day-to-day operations,
and potential interference could severely handicap or impair
their business.
Witnesses were: Dennis Boykin IV, Principal, DB4
Consulting, Leesburg, VA, testifying on behalf of the Leesburg
Executive Airport Commission; Rick Greene, Precision Agronomy
Manager, MFA, Inc., Columbia, MO, testifying on behalf of the
Agriculture Retailers Association; Tim Taylor, President and
CEO, Free Flight Systems, Irving, TX, testifying on behalf of
the Aircraft Electronics Association; and Jeffrey Carlisle,
Executive Vice President of Public Policy, LightSquared,
Reston, VA.
At the hearing, small businesses explained how the
LightSquared proposal would impact their business, including
the costs of repairing and retrofitting their GPS devices. Mr.
Greene discussed the economic impact LightSquared would have on
the agriculture industry, ``It will take 10-15 years to
complete a normal replacement cycle and affects up to $10
billion in equipment. Even if the Javad filter ($300-$800)
works, implanting it to the 1 million receivers will cost $300
to $800 million, which doesn't include the additional
personnel, installation and down-time. It's like saying that
because Chevy has an all-electric car on the market we can shut
down every gas station in the US next year or all analog TVs
need to be replaced the day the digital switch was turned on.''
In closing, Chairman Graves said he will continue to
closely follow the action of the FCC and the LightSquared
proposal. He plans to send a letter to the FCC reinforcing the
need for comprehensive tests of all types of devices to ensure
there is no interference and added costs for small business GPS
users.
OVERSIGHT OF THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION'S FINANCING PROGRAMS
On October 26, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met in
Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose
of conducting an oversight hearing titled ``Oversight of the
Small Business Administration's Financing Programs.'' The
hearing focused on the Small Business Administration's (SBA)
Fiscal Year 2011 performance and whether the SBA programs met
its goal of filling a void in the private lending market.
The first panel witness was the Hon. Karen Mills,
Administrator, United States Small Business Administration,
Washington, DC. Witnesses on the second panel were: Lynetta
Tipton Steed, Executive Vice President, Business and Community
Banking Division, Regions Financial Corp., Birmingham, AL,
testifying on behalf of the Consumer Bankers Association; Sally
Robertson, President, Business Finance Group, Fairfax, VA,
testifying on behalf of the National Association of Development
Companies; Gary Grinnell, President and CEO, Corning Federal
Credit Union, Corning, NY, testifying on behalf of the National
Association of Federal Credit Unions; and Rodger Davis,
Managing Partner, Northcreek Mezzanine, Cincinnati, OH,
testifying on behalf of the Small Business Investor Alliance.
Administrator Mills testified that SBA financing programs
supported over $30 billion in lending to 60,000 small
businesses in Fiscal Year 2011. The SBA also is taking steps to
streamline paperwork in its loan programs and encourage more
lenders to make SBA backed loans.
The second panel testified that while SBA has improved in
several areas, problems remain. Ms. Steed testified that small
businesses are facing a number of challenges that have
diminished overall demand for loans including weak economic
conditions and high levels of unemployment resulting in lower
sales and a poor general economic outlook. Ms. Robertson
testified that the ``grease'' that gets the small business jobs
engine going is capital--both short-term and long-term funding
to pay for business plant and store expansions and for
inventory, raw materials, and labor costs. Mr. Davis testified
that raising leverage limits in the Small Business Investment
Company (SBIC) Program will help SBICs provide more patient
capital to small businesses. Mr. Grinnell testified that
participating in SBA financing programs require meeting
stringent government regulations.
OVERSIGHT OF THE SBA'S DISASTER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
On November 30, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met
in Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the
purpose of conducting an oversight hearing titled ``Disaster
Assistance: Is SBA Meeting the Needs of Disaster Victims?'' The
hearing focused on the Small Business Administration (SBA)
implementation of the Small Business Disaster Response and Loan
Improvements Act of 2008 and how those programmatic changes
have affected the delivery of recovery loans. The Committee
also learned about SBA's response plans and their capacity to
respond to a disaster the size and scope of Hurricane Katrina.
The witnesses were: Mr. James Rivera, Associate
Administrator, Office of Disaster Assistance, United States
Small Business Administration, Washington, DC; and Mr. William
Shear, Director, Financial Markets and Community Investment,
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Washington, DC.
Mr. Rivera testified that the SBA is making progress
towards fulfilling all of the requirements of the Small
Business Disaster Response and Loan Improvements Act of 2008.
Since hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma, Mr. Rivera claimed
that the SBA has greatly improved its capacity to process
disaster loan applications in a timely manner. Mr. Shear
testified that SBA continues to make progress towards
implementing the statutory changes to the disaster program and
other GAO recommendations on how to improve the disaster
program. However, GAO reported that SBA needed to take
additional steps to fully address several shortcomings,
including improvements in the application process, increasing
the celerity of loan disbursements, and improved coordination
with state and local officials.
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, titled ``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' 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
to $19 million, due to the use of common group size standards,
would result in over 97 percent 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 percent 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, 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 percent 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, testifying on behalf of the Petroleum Marketers
Association of America; James Burg, Owner, James Burg Trucking,
Warren, MI, testifying on behalf of the American Trucking
Association; J.D. Morrissette, President, Interstate Van Line
Operations, Inc., Springfield, VA, testifying on behalf of the
American Moving and Storage Association; and Rusty Rader, Co-
Owner, J.J. Kennedy, Inc., Fombell, PA, testifying on behalf of
the National Ready-Mixed Concrete Association.
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.''
NEW FINANCIAL SERVICE REGULATION AND IMPACT ON SMALL BUSINESS
On June 16, 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 for the purpose
of a hearing titled ``The Dodd-Frank Act: Impact on Small
Business Lending.'' The hearing examined the regulatory
structure of financial institutions including the new
requirements placed on them by the Dodd-Frank Act.
The witnesses were: Thomas Boyle, Vice Chairman, State Bank
of Countryside, LaGrange, IL, testifying on behalf of the
American Bankers Association; Mark Sekula, Executive Vice
President, Randolph-Brooks Federal Credit Union, San Antonio,
TX, testifying on behalf of the National Association of Federal
Credit Unions; William Daley, Legislation and Policy Director,
Main Street Alliance, Washington, DC; and Mr. Greg Ohlendorf,
President and CEO, First Community Bank and Trust, Beecher, IL,
testifying on behalf of the Independent Community Bankers of
America.
Witnesses spoke about the impact of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and offered solutions
to minimize its burdens. Mr. Boyle stated that community banks
understand the financial needs of local community and is
concerned that the community banking model will collapse under
the massive weight of new rules and regulations. Mr. Sekula,
testified that ``[w]ith a slew of new regulation emerging from
the Dodd-Frank Act, such relief from unnecessary or outdated
regulation is needed now more than ever by credit unions.'' Mr.
Daley testified that the members of his organization were
concerned more about the over health of the economy and the
impact on their community, then they were about over
regulations. Mr. Ohlendorf, testified that ``[t]he stakes were
raised sharply after the financial crisis, but I believe many
examiners have overreacted and now the pendulum has swung too
far in the direction of over-regulation.''
INSOURCING OF FEDERAL PROCUREMENTS AND ITS EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESSES
On June 23, 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 implementation of the Administration's insourcing policies,
and the effect of these policies on small businesses.
Specifically, five issues were discussed: the lack of
transparency in the insourcing process; inconsistencies in the
cost studies used to justify insourcing; the prohibition on
public-private competitions when insourcing; the lack of
standing for small businesses that wish to challenge agency
insourcing decision; and the role of the Small Business
Administration in insourcing.
The witnesses were Dawn L. Hamilton, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Security Assistance Corporation, Arlington,
VA; Bryant S. Banes, Managing Shareholder, Neel, Hooper &
Banes, P.C., Houston, TX; Bonnie C. Carroll, President,
Information International Associates, Oak Ridge, TN; and Jacque
Simon, Public Policy Director, American Federation of
Government Employees, Washington, DC.
Ms. Hamilton, who had a contract insourced by the United
States Coast Guard, provided testimony explaining the analysis
used to insource her company's contract was irrevocably flawed,
as it began with the assertion that ``that the cost of a
contractor is automatically higher than a government employee
and that the insourcing would have no adverse impacts to other
organizations.'' Ms. Carroll, who had contracts insourced by
the United States Air Force and the Department of Labor,
testified that ``decisions to insource are driven more by
arbitrary budget and manpower boogies than by the objectives of
enhancing the government's workforce capabilities or by true
cost savings.'' Mr. Banes provided testimony in his capacity as
a government contracts expert. Specifically, he addressed the
findings of the United States Court of Federal Claim in the
decision of Hallmark-Phoenix 3, LLC v. United States, 99 Fed.
Cl. 65 (2011) where the court determined that it lacked
jurisdiction to consider insourcing decisions under statutes
that give the Court of Federal Claims the authority to hear
disputes over the award of federal government contracts. Ms.
Simon focused on ``the importance of insourcing and reducing
the Federal government's expensive and risky overreliance on
service contractors.''
Chairman Mulvaney stated that the Committee would consider
legislative actions in response to the testimony received.
REGULATORY BURDENS ON LIVESTOCK PRODUCERS--NEW RULES FOR COMPLYING WITH
THE PACKERS AND STOCKYARDS ACT
On July 7, 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 ``Regulation Gone Awry: How USDA's
Proposed GIPSA Rule Hurts America's Small Businesses.'' The
hearing focused on USDA's Proposed Grain Inspection, Packers
and Stockyard Administration (GIPSA) rule and the changes on
livestock marketing practices.
The witness for the first panel was the Hon. Edward Avalos,
Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs, United
States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. The witnesses
on the second panel were: Robbie LeValley, Hotchkiss, CO,
testifying on behalf of the Colorado Cattlemen's Association
and the National Cattlemen's Beef Association; Gary Malenke,
CEO, Natural Food Holdings, Sioux City, IA, testifying on
behalf of the National Meat Association; Joel Bradenberger,
President, National Turkey Federation, Washington, DC; and Bob
Junk, Local Economy Manager, Fay Penn Economic Development
Council, Uniontown, PA.
At the hearing, Undersecretary Avalos explained that the
USDA was still reviewing the 60,000+ comments they received in
response to the rule. He assured the Committee that the Agency
was taking all of the comments seriously and with a heavy
heart. The Undersecretary refused to answer any specific
questions about where USDA was in the rule making process but
did tell the Committee that they expected a final rule
``soon''. All of the small business owners on the second panel,
minus Mr. Junk, testified that the proposed GIPSA rule was bad
for their business and that some of the provisions in the rule
would set back the livestock industry 30 years. Mr. Junk
testified that the rule was necessary and it stemmed from
language in the 2008 Farm Bill.
At the hearing's close, Chairman Tipton encouraged USDA to
take into consideration all of the testimony and questioning
that they heard during the committee as they work through the
economic analysis. Mr. Tipton also urged the USDA to revise
their analysis on small businesses as part of a more detailed
economic analysis and then publish the new Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis for comment to ensure small businesses can
inform the Agency on its effect to their business. After the
hearing, Chairman Tipton sent a letter to Undersecretary Avalos
on July 21, 2011 with five follow up questions.
ADVERSE IMPACT OF HEALTHCARE LAW ON SMALL BUSINESSES THAT CURRENTLY
OFFER HEALTH INSURANCE
On July 28, 2011, the House Small Business Subcommittee on
Healthcare and Technology met at 10:00 a.m. in Room 2360 of the
Rayburn House Office Building for the purpose of holding a
hearing titled, ``Small Businesses and PPACA: If They Like
Their Coverage, Can They Keep It?'' The hearing focused on
whether small firms can keep their current health insurance
under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
The witnesses were: Steven Larsen, Deputy Administrator and
Director, Center for Consumer Information and Insurance
Oversight, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services,
Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC;
Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Ph.D., President, American Action Forum,
Washington, DC; William Dennis, Research Fellow, National
Federation of Independent Business, Washington, DC; Brian
Vaughn, President, Nearly Famous, Inc., Douglas, GA, testifying
on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; and Timothy
Stoltzfus Jost, Esq., Robert Willett Family Professor of Law,
Washington and Lee University School of Law, Lexington, VA.
Mr. Larsen testified that the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act (PPACA) contains a number of provisions
that will help close the gap between small and large business'
ability to offer health insurance to their employees. Dr.
Holtz-Eakin said PPACA raises the overall cost of operating a
small business and undermines job growth. Mr. Dennis reported
that NFIB's recent survey found by overwhelming margins, small
employers with some knowledge of PPACA think it will not reduce
the rate of health insurance cost increases, will not reduce
the administrative burden, will increase taxes and will add to
the federal deficit. Mr. Vaughn testified that his plan has
been to expand and open a new store by reinvesting profits back
into his business, but he is instead worried that everything he
has worked for will be wiped out by the new law. Professor Jost
said that it is not possible to predict exactly how employers
will react to all of the cross-cutting incentives, and that the
effect of PPACA on employer-sponsored insurance is only one of
many considerations that must be weighted in evaluating health
care reform.
REGULATORY BURDENS OF THE NEW CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU
On July 28, 2011, the Subcommittee on Investigations,
Oversight and Regulations of the Committee on Small Business
met in Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building for the
purpose of a hearing titled ``Open for Business: The Impact of
the CFPB on Small Business.'' The hearing focused on the new
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) created by the Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and its impact on
small business.
The only witness on Panel I was Dan Sokolov, Deputy
Associate Director for Research, Markets and Regulations,
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Washington, DC. The
witnesses on panel II were: Jess Sharp, Executive Director,
Center for Capital Markets Competitiveness, U.S. Chamber of
Commerce, Washington, DC; Terry Jones, Chairman, Legislative
and Regulatory Affairs Committee, Colorado Mortgage Lenders
Association, Denver, CO; Mr. Daniel Fleming, President, Fleming
NationaLease, Springfield, VA, testifying on behalf of the
Truck Renting and Leasing Association; and Adam Levitin, Esq.,
Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington,
DC.
Mr. Sokolov testified that the CFPB is working to minimize
the regulatory burden on small business by following procedural
safeguards in the rulemaking process including compliance with
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. The
CFPB is focused on consumer transactions and does not have
authority to regulate small business credit. Mr. Sharp
testified that large numbers of small businesses turn to
consumer financial products to fund their business because they
are very affordable and that any restriction on use of those
products could have a detrimental impact on small business. Mr.
Jones testified that CFPB is already working on several
regulations that focus on the mortgage lending industry and he
hopes the CFPB does not turn into a ``super regulator'' for the
mortgage industry. Mr. Fleming testified that the new small
business data collection requirements will force him to spend
money on regulatory compliance, rather than on growing his
business. Professor Levitin testified that the CFPB is good for
consumers and will have only tangential impact small business
lending.
SMALL BUSINESS ACCESS TO CAPITAL
On August 25, 2011, the Subcommittee on Oversight,
Investigations and Regulations of the Committee on Small
Business met in Greenwood Village, Colorado for the purpose of
conducting a hearing titled ``Small Business Committee Field
Hearing in Colorado: Local Perspectives on the State of Small
Business Lending.'' This hearing focused on the regulatory
burdens to small business lending and provided attendees the
opportunity to hear from the Small Business Administration
(SBA) about the government backed lending programs available to
help small businesses access capital.
The witnesses were: Steve Smits, Associate Administrator,
Office of Capital Access, United States Small Business
Administration, Washington, DC; Jay Davidson, Chairman & CEO,
First American State Bank, Greenwood, CO; David Brown,
President Southeast Denver Centennialbank, Centennial, CO; and
Mr. Jeff Wasden, Owner, PROFormance Apparel, Littleton, CO.
Associate Administrator Smits testified that SBA lending
programs are providing access to capital to small businesses
and that could not otherwise obtain a loan without assistance.
Mr. Davidson testified that the economic recovery is slower
than it should be because regulators are requiring banks to
raise additional capital. Mr. Brown testified that all of the
new laws will lead to new regulation and this has been
happening at a much quicker pace than at any time in the past.
Further, each new regulation will be very expensive for banks
to understand and implement. Mr. Wasden testified that business
owners need to be focused on the day-to-day operations of their
business and not on government policies. He believes that ten
percent of businesses are thriving, twenty percent are seeing a
slight increase, thirty percent are holding even, and the
balance are struggling to stay in business.
INCREASING PROCUREMENT OPPORTUNITIES THROUGH IMPROVEMENTS TO SBA
PROCUREMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
On September 15, 2011, the Subcommittee on Contracting and
Workforce of the Committee on Small Business met in Room 2360
of the Rayburn House Office Building for a hearing titled
``Helping Small Businesses Compete: Challenges within Programs
Designed to Assist Small Contractors.'' The hearing addressed
recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports on small
business contracting assistance programs. The reports were: (1)
GAO-11-548R, Mentor-Protege Programs Have Policies That Aim to
Benefit Participants but Do Not Require Postagreement Tracking;
(2) GAO-11-549R, Improvements Needed to Help Ensure Reliability
of SBA's Performance Data on Procurement Center
Representatives; and (3) GAO-11-418, Small Business
Contracting: Action Needed by Those Agencies Whose Advocates Do
Not Report to Agency Heads as Required.
The witnesses were: Joseph G. Jordan, Associate
Administrator of Government Contracting and Business
Development, United States Small Business Administration (SBA),
Washington, DC; Jiyoung Park, Associate Administrator, Office
of Small Business Utilization, United States General Services
Administration, Washington, DC; and William B. Shear, Director,
Financial Markets and Community Investment, GAO, Washington,
DC.
The witnesses provided testimony on challenges facing the
SBA's Procurement Center Representative (PCR) program, the
individual agency Offices of Small and Disadvantaged Business
Utilization (OSDBU), and the thirteen Mentor-Protege programs
currently available. Mr. Shear discussed GAO's finding that the
Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Justice, Interior, State,
and the Treasury, and at the Social Security Administration
were not complying with Section 15(k)(3) of the Small Business
Act, which requires that the OSDBU Director ``report directly
to the head of such agency or to the deputy.'' Furthermore, he
explained that most Mentor-Protege programs do not adequately
measure outcomes, and provided insight into the challenges
facing the SBA's PCRs. Mr. Jordan testified that SBA recently
reviewed the PCR program and metrics, and is ``currently
reviewing the results of this analysis and working to develop
and implement an improved system, along with revised standard
operating procedures and tools.'' Ms. Park explained GSA's
Mentor-Protege, and that it had produced results by increasing
both prime and subcontract awards to participants as well as
creating ``132 new jobs as a direct result of participation in
the program.''
At the conclusion of the hearing, Chairman Mulvaney stated
the Subcommittee would continue to work towards holding those
government agencies accountable that refuse to comply with the
requirements of the Small Business Act, and towards improving
the small business contracting assistance programs.
REGULATORY BARRIERS TO ENERGY PRODUCTION
On September 19, 2011, the Subcommittee on Agriculture,
Energy and Trade met in the City Hall Auditorium, Grand
Junction, CO for a hearing titled ``Are Excessive Energy
Regulations and Policies Limiting Energy Independence, Killing
Jobs and Increasing Prices for Consumers?'' The hearing
examined burdensome federal regulations and policies on the
energy industry and their impact on small businesses, jobs, and
consumer prices. Specifically, the issues addressed at the
hearing included: the proposed regulation of coal combustion
residuals under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act as a
hazardous waste; proposed rule to limit air certain toxics
emitted from coal-fired powerplants; potential rules proffered
by EPA to limit emission of greenhouse gases; and regulations
to address hydraulic fracking in the natural gas extraction
industry.
Witnesses on Panel I were: James Martin, Regional
Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, Denver, CO; and
Helen Hankins, Colorado State Director, Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), United States Department of Interior,
Lakewood, CO. The second panel consisted of the following
witnesses: David White, Commissioner, Montrose County,
Montrose, CO; David Ludlam, Executive Director, West Slope Oil
& Gas Association, Grand Junction, CO; Jennifer Bredt,
Development Manger, Renewable Energy Systems Americas,
Broomfield, CO; James Kiger, Environmental Manager, Oxbow
Mining, LLC, Somerset, CO, testifying on behalf of the Colorado
Mining Association; Richard Welle, General Manager, White River
Electric Association, Inc., Meeker, CO.
Mr. Martin testified that EPA was still evaluating various
regulations but did not believe that any final rules would
impose significant costs on small businesses involved in energy
extraction or production. Ms. Hankins stated that BLM is, by
statute, committed to multiple use of federal lands and manage
such lands to permit responsible use of public lands for energy
and mineral development. Mr. White testified about the
regulatory barriers imposed by EPA and BLM to siting energy
production (both extractive and renewable) facilities in
Montrose County, Colorado. Mr. Ludlam stated that the
Department of Interior blocked a number of oil and gas drilling
operations in western Colorado while at the same fracking for
extraction of natural gas may be subject to stricter EPA
regulation. Ms. Bredt testified about the impediments imposed
by the Department of Interior to the development of wind energy
projects. Mr. Kiger stated that in thirty plus years of
``working in the Colorado coal mining industry . . . I have
never before seen such a concerted emphasis by numerous federal
agencies to create additional head winds for the coal industry.
. . .'' Mr. Welle testified that his customers (who also are
the owners since White River is a rural electric cooperative)
support the use of clean coal and renewable energy but cannot
afford rate increases that harm industry and punish consumers.
SUBCONTRACTING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SMALL BUSINESS
On October 6, 2011, the Subcommittee on Contracting and
Workforce of the Committee on Small Business met in Room 2360
of the Rayburn House Office Building for a hearing titled
``Subpar Subcontracting: Challenges for Small Business
Contractors.'' Specifically, the problems discussed were:
problems with the limitation on subcontracting requirements;
noncompliance with subcontracting plans; and duplicative
government contracting systems which fail to support
enforcement or compliance.
The witnesses were: Joseph G. Jordan, Associate
Administrator of Government Contracting and Business
Development, United States Small Business Administration (SBA),
Washington, DC; Mary L. Kendall, Acting Inspector General,
United States Department of the Interior, Washington, DC;
Jenifer Bisceglie, President, Interos, McLean, VA, testifying
on behalf of Women Impacting Public Policy; and Jamie Borromeo,
President, The E & J Commission, LLC, Washington, DC.
Mr. Jordan testified that SBA is working to ensure
compliance with the limitation on subcontracting requirements,
and is developing and maintaining tools, systems, and resources
needed to monitor and track subcontracting achievements. Acting
Inspector General Kendall testified that confusion as to the
division of responsibilities between SBA and contracting agency
personnel contributes to enforcement and compliance issues.
The private sector witnesses agreed that small businesses
are harmed by failure to enforce the subcontracting rules. Ms.
Bisceglie testified that large prime contractors do not honor
their subcontracting plans and the government fails to
evaluate, monitor, and document compliance. Ms. Bisceglie
recommended that the Subcommittee consider revising the
limitation on subcontracting provisions to make them price-
based rather than cost-based, and to encourage small business
teaming. She further recommended increased enforcement and
transparency of subcontracting plans. Ms. Borromeo concurred,
and also recommended the following steps to prohibit fraudulent
contracting practices: 1) ensure government contracting
professionals are complying with rules and systems in place to
ensure prime contractors are performing well on existing
contracts and subcontracting the proper amount to small
businesses; and 2) ensure diligent and proper market research
performed by program offices.
Chairman Mulvaney asked the witnesses to work with the
Subcommittee on ideas to improve large business compliance with
subcontracting plans, and to improve the limitation on
subcontracting requirements.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS FOR NEW ENTREPRENEURS
On October 17, 2011, the Subcommittee on Contracting and
the Workforce of the Committee on Small Business met for a
field hearing in Pasadena, CA titled ``Land of Opportunity:
Pursuing the Entrepreneurial American Dream.'' The hearing
examined the resources available to new legal immigrants
interested in becoming entrepreneurs.
Witnesses at the hearing were: Manuel Martinez, President,
Greater Los Angeles SCORE, Los Angeles, CA; America Tang,
President and CEO, Ace Fence Co., La Puente, CA; Mr. Jesse
Torres, President & CEO, Pan American Bank, Los Angeles, CA;
and Yusa Chang, COO, of Pacific Asian Consortium in Employment
(PACE), Los Angeles, CA.
Witnesses discussed the training and services new legal
immigrants need to become successful entrepreneurs. The hearing
also focused on the resources that are currently available to
help prospective business owners and whether additional
outreach methods should be considered. Mr. Martinez testified
about his experience as a volunteer counselor for SCORE and
stated that the business owner is the only one who can truly
make a business successful. Ms. Tang testified that Small
Business Administration (SBA) programs can help her business,
but the SBA needs to do a better job of letting people know of
new programs that assist small business. Mr. Torres testified
that his bank does not use SBA loan products because the rules
for participation are too stringent and it would require too
much of an investment to train his lending officers on how to
work within SBA strictures. Ms. Chang provided several
anecdotes about businesses that PACE has counseled and what
services they could have used to be successful.
REDUCING FRAUD IN FEDERAL PROCUREMENT PROGRAMS
On October 27, 2011, the Subcommittee on Investigations,
Oversight and Regulations of the Committee on Small Business
met in Room 2360 of the Rayburn House Office Building to hold a
hearing titled ``Misrepresentation and Fraud: Bad Actor in the
Small Business Procurement Programs.'' The hearing focused on
problems in the Small Business Prime Contract Program,
Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) Small
Business program, Women-Owned Small Business program, Service-
Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Program, and Small
Disadvantaged Business program.
The witnesses were: the Hon. Peggy E. Gustafson, Inspector
General, United States Small Business Administration,
Washington, DC; and the Hon. Brian D. Miller, Inspector
General, General Services Administration, Washington, DC.
The witnesses provided examples of the types of fraud they
have encountered in the small business procurement programs,
including misrepresentations of size, program specific
misrepresentations, pass-through contracts, violations of the
non-manufacturer rule, incorrect assignment of size standards
to contracts, and recurring acts of bribery and kickbacks.
Inspectors General Miller and Gustafson stated that these
fraudulent activities harm legitimate small businesses by
denying them opportunities; the government, because statutory
procurement goals are skewed and program reputation suffers;
and the American people, as small businesses are not able to
create more jobs. Finally, the witnesses explained that the
current remedies available through the procurement process,
False Claims Act, Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act, and the
Small Business Jobs Act, still leave gaps in enforcement.
Specifically, Inspector General Miller indicated that since
small business fraud cases usually cost more to prosecute than
they collect in damages, the Department of Justice is reluctant
to use scarce resources to prosecute these cases, which results
in agency Inspectors General devoting investigative resources
elsewhere, which in turn results in mediocre enforcement by
agency contracting personnel, ultimately leaving legitimate
small businesses and taxpayers unprotected.
At the conclusion of the hearing, Chairman Coffman asked
the Inspectors General to work with the Subcommittee on ways to
deter and punish bad actors, examine the sufficiency of the
current remedies and whether there are sufficient monitoring
mechanisms in place, or how these should be strengthened to
detect fraud and misrepresentation in the small business
procurement programs.
TAX REFORM FOR SMALL BUSINESSES
On November 3, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. 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 for the purpose of receiving testimony on ``Pro-Growth
Tax Policy: Why Small Businesses Need Individual Reform.'' The
hearing focused on the importance of tax policies to our
nation's small businesses, our best job creators.
The witnesses were: Robert Carroll, Principal, Ernst &
Young, Washington, DC; Gary Marowske, President & CEO, Flame
Furnace, Heating, Cooling, Plumbing & Electrical, Warren, MI,
testifying on behalf of the Air Conditioning Contractors of
America; William R. Smith, President & CEO, Termax Corporation,
Lake Zurich, IL, testifying on behalf of the Precision
Metalforming Association; and Stephen Capp, President & CEO,
Laserage Technology Corporation, Waukegan, IL, testifying on
behalf of the National Federation of Independent Business.
Mr. Carroll estimated that 95 percent of U.S. businesses
are pass-through entities--sole proprietorships, LLCs,
partnerships or S corporations. He opined that if Congress
enacts only corporate tax reform, and not individual tax
reform, the income taxes paid by owners of pass-through
businesses could increase, on average, by 8 percent, or $27
billion annually from 2010-2014. Mr. Smith testified that
``[d]ue to our current U.S. tax code, we are taxed on income we
do not take out of the company, but leave in the business to
reinvest. This means we have fewer resources to put toward
hiring, training and buying new machines. We need a
comprehensive approach that addresses corporate, pass-through
businesses and individual tax rates, deductions and credits.''
Mr. Marowske said ``I wholeheartedly agree that tax reform must
address individual rates because of their impact on small
businesses. Not everyone understands that sole proprietors,
partners and S corporation shareholders pay taxes on business
income through the individual income tax rate schedules.'' Mr.
Capp testified that ``[a]t the very least, the tax rate paid by
pass-through small businesses should be the same rate that
applies to C corps.''
At the hearing's close, Chairman Walsh said he plans to
send a letter to the Joint Select Committee on Deficit
Reduction asking that the Committee consider the concerns of
small business owners when they evaluate approaches to tax
reform.
SMALL BUSINESS CONTRACTING OPPORTUNITIES AT THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
On November 8, 2011, the Subcommittee on Contracting and
Workforce of the Committee on Small Business met in Sumter,
South Carolina for the purpose of receiving testimony on small
business contracting issues at the Department of Defense. The
hearing, titled ``Examining the Barriers for Small Business
Contracting at the DOD,'' focused on examining the specific
process by which the Navy determined the contract for the 3rd
Army headquarters building construction on Shaw Air Force base.
Additionally, testimony was delivered on the difficulties small
businesses face when entering the federal contracting arena
along with their potential solutions.
The witnesses for the hearing were: Robert Griffin,
Assistant Commander for Acquisition, United States Navy
Facilities Engineering Command, Washington, DC; Jackie
Robinson-Burnette, Associate Director of Small Business
Programs, United States Army Corps of Engineers, Washington,
DC; John Caporal, Secretary, United States Air Force Small
Business Programs Office, Washington, DC; Bill Lynam, Owner,
Lynam Construction, Sumter, SC; William Aycock, President,
Aycock Construction, LLC., Sumter, SC; and Scott H. Bellows,
Program Manager, South Carolina Procurement Technical
Assistance Center, The Moore School of Business Small Business
Development Center, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC.
Mr. Griffin began the testimony by detailing the process by
which the Navy awarded the contract for construction of the 3rd
Army headquarters building. The contract was awarded under a
full and open process and no small business set aside programs
were used. Ms. Robinson-Burnette detailed the efforts taken by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to include small businesses in
their contracting plans. Mr. Caporal provided testimony
outlining the efforts of the Air Force to include small
business in their contracting efforts and explained several
areas in which small businesses can compete for contracts at
Shaw Air Force base.
The second panel began with Mr. Lynam explaining that he
believes that 8(a) firms have a virtual monopoly on contracts
at Shaw. He also explained that while he appreciated the recent
Administration efforts to hasten payments to prime contractors,
he feels that it ought to be extended to subcontractors as well
as there is often a delay in payments from prime contractors to
subcontractors. Mr. Aycock testified that he found it
disheartening that prime contracts and some subcontracts go to
out of state companies, and that it seemed counterintuitive to
force local companies to partner with out of state companies to
get work literally right down the street. Finally, Mr. Bellows
explained the services and benefits available for small
businesses looking to get into the federal contracting arena at
the South Carolina Procurement Technical Assistance Center.
REGULATORY BURDENS ON THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR
On November 17, 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 ``Adrift in Regulatory Burdens and
Uncertainty: A Review of Proposed and Potential Regulations on
Family Farms.'' The hearing focused on National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements under the
Clean Water Act (CWA) for the application of pesticides and
other chemicals that must be registered under the Federal
Insecticide, Rodenticide and Fungicide Act (FIFRA). In
addition, the Subcommittee addressed new National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for coarse particulate matter (PM)
that may or not incorporate dust.
The witnesses were: Philip Nelson, President, Illinois
State Farm Bureau, Bloomington, IL; Mr. Leonard Felix,
President, Olathe Spray Service, Inc., Olathe, CO, testifying
on behalf of the National Agriculture Aviation Association; Mr.
Ray Vester, Vester Farms, Stuttgart, AR, testifying on behalf
of the USA Rice Federation; and Carl Shaffer, President,
Pennsylvania State Farm Bureau, Mifflinville, PA.
At the hearing, the witnesses discussed onerous,
overreaching proposed and potential regulations that the
current Administration is considering which leave family
farmers and ranchers adrift in new regulatory burdens. Extra
regulation is potentially concerning at this time with nearly
one in ten Americans unemployed and our country still
struggling to crawl out of this economic downturn. All of the
witnesses testified that the EPA was overreaching with their
new regulations, and that it was clear the EPA does not
understand the improvements in agricultural practices over the
years.
At the hearing's close, Chairman Tipton vowed to continue
to focus on burdensome regulations that affect our farmers,
ranchers and small businesses.
CYBER SECURITY FOR SMALL BUSINESS
On Thursday December 1, 2011 at 1:00 p.m., the Subcomittee
on Healthcare and Technology of the Committee on Small Business
held a hearing entitled: ``Cyber Security: Protecting Your
Small Business.'' This hearing focused on the issues faced by
small businesses in combating cyber security threats, including
the role of the federal government and best practice solutions.
According to a recent study, small businesses are the victims
of nearly 40 percent of cyber attacks in the United States.
The only witness on panel I was the Hon. William M. ``Mac''
Thornberry (R-TX). Witnesses on panel II were: David Beam,
Senior Vice President, North Carolina Electric Membership
Corporation, Raleigh, NC, testifying on behalf of the National
Rural Electric Cooperative Association; Glenn Strebe, Chief
Executive Officer, Air Academy Federal Credit Union, Colorado
Springs, CO, testifying on behalf of the National Association
of Federal Credit Unions; Phyllis Schneck, Vice President and
Chief Technology Officer, McAfee, Inc., Reston, VA; and Michael
Kaiser, Executive Director, National Cyber Security Alliance,
Washington, DC.
At the hearing, Congressman Thornberry provided testimony
on House Republican Cybersecurity Task Force's policy
recommendations. He stressed the importance of establishing a
strong public-private partnership to voluntarily share
information and raise awareness. Next, a panel of private
sector witnesses provided chilling reports on the severity of
cyber attacks on small businesses. Michael Kaiser, Executive
Director of the National Cyber Security Alliance in Washington,
DC, provided some daunting statistics. He stated the average
annual cost of a cyber attack on a small business was $188,242,
and more than 60 percent of victims will shut down within six
months.
In closing, the Chairwoman said she will continue to
closely follow the action around cybersecurity legislation. She
plans on working with the Committees of jurisdiction to make
sure small businesses have the resources available to combat
cyber attacks, while not adding any duplicative regulatory
burdens.
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.
HEARINGS ON SBA FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
The Committee held two hearings to consider the adequacy of
programs designed to provide financial assistance to small
businesses. On October 26, 2011, the Committee reviewed the
capital access programs operated by the SBA in conjunction with
private lenders. One of the major issues raised at the hearing
related to the adequacy of the SBA's oversight of the lenders
to ensure that federal taxpayers were not put at risk. In
addition, the hearing also inquired into whether the SBA
obtains sufficient returns when it is forced to foreclose on
loans. The hearing on November 30, 2011 assessed the SBA's
compliance with changes made to the disaster loan program in
2008 and whether the agency was capable of responding to major
disasters. GAO noted that SBA was improving its disaster
preparedness but still had more to do to ensure adequate
handling of disasters.
HEARINGS ON FEDERAL PROCUREMENT
The Subcommittee on Contracting and the Workforce conducted
four hearings on federal procurement matters that addressed
problems in efforts by the federal government to increase
opportunities for small businesses to participate in federal
procurements. Increased utilization of small businesses will
increase competition, enhance innovation, and reduce reliance
on certain sole source contracts thereby improving the value of
goods and services purchased by the federal government.
On June 23, 2011, the Subcommittee examined the impact of
insourcing (converting work done by contractors to work done by
federal employees) on small business federal government
contractors. The hearing revealed that small businesses (who
can do work in a more cost effective manner) were having their
contracts brought in-house to be performed by federal employees
even when those activities were not inherently governmental.
On September 15, 2011, the Subcommittee investigated
whether certain SBA programs were working sufficiently to
ensure maximum participation by small businesses in the federal
procurement arena. The hearing revealed that SBA programs
needed further enhancement and revision to ensure maximum
utilization from small businesses and the benefits that small
businesses would provide to the federal government.
A hearing on October 6, 2011 examined whether large
contractors were complying with federal statutes and
regulations to utilize small business subcontractors when
providing goods and services to the federal government. The
hearing found that large contractors did not comply with such
requirements and that the computer data systems used by the
federal government were inadequate to ensure compliance with
the subcontracting requirements.
The Subcommittee examined mechanisms to reduce fraud in
special contracting programs overseen by the SBA in a hearing
on October 27, 2011. The hearing identified a number of
problems associated with these programs, including
misrepresentation of status for participation in the programs,
improper subcontracting (including violations of the so-called
``non-manufacturing rule''), incorrect assignment of size
standards by contracting officers, and recurring acts of
bribery and kickbacks (which are currently under criminal
investigation).
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
do 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 of 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 Interior, particularly the Bureau of
Land Management and Minerals Management Service.
Department of Labor, particularly the Occupation
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 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 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 by
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 Department
of Treasury.
State Small Business Credit Initiative operated by
Department of Treasury.
Patriot Express Loan Program overseen by the SBA.
Express Loan Program overseen by SBA.
Emerging Leaders Initiative started by 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. The Committee, in a hearing with Secretary Geithner on
June 22, 2011, examined programs operated by the Department of
Treasury to increase capital access to small businesses. On
October 26, 2011, the Committee examined in greater detail the
SBA capital access programs (which use loan guarantees rather
than direct loans to small businesses) and whether they were
operating in a manner designed to enhance access to capital by
small businesses while protecting the federal taxpayer from
defaults on such loans. Finally, the Committee continued its
oversight of the SBA Disaster Loan Program in a hearing on
November 30, 2011 to ensure that it is prepared to assist small
businesses in recovering from disasters.
On June 2, 2011, the Committee secured a commitment from
the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to review the SBA's
Loan Management Accounting system. GAO has concluded its
investigation and is awaiting the response from the SBA before
finalizing its report to Congress.
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.
On July 28, 2011, Chairman Graves sent a letter to the
Administrator of the SBA, the Hon. Karen Mills, requesting that
the Administrator reconsider the disbursement of funds to
grantees operating Small Business Development Centers (SBDC).
The letter contended that the competitive grant program
undermined the basic financing structure of the SBDC program.
The following day, the Committee sent a request to the SBA
for contracts issued by the agency on a sole source basis to a
company that provided certain types of entrepreneurial
education. The Committee continues to investigate this sole
source contract and whether it duplicates efforts already
provided by other entrepreneurial development programs at the
SBA.
At a hearing on October 17, 2011, the Subcommittee on
Contracting and the Workforce examined whether changes were
needed to the SBA's entrepreneurial outreach programs to
maximize assistance to new entrepreneurs. The panel determined
that improvements could be made with efforts to refocus some of
the assistance provided by the SBA's entrepreneurial
development partners.
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.
Efforts to examine federal government contracting continued
with four hearings by the Subcommittee on Contracting and the
Workforce in late June, September and October of 2011. Those
hearings have been described in greater detail in the sections
on Subcommittee hearings and a description of the Committee's
activities to combat waste, fraud and abuse. For the sake of
brevity, their description will not be reiterated here.
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. The
Committee continues to investigate this contract in conjunction
with the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
On June 29, 2011, as a follow-up to a hearing on insourcing
policies, Subcommittee Chairman Mulvaney sent a letter to the
Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy
(OFPP), the Hon. Daniel I. Gordon (a copy of which was also
sent to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget,
the Hon. Jacob Lew). In the letter, Chairman Mulvaney disputed
the findings of OFPP that insourcing would result in savings to
the federal government. The Subcommittee Chairman then went on
to request that insourcing stop until agencies developed
transparent and sound cost estimation methodologies.
On November 1, the Committee issued subpoenas to Deputy
Attorney General James Cole, Deputy Secretary of State William
Burns, Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin, and Deputy
Secretary of Agriculture, Kathleen Merrigan to testify at a
hearing on their agencies' lack of compliance with the
requirements for ensuring that the Small and Disadvantaged
Business Utilization Offices (SADBUs) reported to the head or
deputy head of the agency. The hearing was intended to be the
culmination of an investigation by GAO and the Committee on the
failure of certain agencies to comply with federal statutes
mandating that SADBUs report to either the head or deputy head
of each federal agency. After the issuance of the subpoenas,
the agencies negotiated changes to their internal reporting
structures to the satisfaction of Chairman Graves and
Subcommittee Chairman Mulvaney. In addition to these agencies,
the Departments of Interior and Health and Human Services also
agreed to modify the reporting structures for their Offices of
Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization.
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.
In two hearings, one on October 26, 2011 and one on
November 30, 2011, the Committee held hearings to assess the
management of SBA's capital access and disaster loan programs.
Those hearings were described in greater detail elsewhere in
this document and a reiteration of their descriptions would be
pleonastic.
The examination of the Loan Management Accounting System by
the GAO at the behest of the Committee, perforce, delves into
SBA management of complex information technology. In addition,
it examines whether the SBA has the tools needed to manage an
$80 billion loan portfolio.
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 13, 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.
On June 16, 2011, the Small Business Subcommittee on
Economic Growth, Tax and Capital Access convened a hearing
titled ``The Dodd-Frank Act Impact on Small Business Lending.''
The hearing examined the impact of Dodd-Frank regulations on
the ability of banks to make loans to small businesses. This
was followed by an examination of the potential adverse
consequences on small business access to capital that may
result from regulations issued by the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau. The hearing, titled ``Open for Business: The
Impact of the CFPB on Small Business,'' was convened by the
Subcommittee on Investigations, Oversight and Regulations.
On June 23, 2011, the Committee sent the Commissioner of
the Internal Revenue a letter concerning the requirement to
report payment card and third party network transactions. The
letter noted these requirements would be particularly
burdensome on small businesses. As a result, the Committee
requested that the Commissioner impose the minimal amount of
reporting necessary to comply with the law and to the extent
possible, reduce the complexity associated with this
information collection.
On July 7, 2011, the Subcommittee on Agriculture, Energy
and Trade held a hearing titled ``Regulation Gone Awry: How
USDA's Proposed GIPSA Rule Hurts America's Small Businesses.''
The hearing was a follow-up to the June 13, 2011 letter from
Chairman Graves and Subcommittee Chairman Tipton concerning the
Department's failure to examine the impact of proposed rules to
implement the 2008 Farm Bill changes to the Packers and
Stockyards Act. At the hearing, small livestock producers and
meat processors testified about the increased uncertainty that
would result from the adoption of the Department's proposed
rule.
Chairman Graves sent a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa
Jackson on July 11, 2011 concerning the procedures used by the
agency to convene a panel of small businesses, as set forth in
Sec. 609 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 609,
in the development of a proposed rule to establish new source
performance standards for utilities in order to control
greenhouse gases. The Chairman noted that the small business
representatives were not provided sufficient information to
provide EPA with appropriate input on the impacts on small
businesses.
On September 21, 2011, the Committee on Small Business held
a hearing titled ``Eliminating Job-Sapping Federal Rules
through Retrospective Reviews--Oversight of the President's
Effort'' to examine the results of Executive Order 13,563. That
order required ongoing retrospective review of all federal
regulations and the Committee has raised questions to the
Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, the Hon. Cass Sunstein, concerning whether the
Executive Order would be any different than other presidential
efforts to reduce regulatory burdens through retrospective
reviews. As a follow-up to the Committee's September 21, 2011
hearing, the Chairman, on November 4, 2011 sent Administrator
Sunstein a letter raising multiple concerns about the cost
impact of federal rules on general aviation.
On October 5, 2011, the Committee convened to examine the
impact of various decisions by the Department of Labor and
National Labor Relations Board on small businesses. In
particular, the hearing reviewed decisions that would place
small businesses in a significantly disadvantageous position
during union organizing campaigns.
The Committee extended its examination of regulatory issues
affecting general aviation when it convened a hearing titled
``LightSquared: The Impact of Small Business GPS Users'' on
October 12, 2011. The hearing focused on a proposal before the
Federal Communications Commission to allocate spectrum for use
of a terrestrial broadband service adjacent to spectrum used
for GPS services. Witnesses testified about the potential
interference with GPS devices, the potential serious
consequences to aviation, and the costs that would result in
needing to buy equipment that can filter out interference from
an adjacent terrestrial broadband service.
On November 17, 2011, the Subcommittee on Agriculture,
Energy and Trade held a hearing titled ``Adrift in Regulatory
Burdens and Uncertainty: A Review of Proposed and Potential
Regulations of Family Farms.'' The primary focus of the hearing
was the impact of requiring pesticide applicators to obtain a
discharge permit under the Clean Water Act. In addition, the
hearing considered the economic consequences of regulating dust
on farms pursuant to the Clean Air Act.
On November 17, 2011, Chairman Graves co-signed a letter to
the Chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Hon.
Mary Schapiro. In the letter, the signatories raised concerns
about the Commission's efforts to issue a final rule on
conflict minerals as required by 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Specifically, the
Commission's failure to assess adequately impacts on small
business as mandated under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
F. Oversight of federal tax policy
On February 9, 2011, the Committee on Small Business met
for a hearing titled, ``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.
On November 3, 2011, the Subcommittee on Economic Growth,
Tax and Capital Access held a hearing titled ``Pro-Growth Tax
Policy: Why Small Businesses Need Individual Reform.'' The
hearing focused on the importance of tax policies to our
nation's small businesses. The primary issues addressed at the
hearing included complexity of the tax code and the taxation of
pass-through entities, such as sole proprietorships and S
corporations.
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. As follow-ups to this
hearing, Subcommittee Chairwoman Ellmers sent letters to the
Department of Health and Human Services (dated July 5, 2011 and
August 11, 2011) raising issues about the cost of implementing
health information technology and regulatory modifications that
could assist small health care providers in overcoming these
cost barriers.
The Subcommittee on Healthcare and Technology held a
hearing on July 28, 2011 titled ``Small Businesses and PPACA:
If They like Their Coverage Can They Keep It?'' Small
businesses testified that PPACA will not help them maintain
health insurance coverage or reduce their costs of doing
business.
On August 30, 2011, Subcommittee Chairwoman Ellmers sent a
letter to Secretary Sebelius on a proposed rule concerning the
establishment of health insurance exchanges under the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act. Subcommittee Chairwoman
Ellmers contended that the proposed rule might force small
health insurers out of the market. More significantly,
Subcommittee Chairwoman Ellmers alleged that the requirements
for eligibility as a small business under the insurance
exchanges would impose significant additional recordkeeping and
reporting requirements thereby increasing rather than
decreasing costs for small businesses.
On October 14, 2011, Chairman Graves sent a letter to GAO
concerning the Internal Revenue Service's implementation of
provisions in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Mr. Graves, in addition to being added as co-requestor on a
study already underway by GAO, he asked GAO to prepare a study
on the impact on small business of the Service's implementation
of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
H. Oversight of energy policy
On April 14, 2011, the Small Business Subcommittee on
Agriculture, Energy and Trade met for a hearing titled,
``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.
On September 19, 2011, the Subcommittee on Agriculture,
Energy and Trade held a field hearing in Grand Junction, CO,
titled ``Are Excessive Energy Regulations and Policies Limiting
Energy Independence, Killing Jobs and Increasing Prices for
Consumers?'' The hearing examined burdensome federal
regulations and policies on the development of energy resources
located in the United States and, in particular, Colorado.
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.
On July 27, 2011, the Committee on Small Business held a
hearing titled ``Bureaucratic Obstacles for Small Exporters: Is
Our National Export Strategy Working?'' The hearing examined
the efforts encapsulated in President Obama's National Export
Strategy to reduce the regulatory barriers facing small
businesses to expand their involvement in exports of goods and
services.
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. The Committee continues to examine programs and
options for consolidating and eliminating unnecessary small
business programs.
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 Business\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oversight and legislative
Regulation, order, administrative action activity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1099 Reporting Requirement in the Patient The Committee held a hearing
Protection and Affordable Care Act regarding the burden on
(PPACA) (P.L. 111-148). small 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 Fed. On March 2, 2011, the
Reg. 9,213). Committee 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 (76 questioning the methodology
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 Patient Committee sent a letter to
Protection and Affordable Care Act HHS requesting information
(PPACA). (P.L. 111-148). related to the treatment of
small businesses in the
PPACA waiver process.
Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) On April 14, 2011, the
rule related to conflict minerals (75 Committee sent a letter to
Fed. Reg. 80,948). the 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 of The Committee submitted a
political contributions by Federal letter to President Obama
contractors. on 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 System Growth, Tax, and Capital
(NAICS) Sector 54 Industries related to Access held a hearing on
professional services (76 Fed. Reg. May 5, 2011 to review the
14,323). size 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 Act Investigations, Oversight,
(42 USC, Chapter 85) and the Resource and Regulations held a
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 hearing on various EPA
(P.L. 95-609). regulations and 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 to USDA regarding compliance
amend the Packer and Stockyards Act of with the Regulatory
1921 (75 Fed. Reg. 35,338). Flexibility Act 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
established by the Patient Protection and GAO analysis of the small
Affordable Care Act (PPACA) (P.L. 111- business tax credit
148). established by PPACA.
Department of Transportation Federal Motor The Subcommittee on
Carrier Safety Administration's Hours of Investigations, Oversight
Service regulations (75 Fed. Reg. 82,170). and Regulation held a
hearing on the impact of
trucking Hours of Service
regulations on small
businesses on June 14,
2011.
Presidential Guidance on Government The Subcommittee on
Contracting, (74 Fed. Reg. 9755). Contracting and Workforce
held a hearing to examine
the President's guidance on
insourcing of work
currently done by federal
contractors on June 23,
2011.
Reporting to IRS on credit card Chairman Graves sent a
transactions, (28 U.S.C. Sec. 6050W). letter to the Commissioner
of the Internal Revenue
concerning the
implementation of reporting
requirements for payment
card and third party
network transactions on
June 23, 2011. The
Committee continues to work
with the IRS on this issue.
Medicare Program; Proposed Changes to the Subcommittee Chair Ellmers
Electronic Prescribing Incentive Program, sent a letter to the
(76 Fed. Reg. 31,547). Administrator of the
Centers for Medicare and
Medicaid Services
addressing the impact of
changes in the electronic
prescribing program on
small businesses on July 5,
2011.
Implementation of Regulations Required The Subcommittee on
Under Title XI of the Food, Conservation Agriculture, Energy and
and Energy Act of 2008; Conduct in Trade held a hearing on
Violation of the Act, (75 Fed. Reg. July 7, 2011 which
35,338). addressed proposed
regulations that modify
requirements to comply with
the Packers and Stockyards
Act.
Draft Rule on Green House Gas New Source Chairman Graves sent EPA
Performance Standards for Electric Administrator Jackson a
Utility Steam Generating Units. letter on July 11, 2011,
about the inadequacy of the
Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act
panel on green house gas
emissions for new steam
generating facilities
constructed by electric
utilities.
Patient Protection and Affordable Care In a letter dated August 30,
Act: Establishment of Exchanges and 2011, Subcommittee Chair
Qualified Health Plans, (76 Fed. Reg. Ellmers provided written
41,866). comments to the Department
of Health and Human
Services on the impact of
proposed insurance
exchanges on small
businesses and the agency's
lack of compliance with the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Mentor-Protege Programs related to The Subcommittee on
government contracting (13 CFR 124.520). Contracting and Workforce
held a hearing on September
15, 2011 to address a
number of government
contracting issues
including SBA improvements
needed to maximize benefits
of its Mentor-Protege
Program for small
government contractors.
Executive Order 13,563 regarding The Committee held a hearing
regulatory review, (76 Fed. Reg. 3821). on September 21, 2011 with
OIRA Administrator Sunstein
to examine President
Obama's executive order
mandating retrospective
review of federal
regulations.
Representation--Case Procedures, Proposed The Committee held a hearing
Rule, (76 Fed. Reg. 36,812); Labor- on October 5, 2011 to
Management Reporting and Disclosure Act-- address the impact of
Interpretation of the ``Advice'' proposed changes to union
Exemption, Proposed Rule, (76 Fed. Reg. representation elections
36,178). and the impact those
changes would have on small
businesses.
In the Matter of LightSquared Subsidiary The Committee held a hearing
LLC; Request for Modification of its on October 12, 2011 to
Authority for an Ancillary Terrestrial consider the impact of
Component, Order and Authorization, DA 11- LightSquared's construction
133, 26 FCC Rcd 566 (2011). of a terrestrial wireless
broadband service and its
impact on general
aviation's use of GPS.
14 CFR Part 91; 14 CFR 39.13; Lead Chairman Graves sent a
Emissions from Piston Engine Aircraft letter on November 4, 2011
using Leaded Aviation Fuel, Advanced to OIRA Administrator
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, (75 Fed. Sunstein concerning
Reg. 22,440). regulations affecting small
businesses involved in
general aviation.
Final National Pollutant Discharge The Subcommittee on
Elimination System Pesticide General Agriculture, Energy and
Permit for Point Source Discharges from Trade held a hearing on
the Application of Pesticides, (76 Fed. November 17, 2011 to
Reg. 68,750). consider the impact of EPA
regulatory actions on small
agribusinesses.
Conflict Minerals, Proposed Rule, (75 Fed. Chairman Graves, in
Reg. 80,948). conjunction with other
members of the House and
Senate, wrote to the SEC on
November 17, 2011 reminding
the agency of the need to
comply with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act in
finalizing a rule on
conflict minerals.
------------------------------------------------------------------------