What is your e-mail address?

My e-mail address is:

Do you have a password?

Forgot your password? Click here
close

Acquisitive Mind

By Matthew Weigelt

Blog archive

Congress could end HUBZone priority in small-biz contracting

“Shall” seems to be the toughest word to erase from the law books. Even when everyone wants the word gone, it tends to stick around to wreak havoc for those who dislike its mandatory nature.

Officials have been trying to delete "shall" from the HUBZone program in order to equalize contracting set-asides among the various categories of small businesses. And this time Congress seems determined.

Currently, the law tells agencies that when they set aside a federal contract for small businesses to look first for companies based in economically depressed areas, or HUBZones. If none qualify for the job, then agency contracting officials can check out firms in the Small Business Administration’s 8(a) program and small companies owned by service-disabled veterans.

The law requires contracting officers to give HUBZone companies priority, and many people don’t like that advantage.

Yesterday, the House voted to close the conference in which representatives from the House and Senate amend the differences in the two versions of the fiscal 2010 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 2647). The Senate’s version includes a short section on Small Business Contracting Programs Parity. It would simply strike the pesky “shall” and replace it with the more egalitarian “may.” The section is expected in the final version too.

In case something goes wrong, there’s another option. Rep. Wally Herger (R-Calif.) yesterday introduced a one-line bill to strike the "shall" and pencil in "may." Herger today said he’s heard from many small businesses in his Northern California district who say that the HUBZone program in its current form prevents them from bidding on contracts.

Even some strong HUBZone advocates agree with the proposed change of wording. In July, Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.), co-chairman of the HUBZone Caucus, said the small business categories should be treated equally.

The Obama administration is conducting its own legal review of the law regarding HUBZone business set-asides and the accompanying shall. But until it’s finished, Peter Orszag, director of the Office of Management and Budget, told agencies in a July memo that the categories of small businesses are equal when it comes to contract set-asides.

However, when asked to review two related bid-protest decisions, the Government Accountability Office pointed back to the law. The law, the standard by which the U.S. government operates, says those small businesses aren’t equal.

The Small Business Reauthorization Act of 1997 states that “a contract opportunity shall be awarded” on the basis of a set-aside competition among HUBZone companies. Meanwhile, Congress didn’t afford other small companies the same mandate. The law only says contracting officers “may” set aside a contract to those types of companies.

Until administration officials finish their review of the law, small business parity regulations “should not be disregarded by contracting officers, and federal agencies should not, as a result of the GAO’s decisions, be compelled to prioritize HUBZone small businesses,” Orszag wrote.

As the defense authorization bill comes before the House and Senate for a vote on passage, the administration's legal review may become moot. But "shall" is proving to be hard to erase.

Posted by Matthew Weigelt on Oct 07, 2009 at 1:58 PM


Reader comments

Thu, Jan 14, 2010

I respect the intent of the government to make a difference in the under utilized or depressed areas (eg HUBZones) of our country by granting them the opportunity to succeed (eg if they can prove they can perform the work they're ultimately given the right of first refusal). However, I disagree with the previously written comments regarding woman owned, 8(a)'s or any other small business that falls under the SBA's "socio-economically disadvantaged" business categories as they too are given significant advantages over everyone else. It's a bit ironic (and a bit hypocritical) to be given (not to be confused with earned as is the case with Veteran Owned Small Businesses) an advantage over other small businesses and then complain about someone else having an advantage over you. If the playing field is to be leveled then the issue in 2010 needs to address "small businesses" as a whole and not provide what amounts to a "golden ticket" to any category of small business. A small business is a small business. A level playing field is a level playing field. The ultimate disappointment here is not focusing on helping small businesses as a whole to drive our economy, but rather focusing on and helping only segments of small businesses. While philosophically very good in principle (having "socio-economically disadvantaged business categories") establishing categories of small businesses unfortunately has lead to abuse of the "system" and small businesses that don't meet the "socio-economically disadvantaged" requirements of the SBA are the ones truly left out. There's very little to nothing done for them. There are no programs for those businesses, so if you have a program to turn to and the government has given you an advantage consider yourself fortunate as not everyone has it. If you think surviving with an advantage given to you is hard try surviving and thriving without it.

Wed, Jan 13, 2010

Ditto the Woman-Owned Small Business program. Neither Clinton, nor Bush, implemented regulations to give Woman-Owned business parity with 8a and Hubzone, even after Congress passed legislation to direct that it be done. So far, Obama is also doing nothing. Oh, and did I mention the uneven parity for native american owned firms; at what point will all the billions of dollars of federal contracts given them on a sole source basis be enough money to be sufficient "reparations" for taking away a country from them that they had themselves invaded from Asia and taken over centuries before?

Fri, Oct 9, 2009

Unfortunately we, like most 8(a) IT firms, wasted most of our 8(a) eligibility under the Bush administration, which had an extremely negative view on the enforcement of rules and regulations regarding federal contracting opportunities for minority business. The SBA’s secrecy combined with the common practice of awarding federal small business contracts to mega-large corporations were particularly devastating to small business. We were lucky to survive.

The Obama administration’s current inaction in enforcing those very same rules may force firms that were barely surviving to ultimately close their doors.

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above

Editorial Webcasts

  • Service Consolidation: How to Avoid Basic Pitfalls of Shared Services Register Now

    This is the first webcast of the Series “Future First: Three Steps to Data Center Transformation”. Plan to attend this webcast to support your agency efforts to design a practical roadmap for consolidation of resources and shared services to meet current and emerging program demands. Learn from those who are doing to help you evaluate services in your current operations that may lend themselves to future shared service arrangements. Read more

Federal Computer Week eNewsletters

  • Subscribe to Newsletters Subscribe

    Federal Computer Week's eNewsletters deliver the latest policy and management news to your inbox.