Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Pages S6001-S6002]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROTECTING BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES FOR VETERANS ACT OF 2019
Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Veterans' Affairs be discharged from further consideration
of H.R. 561 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 561) to amend title 38, United States Code, to
improve the oversight of contracts awarded by the Secretary
of Veterans Affairs to small business concerns owned and
controlled by veterans, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the committee was discharged, and the
Senate proceeded to consider the bill
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I wish to enter into a colloquy with
Senators Moran and Tester, the chairman and ranking member of the
Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to discuss H.R. 561, the
Protecting Business Opportunities for Veterans Act.
H.R. 561 is important legislation that seeks to prevent large
companies from using a veteran-owned small business as a front to win a
small business set-aside or sole-source contract that the small
business contractor is incapable of performing. To prevent this, H.R.
561 places certain subcontracting limitations on the Department of
Veterans' Affairs Vet's First contracting program. For the agency's
small business set-asides for veteran-owned and service-disabled
veteran-owned small businesses, the small business prime would need to
certify that it will perform 50 percent more of the work. This
limitation on subcontracting can only be circumvented if the small
business prime subcontracts to a ``similarly situated'' business.
However, as ranking member of the Senate Small Business and
Entrepreneurship Committee, I have two concerns with this legislation.
The first concern is that all the penalties for violating the
limitations on subcontracting fall on the small business prime
contractor and does not provide the agency with the flexibility to
impose penalties on the subcontractor that is using the small business
as a front to win the contract. This is inconsistent with similar Small
Business Administration regulations governing other small business set-
asides that provide the necessary flexibility to penalize the
appropriate party.
The second concern is that the bill requires the Department of
Veterans' Affairs to monitor compliance by using a reporting system
that is not used by small business prime contractors because small
businesses are exempt from the requirement to provide a small business
subcontracting plan. The current system does not have the capability to
record compliance on limitations of subcontracting and a system has not
been established by the Small Business Administration. Simply put,
there is no system in place for small businesses to report into and
needs to be created.
[[Page S6002]]
While I recognize the importance and need for H.R. 561 and believe it
should be sent to the President for his signature, would the chair and
ranking member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee provide
assurances that we can work together on future legislation to address
my concerns?
Mr. MORAN. Yes.
Mr. TESTER. Yes. The bill before us, H.R. 561, seeks to crack down on
the unfair practice of using veteran and service-disabled owned small
businesses as pass-throughs for larger contractors to secure Federal
contracts. I would like to thank Senator Cardin for working diligently
on this issue and for his leadership as ranking member of the Senate
Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee. I look forward to
working closely with him to ensure this legislation meets congressional
intent once it is enacted.
Mr. PORTMAN. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read
a third timed and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered
made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 561) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
