Owners slip through the small business loophole

News

Owners slip through the small business loophole

By Nicole Haley
Daily News Tribune
May 15, 2007

Frene is president of TransAction Associates, a transportation consulting firm on Main Street. Hers is one of the small businesses around the country that could be hurt by a federal bill passed in the House last week.

Dubbed the "Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act," HR1873 has been criticized for a loophole that lets large corporations snag small-business contracts.

Many corporate giants have already slipped through an existing loophole and have taken an estimated $60 billion a year in small-business contracts, said Lloyd Chapman, president and founder of the American Small Business League.

Chapman says the U.S. Small Business Administration should be giving that money to small businesses like Frene's.

As HR1873 moves along to the Senate, Chapman said he pushing for what he says is a vital amendment to the bill. Currently the legislation does not require annual re-certification as a legitimate small business for firms with existing government contracts. That means, Chapman said, the government would continue overestimating its support to small businesses by billions of dollars.

"I just think that it's difficult enough to do work with the government if you're a small business. And for them to pass a bill that eliminates the need to certify as a small business allows anybody to apply for something," said Frene. "If they're going to set aside money for small businesses they should make sure it actually goes to small businesses."

The Small Business Administration, under Bush administration, has provided 23 percent of all government contracts to small businesses, according to the organization's Web site. However, several investigative reports in recent years have shown major corporations holding small-business contracts.

A July 2003 Associated Press report found several internationally known companies listed in the government contractor database as "small businesses."

The list included Verizon Communications, AT&T Wireless, and Barnes & Nobles booksellers. Without required annual re-certification, Chapman said those companies could continue taking small-business dollars.

The House bill has some worthwhile facets, Chapman said, including upping the goal for small business federal contracts from 23 to 30 percent, with contracts reserved for female-owned small businesses up from 5 to 8 percent. However, without annual re-certification to make sure the contracts are going to legitimate small businesses, Chapman said the increases hold little meaning.

"What difference does it make if it's 23 or 30 (percent) if it includes Fortune 1000 companies?" Chapman said.

Chapman is holding out hope that U.S. Sen. John Kerry, D-Massachusetts, will add an amendment for re-certification before the bill is passed by the Senate as early as the end of this week. Chapman said Kerry, chairman of the Small Business Committee, has publicly supported re-certification in the past.

Frene, whose business holds several statewide contracts but no federal contracts as of yet, also wants to see the bill amended.

"It just seems that the federal government should really try to make sure that money is going to a small business and not just being funneled to another large corporation," she said.

A call to U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy's office, D-Massachusetts whose district includes Waltham, was not immediately returned yesterday.

The Truth About H.R. 1873-The Small Business Fairness In Contracting Act

Press Release

The Truth About H.R. 1873-The Small Business Fairness In Contracting Act

By Lloyd Chapman
May 15, 2007

Petaluma, Calif.- Calling H.R. 1873 the “Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act,” would be akin to Congress passing legislation to allow strip mining in every national park in America and calling it the “National Park Beautification and Preservation Act.”
 
On February 24, 2005, the Small Business Administration Office of Inspector General issued Report 5-15, which stated, “One of the most important challenges facing the Small Business Administration (SBA) and the entire Federal Government today is that large businesses are receiving small business procurement awards and agencies are receiving credit for these awards.” This will continue under H.R. 1873.
 
H.R. 1873 does not have an annual re-certification provision for all firms with current Federal small business contracts that will stop large corporations with existing Federal small business contracts from continuing to receive billions of dollars in Federal small business contracts for years to come.
 
The paltry handful of positive provisions in H.R. 1873 are nothing more than window dressings and could in no way counter the staggering diversion of billions of dollars in Federal small business contracts that H.R. 1873 will continue to ensure. A prime example of how ineffective H.R. 1873 really is can be seen in the provision to raise the Federal small business contracting goal from 23 to 25 percent. As long as hundreds of the biggest companies in the world are considered small businesses what difference does it make? Congress could raise it to 100 percent and it would be meaningless. Under H.R. 1873, Federal agencies and prime contractors can reach a 23, 25 or 50 percent small business contracting levels and never award contracts to a company that is not a Fortune 1000 firm. 
 
The facts surrounding this issue are simple and irrefutable.
 
1. Fact: The United States government is counting billions of dollars in awards to hundreds of the largest firms in America and Europe towards the government's minimum 23 percent small business contracting goal. Every year, legitimate small businesses are cheated out of billions of dollars in Federal small business contracts because of intentional loopholes in the regulation that allow this to happen. H.R. 1873 will allow this to continue for years to come. There have now been over a dozen Federal investigations and private studies that have found that the Federal government has reported billions of dollars in contracts to hundreds of large businesses as small business contracts. Firms like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Halliburton, Oracle, BAE, Hewlett-Packard, Raytheon, Titan Industries, L3 Communications and the multi-billion Euro Dutch firm Buhrmann NV have all received billions of dollars in Federal small business contracts. Each one of these firms will be allowed to keep their existing small business contracts under H.R.1873.
 
The truth is that policies the SBA, General Services Administration, Office of Management Budget and the FAR Council have created; intentionally divert hundreds of billions in Federal small business contracts and subcontracts from legitimate hard working small businesses in every state to big business. It places legitimate small businesses in a position where they must compete head-to-head with giant corporations for even the smallest contracts for goods and services. Thousands of American small businesses have been forced out of business as they unknowingly tried to compete with Fortune 1000 firms for government small business contracts. H.R. 1873 will allow this to continue.
 
2. Fact: After the first Congressional hearing on this issue in May of 2003, the SBA Inspector General recommended the annual re-certification of all firms holding Federal small business contracts as the simplest solution to this problem. The head of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, Angela Styles also agreed annual re-certification for all firms holding Federal small business contracts was the solution. In 2006, the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship voted unanimously for annual re-certification for all firms holding Federal small business contracts as part of the SBA reauthorization bill. New SBA Inspector General, Eric Thorson recommended annual re-certification for all firms in his testimony before the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
 
3. Fact: H.R. 1873 DOES NOT CONTAIN ANNUAL RE-CERTIFICATION FOR ALL FIRMS CURRENTLY HOLDING FEDERAL SMALL BUSINESS CONTRACTS. It only requires firms obtaining NEW Federal small business contracts to recertify their status as small businesses. H.R. 1873 allows Fortune 1000 firms and their subsidiaries to continue to rob legitimate small businesses out of billions of dollars in Federal small business contracts for years to come.
 
You don't have to be a Washington insider to know that the real beneficiaries of H.R. 1873 are corporate giants that have the most powerful lobby in the nation. They are also the largest contributors to Congressional campaigns.
 
The SBA Office of Advocacy reported that small businesses received around $130 billion in Federal contracts and subcontracts. There is no telling how much of that actually went to legitimate small businesses. The Bush Administration has done everything possible to conceal the names of the actual recipients of Federal small business contracts.  
 
Based on the information I have been able to obtain I would estimate that approximately $65 billion a year in so called small business contracts actually go to the top two percent of firms in America. Firms in Holland, France and England also receive U.S. small business contracts. This wholesale diversion of Federal small business contracts to a, “Who’s Who,” of international corporate giants will only continue under H.R. 1873 in its current form.
 
Any member of Congress that allows H.R. 1873 to become law without a provision to remove hundreds of the largest firms in the world from America's small business contracting programs is either an uninformed fool or as deceitful and dishonest as the members of Congress that wrote this bill and introduced it.
 
 
 
###
 

House Passes H.R. 1873 and Gives Billions in Federal Small Business Contracts to Fortune 500 Companies

Press Release

House Passes H.R. 1873 and Gives Billions in Federal Small Business Contracts to Fortune 500 Companies

Yesterday, the House of Representatives passed Bill H.R. 1873, which will force small businesses to compete with large corporations for small business contracts.

May 11, 2007

Petaluma, Calif.- Yesterday, the House of Representatives passed Bill H.R. 1873 the “Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act.” Although the bill has some positive provisions for small businesses, it does not contain any provision that will stop the diversion of billions of dollars in Federal small business contracts to Fortune 500 firms that have existing Federal small business contracts.
 
Twelve Federal investigations since 2002 have all found billions of dollars in Federal small business contracts actually wound up in the hands of some of the largest firms in the United States and Europe.
 
In Report 5-15, the Small Business Administration Office of Inspector General referred to the diversion of Federal small business contracts to large businesses as one of the biggest challenges facing the Federal government today.
 
Under H.R. 1873, the Federal government would be allowed to continue to report contracts to corporate giants like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop-Grumman, Raytheon, Rolls Royce and L3 Communications as small business contracts.
 
As early as 2002, the SBA Office of the Inspector General, the SBA, the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, the Office of Management and Budget, the Government Accountability Office and the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship all recommended annual re-certification for all firms receiving Federal small business contracts. H.R. 1873 only requires firms receiving new small business contracts to recertify their status as legitimate small businesses. Firms with existing small business contracts are unaffected by H.R. 1873.
 
Beginning in 2002, the SBA acknowledged that large businesses had received small business contracts through miscoding, computer glitches and honest mistakes. Two separate investigations by the SBA Office of Advocacy and the SBA Office of the Inspector General found fraud was responsible for large businesses receiving Federal small business contracts.
 
H.R. 1873 will allow large businesses that currently have small business contracts to keep them regardless of how they originally obtained them. In its current form, the bill will allow firms that obtained small business contracts fraudulently to keep their contracts for at least five more years. 
 
The bill now goes to the Senate. Small business owners and advocates are hoping that Senator John Kerry will save the day for small businesses across America and add the annual re-certification provision for all firms holding Federal small business contracts. If he does, as much as $60 billion a year in Federal small business contracts could begin to flow to America’s 23 million small businesses.
 
###

Congress plans to vote today on small business legislation increasing amount of government work

News

Congress plans to vote today on small business legislation increasing amount of government work

By Melissa Frederick
The Examiner
May 9, 2007

WASHINGTON - The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote today on a somewhat weakened version of legislation that strengthens government requirements for employing small businesses.

The Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act (H.R. 1873) increases the amount of work the government must give to small businesses and tightens restrictions on how the work should be administered.

The bill raises the amount of work required to 25 percent of total government business, up from the current 23 percent. The number is less than in earlier drafts of the bill, which required a 30 percent set-aside.

The legislation also works to restrict the process of bundling contracts, making them larger in scale and more difficult for small businesses to get. American Small Business League Chairman Lloyd Chapman criticized the bill because it does not require annual recertification for companies that already have small business contracts.

Benson has been among critics of the Small Business Administration, which has come under fire for giving contracts to companies that get bought out by large contractors.

“Basically, there are so many existing government contracts, that they could go for the next 20 years without having to enter into any new ones,” Chapman said.

The bill, however, does require annual recertification for all new small business government contracts.

The SBA also opposed the bill in a statement released Tuesday.

“H.R. 1873 ... would impose broad, burdensome statutory restrictions on federal agencies’ ability to conduct acquisitions and establish unrealistic small business procurement goals,” the agency said.

SBA recently introduced its own reforms, which would require firms to recertify that they meet the definition of a small business every five years.

Size Matters

News

Size Matters

Lloyd Chapman blows the whistle on corporate favoritism at the Small Business Administration

By Bruce Robinson
The Bohemian
May 9, 2007

Four years later, Lloyd Chapman is still steamed.

On May 8, 2003, Chapman appeared before a Capitol Hill hearing, convened at his instigation, of the House Committee on Small Business. He was there to challenge the Small Business Administration's practice of awarding government contracts intended for small American companies to multinational corporations instead.

Even though the hearing did not turn out to be the watershed exposé he had envisioned--he now calls it "a government pep rally"--it still drew considerable attention, and Chapman was confident that the issue would soon be addressed.

And, in a way, it was.

"Since that time, there have been 12 to 15 federal investigations and two private studies," he says, spreading documents out across a conference table in the offices of the Petaluma computer firm he cofounded. The most damning report, issued by the SBA's internal inspector general in February 2005, states that "one of the most important challenges facing the Small Business Administration and the entire federal government today is that large businesses are receiving small business procurement awards."

But one, two, three years passed, and there was no legislative response.

"It's unprecedented for a problem of this magnitude to have been exposed at this level and not addressed," Chapman fumes. "Think of the power you've got to have in Congress to shut down something like that. That's some juice. That's impressive."

Part of a modern business park in Petaluma, Chapman's office has a wall full of photographs taken with political and pop culture figures from presidents and governors to racecar drivers. (It's also the headquarters for the American Small Business League, the trade and lobbying association Chapman formed in 2002, which now boasts 100,000 members.) A lifelong Republican and productive entrepreneur, the San Antonio native was taken aback when Margie Walker, one of his staff members at GC Micro, came into his office on a summer day in 2002 with tears streaming down her face. She had been working for weeks on a complicated bid for a federal contract for computer controllers. The contract was a "set-aside," meaning it was designated specifically for smaller companies to bid on. But, Chapman relates, Walker had just learned "she had lost it to a company in Amsterdam with 20,000 employees and operations in 20 countries. I was so mad I couldn't take it."

Suspicious that this might not be an isolated instance, Lloyd quickly began to search the SBA's database of companies with which it has contracts. "I found 600 of the biggest companies in the world," he snorts, among them AT&T, Hilton Hotels, Nike, Sprint, Barnes & Noble and the now infamous Halliburton, along with multinationals from Switzerland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.

Those findings were clearly at odds with the Small Business Act of 1953, which set a goal of directing 23 percent of the federal government's contracts to the nation's small businesses. Half a century later, the law remains in effect.

"So I started calling everyone in Washington," he says. He finally found a sympathetic ear at the General Accounting Office. "They launched an investigation based on the information I had given them. That lasted six months, and they found out I was right--that billions of dollars in small business contracts was going to big companies."

That investigation led directly to the May 2003 hearing at which Chapman testified. Briefly. "The hearing lasted five and a half hours," he recalls. "I spoke for seven minutes, the gentleman from the General Accounting Office spoke for seven minutes, and another small-business gentleman spoke for seven minutes. The rest of the time was people from the government talking about what a great job they were doing with small businesses."

Still, the hearing helped prompt several further investigations, including three that identified official malfeasance. Chapman ticks them off on his fingertips: "The SBA's own inspector general found fraud in '95; they found more fraud again in March of 2005; the SBA Office of Advocacy found 'vendor deception,' and then the rest of it are actually policies the government has passed to intentionally allow this."

Among those policies are complex rules regarding the multimillion dollar contracts that require dozens of subcontractors and a stunningly lax system of monitoring who is allowed to bid on what. Chapman asserts that many corporations are "intentionally misrepresenting themselves in order to receive these federal small business contracts. I can think of one company, they told their stockholders they weren't a small business in February of 1998, and in 2004 they received $500 million in federal small-business contracts."

The abuses are so widespread, he alleges, that "it could be as much as $100 billion a year in federal small-business contracts that are being diverted to large companies. At a minimum," he estimates, "it's $50 billion a year."

Kathryn Seck, press secretary for Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who chairs the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, attributes part of the problem to rolling reductions in the SBA budget, including cuts of 40 percent under the current administration. "In the 1980s, there were well over 200 procurement center representatives," she notes. "Today, there are approximately 50 individuals monitoring and reviewing $340 billion in federal contracts."

But aside from a general antipathy for massive corporate pork, why should anyone who's not bidding for those deals care? Chapman avers there was a good reason Congress created those small-business set-asides 54 years ago.

"The U.S. Census Bureau tells us that 98 percent of all U.S. firms have less than a hundred employees; around 89 percent of all American companies have less than 20 employees; and the average American firm has about 10 employees," Chapman explains. "So when you're talking about diverting $50 billion a year away from the firms where most Americans work, that's going to be felt in Rohnert Park and Santa Rosa and Novato and every city in America."

Frustrated by the lack of congressional response on the issue, Chapman aggressively backed Democratic candidates in 20 key districts across the country in the 2006 midterm elections, feeding the local newspapers stories of the Republican incumbents' inaction on his pet issue. Nineteen of those candidates won.

Following the partisan shift in Congress that resulted from the 2006 midterm elections, Rep. Bruce Braley, D-Iowa, introduced H.R. 1873, the "Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act," which sailed unanimously through the House Committee on Small Business on April 24. The bill, whose 28 co-sponsors include 10 Republicans, is intended to end abuses and tighten loopholes in the federal contracting process.

"It red-flags businesses which have been found to be other than small" in the government's contracting database, explains Kate Gilman, a committee staff member. She adds that the intended result is "pruning all the non-eligible entities and prevents businesses that have been discovered [to be wrongly coded as small] from re-registering in that database."

Another key provision would require the companies seeking the small business contracts to affirm each year that they are still qualified to do so, a notable change from the five-year recertification cycle proposed by SBA chief Steven Preston.

Chapman's primary complaint is that the new bill does not address the thousands of mis-awarded contracts already on the books, although he concedes it should prevent new ones from being added to the list. But his greater indignation is reserved for the recertification process.

"The scam is, it's just for new contracts, not existing contracts," he grumbles. "It's designed to let the five-year recertification plan stand."

H.R. 1873 also contains a provision that would increase that 1953 allocation of federal contracts for small businesses from 23 percent to 30 percent. But Chapman remains unimpressed. "It's smoke and mirrors," he snorts. "If you've got Boeing and Bechtel and Northup and Lockheed in there, what difference does it make?"

http://www.metrosantacruz.com/bohemian/05.09.07/lloyd-chapman-0719.html