Bill Overview
Title: Small Business Contracting Fairness Act of 2022
Description: This bill removes the maximum annual revenue threshold that limits certain small businesses owned by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals from receiving funding under the disadvantaged business enterprise program. The program provides such small businesses the opportunity to compete for federally funded transportation contracts.
Sponsors: Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank," Jr. [D-GA-4]
Target Audience
Population: Small business owners who are socially and economically disadvantaged
Estimated Size: 500000
- The bill affects small businesses owned by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals.
- The change in policy would likely affect businesses involved in federally funded transportation projects since that's the focus of the disadvantaged business enterprise program.
- The legislation may broaden the number or stability of companies that can maintain their disadvantaged business status, impacting those who previously exceeded the revenue cap.
Reasoning
- The policy aims to assist small businesses owned by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals by removing the maximum revenue cap for participation in a program for transportation contracts.
- This change may impact businesses that would graduate from the disadvantaged status due to revenue, thus maintaining or increasing their wellbeing.
- Given the $200,000,000 budget in year 1, only a fraction of the estimated 500,000 targeted businesses might significantly see changes in their wellbeing immediately.
- Long-term effects over 10 years may be more pronounced as companies are able to stabilize financially or grow with access to more contracts.
- Not all disadvantaged small businesses will be equally affected, some may have no immediate benefit if they are not in the transportation sector or not close to surpassing revenue caps.
Simulated Interviews
Owner of a small logistics firm (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy would allow my firm to compete for more contracts without worrying about losing our disadvantaged status.
- Access to more federally funded projects would mean stable revenue streams.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Owner of a small engineering consultancy (Chicago, IL)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The change is beneficial for businesses in my position; however, I'm still trying to grow my client base.
- It might not immediately affect my company, but it aligns with my growth plans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Co-owner of a construction company (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a big relief; we'd been strategizing around the revenue cap issue.
- This allows us to plan for expansion without the fear of losing our status.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Runs a transportation company (Miami, FL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this as future-proofing; it'll benefit me as we grow.
- It's reassuring but not immediately impactful for us.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Owner of a tech startup focusing on transit systems (New York, NY)
Age: 47 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This change means we can participate again, which is incredible for keeping our business competitive.
- The extra resources and opportunities will be transformative.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Owner of a small catering business (Houston, TX)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is not applicable to my business as we're not in transportation.
- I appreciate the intent but we need support in other areas.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Owner of a bus service company (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This expansion allows us to continue receiving contracts without cutting back to avoid revenue limits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Freelance civil engineer (Detroit, MI)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This creates more opportunities if my firm grows into the disadvantaged business sphere, it's quite promising.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
CEO of a large disadvantaged construction firm (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Allows us to sustain competitive edge and solidify our standing in government projects.
- Revenue caps were constraining our growth.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Owner of a hardware supply company (Dallas, TX)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might indirectly benefit us if contractors we supply are impacted.
- Not expecting immediate changes in our situation, but it's a positive development for transportation firms.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)
Year 2: $210000000 (Low: $155000000, High: $260000000)
Year 3: $220000000 (Low: $160000000, High: $270000000)
Year 5: $240000000 (Low: $180000000, High: $300000000)
Year 10: $300000000 (Low: $230000000, High: $370000000)
Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)
Key Considerations
- The overall costs may range significantly based on how many businesses qualify under the new policy.
- Positive impacts on GDP and tax revenue are anticipated, potentially offsetting the increased costs.
- Administrative operations may need significant adjustments to manage increased program participation.