Bill Overview
Title: Preventing Personal Conflicts of Interest in Federal Acquisition Act
Description: This bill addresses conflicts of interest in federal acquisition. Specifically, the bill directs the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council to (1) expand the scope of rules to prevent personal conflicts of interest beyond the limited types of functions or services that are currently addressed in a specified part of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), and (2) revise the FAR to address the functions and services that give rise to heightened concerns for personal conflicts of interest. The bill similarly expands the scope of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy's standard policy to prevent personal conflicts of interest by contractor employees performing relevant acquisition functions for or on behalf of a federal agency or department. The bill prohibits contractors, contractor employees, and subcontractors and their employees from providing services supporting the regulatory, policymaking, or adjudicative functions of an agency at the same time that the contractor, employees, or subcontractor provides services to an entity regulated by, or having non-routine business before, the agency, except where there is a compelling reason, as documented in writing. The Department of Justice may bring a civil action in U.S. district court for violations of this bill.
Sponsors: Rep. Maloney, Carolyn B. [D-NY-12]
Target Audience
Population: people involved in federal acquisition processes
Estimated Size: 4000000
- The bill aims to prevent conflicts of interest in federal acquisition, impacting those involved in federal procurement processes.
- Contractors, subcontractors, and their employees providing services for federal agencies will be directly affected by new regulations and rules specified in the bill.
- These regulations will also affect agencies and governmental departments that rely on contractors for acquisition-related services.
- Businesses and organizations that rely on contracts with federal agencies will need to adjust to ensure compliance with the new rules.
- The global population likely affected includes millions of workers and organizations involved in government contracting and regulatory compliance.
Reasoning
- The policy affects a specific group within the population, namely those involved in federal acquisition processes across the United States.
- Contractors, subcontractors, and their employees will experience varying degrees of impact, largely depending on their direct involvement in functions that may present conflicts of interest.
- Some contractors might benefit from the policy if it opens up opportunities by eliminating competitors who are unable to comply with new regulations.
- Well-being scores are generally measured by job security, ethical workplace satisfaction, and financial stability. These might be significantly impacted by changes in policy adherence requirements and potential litigation risks.
- A range of impacts is expected: some may see increased job satisfaction and security, while others may experience stress due to increased compliance costs or regulatory burdens.
Simulated Interviews
Federal Contractor (Virginia)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The new rules could complicate compliance for us, but overall, I think it will level the playing field.
- Increased transparency and ethical standards are ultimately beneficial for everyone in this field.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Subcontractor Employee (California)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about how these changes might affect my job security, especially if our firm faces compliance issues.
- However, I believe it's important to maintain integrity across government contracts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Policy Analyst (Texas)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This will facilitate a more ethical procurement environment, which is a priority for our agency.
- We anticipate increased workload initially, but the long-term benefits are substantial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
SME Owner (Florida)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The financial burden of meeting these regulations could be challenging for smaller businesses like mine.
- Still, I believe these measures could reduce unfair advantages for larger competitors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Retired Federal Employee (Maryland)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These changes are overdue; they will close loopholes that have existed for too long.
- The consulting work I do now might increase as firms seek to navigate these requirements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Corporate Attorney (New York)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These changes will generate more business for our firm as clients need legal guidance.
- There are concerns about potential bottlenecks in compliance processes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
NGO Advisor (Colorado)
Age: 42 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a step towards greater transparency which is much needed.
- I am concerned about the implementation and enforcement, though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
CEO of a Large Corporation (Illinois)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased compliance could drive up costs, impacting competitive advantage.
- Despite these challenges, I support the intent of the policy for enhancing fairness.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Federal Procurement Officer (Washington)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The new rules will help streamline our processes and prevent conflicts effectively.
- It might require some adjustment, but the outcome should justify the initial work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 9 |
Junior Analyst in a Contracting Firm (Nevada)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I have some concerns about how these regulations will impact my future career opportunities.
- However, I understand that these changes could benefit us in the long-term ethical landscape.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $45000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $65000000)
Year 3: $45000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $65000000)
Year 5: $40000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $60000000)
Year 10: $40000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $60000000)
Year 100: $40000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $60000000)
Key Considerations
- The effective enforcement of these conflict-of-interest policies will hinge on the clarity and specificity of the revised regulations.
- Potential legal challenges from contractors can affect the timeline and ultimate compliance costs.
- The scalability of these regulations across diverse contracting environments will be a determining factor in both administrative costs and savings captured.