Bill Overview
Title: A bill to amend the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to remove the exclusion of certain small business concerns from the disadvantaged business enterprise program, and for other purposes.
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: Sen. Ossoff, Jon [D-GA]
Target Audience
Population: Small business owners who are socially and economically disadvantaged
Estimated Size: 200000
- The bill impacts small businesses that are owned by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals.
- It specifically targets those businesses that previously were excluded due to exceeding the maximum annual revenue threshold.
- These businesses now have increased opportunities to compete for federally funded transportation contracts.
- The wider umbrella of the disadvantaged business enterprise program covers businesses across multiple industries associated with federal transportation projects.
Reasoning
- Considering the policy's target, I focused on small business owners who are socially and economically disadvantaged, particularly those who might have been excluded from funding opportunities due to a maximum revenue threshold.
- The budget constraints and the wide distribution of eligible businesses across the United States mean that not every business will feel the impact equally—some might benefit significantly, while others not at all.
- I factored in a mix of industries related to transportation, as these are directly connected to the policy's funding benefits.
- Given this policy is aimed at expanding opportunities, it could take a few years for eligible businesses to noticeably increase their competitiveness in securing federal contracts.
Simulated Interviews
Owner of a logistics company (Chicago, IL)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy finally gives my business a fair chance to compete for projects we were previously sidelined from.
- It feels like the opportunities are slowly becoming more accessible, but there's still a lot to learn about the bidding process.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Construction business owner (New York, NY)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- With this policy, there is potential, but I need to see significant contracts to truly make a difference to our financials.
- I'm concerned whether smaller businesses like mine will really be prioritized.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Civil engineering consultant (Miami, FL)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This change may allow our business to continue growing without the fear of losing out due to revenue thresholds.
- We are excited but cautious—competition is fierce and contracts are limited.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Tech solutions provider for transportation (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This gives us a shot at landing projects that can showcase our tech solutions.
- However, the initial bump might just be a drop in the ocean without consistent opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Public transit supplier (Dallas, TX)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a relief, but we worry about larger businesses overshadowing those newly eligible.
- We hope for fair distribution of opportunities so every disadvantaged business gets a chance.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Architectural firm owner (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Removing the revenue cap truly opens doors for us to work on larger scale projects.
- But, with growth comes its own challenges of scaling and sustaining quality.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Environmental compliance advisor (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy allows us to broaden our client base to include federal accounts.
- Overall, it feels like a proactive change, but penetration takes time and outreach.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Transportation equipment supplier (Detroit, MI)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We appreciate the policy lifting the cap—it encourages us to expand our operations.
- However, it's still challenging to compete against larger players on established contracts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Civil infrastructure contractor (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having this cap removal means we can aggressively pursue new bids we've previously avoided.
- Our team is a bit anxious about adapting to potentially larger projects.
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 | 9 | 7 |
IT services for transport (Seattle, WA)
Age: 31 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Finally, we can explore federal contracts, which can be a game changer for our growth strategy.
- I'm optimistic, but cautious, about how much this will help directly and swiftly.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $155000000 (Low: $105000000, High: $205000000)
Year 3: $160000000 (Low: $110000000, High: $210000000)
Year 5: $170000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $220000000)
Year 10: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)
Year 100: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Key Considerations
- The scale of the program and its impact heavily relies on current federal transportation budgets and the extent to which funds can be redistributed or increased.
- The effectiveness of excluding the revenue cap will depend on the forthcoming administration strategies and successful awareness among the targeted demographic of businesses.
- The program's impact on local economies and employment may vary depending on the geographical concentration of qualifying businesses.