Ehlers: Bill would make government contracting ‘eminently more fair’

        House members voted 362-57 in support of the Federal Prison Industries Competition in Contracting Act of 2006 (H.R. 2965), with 202 Republicans, 159 Democrats and one independent in favor of the legislation. Ehlers, R-Grand Rapids, provided the following statement in favor of the bill:

Mr. Speaker,

      I rise in strong support of H.R. 2965. This bill restores a modicum of sense to our current government procurement system.

      Let me highlight two important aspects of this bill. One, the bill helps federal agencies manage taxpayer dollars more responsibly. For the first time, private-sector firms will be free to bid on federal contracting opportunities currently reserved for Federal Prison Industries. To assure that a buying agency is getting adequate value for the taxpayer dollars being spent on clothing, textiles, electronics, office furniture, equipment, services, or other procurement items, the buying agency – rather than FPI – would be empowered to determine whether the offered product and delivery schedule meet the buying agency’s needs. Similarly, the buying agency would be empowered to determine whether FPI’s offered price meets the procurement standard for a “fair and reasonable price.”

      Two, the bill is eminently more fair to contractors. Let me give you one example of the egregiously unfair practices under the current system. Back in 2003, the FAA was seeking to procure office furniture for its headquarters building. Through the General Services Administration, it solicited bids for the contract. On April 16, 2003, Steelcase (which is a major office furniture manufacturer based in my district) submitted its final bid for this contract to the GSA. A week later, Steelcase was informed by GSA that they were likely the winning bid on the contract. On May 7, they were informed by GSA that FPI had copied the proposal word for word and exactly matched Steelcase’s bid. FPI asserted its sole source authority and decided not to grant a waiver for this contract. This was completely unfair as Steelcase had spent over 1,000 man hours and hundreds of thousands of dollars preparing the design, construction schedule, labor and material costs and other elements of this bid, only to have FPI duplicate the offer and undercut them. Thankfully, FPI eventually relented after considerable political pressure was brought to bear by myself and others.

      We cannot continue to fight these kinds of situations on a case-by-case basis. That is why I support comprehensive FPI reform. If FPI can compete on quality and price, then great! Let me note that the bill does not alter a broad array of other advantages that FPI enjoys when it competes with private-sector firms, including extremely low wage rates, low overhead costs and no tax liability. But the current mandatory source privilege is anathema to principles of the free market and open enterprise.

      I commend my colleague, Mr. Hoekstra, for his steadfast dedication to addressing this problem and for working with all the interested stakeholders. I urge everyone to support this bill.