Passed
384 Yea25 Nay23 Not voting2/3 required
HR-818-119
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
Sponsored by Pete Stauber (R-MN)
What it does
This bill would amend the Small Business Act to require federal agencies to track and report the number of "new small business entrants" — defined as small businesses receiving their first-ever federal prime contract — as part of their annual procurement scorecards. It would require year-over-year comparisons of these numbers, broken down by industry classification code and by specific small business categories (service-disabled veteran-owned, HUBZone, women-owned, and socially and economically disadvantaged). The bill explicitly authorizes no new appropriations to carry out these requirements.
Who benefits
Small businesses that have never held a federal prime contract, who would gain greater visibility in agency performance evaluations. Service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses, HUBZone firms, women-owned small businesses, and socially and economically disadvantaged small businesses, who are specifically tracked as subcategories. Federal procurement reform advocates who want more transparency in how agencies reach new vendors. Researchers and watchdog organizations who would gain access to more granular contracting data.
Who is hurt
Incumbent federal contractors — particularly established small businesses that already hold prime contracts — who may face increased competition if agencies respond to scorecard pressure by broadening their vendor pools. Federal agency procurement offices, which would bear the administrative burden of collecting, categorizing, and reporting the new data with no additional funding authorized. Agencies with limited procurement staff may face resource strain in meeting the new reporting requirements.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the federal government's $700+ billion annual procurement market is disproportionately concentrated among repeat contractors, and that first-time vendors face structural barriers to entry that transparency alone can help break down. They contend that adding new entrant tracking to agency scorecards creates an accountability mechanism — agencies that consistently fail to bring in new small businesses will have that failure documented and visible, incentivizing outreach to a broader vendor base without mandating specific outcomes.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that adding a reporting metric without funding or a corresponding performance goal creates paperwork without meaningful reform — agencies are required to count new entrants but face no consequence for low numbers. They contend that the administrative burden falls on procurement offices already stretched thin, and that without dedicated resources or enforceable targets, the new data requirement may produce compliance costs while doing little to actually increase the number of first-time contractors winning federal work.
Constitutional context
No significant constitutional issues are raised by this bill. Congress has clear authority under the Spending Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause (Art. I, §8) to set conditions on how federal procurement is conducted and reported. This bill modifies an existing statutory reporting framework rather than delegating broad new rulemaking authority to an agency, so major questions doctrine concerns under West Virginia v. EPA (2022) are not implicated.
Checks and balances
Congress gains a modest increase in oversight visibility through the new reporting data; the Small Business Administration and federal agencies implement the reporting requirement, with no new agency rulemaking authority created.
Historical precedent
The Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 and prior amendments to the Small Business Act have similarly expanded scorecard reporting requirements for federal agencies to track contracting goals for specific small business categories, establishing a pattern of using transparency metrics as a procurement policy tool.
Passed