Overview
Title
An Act To require the Director of the Office of Management and Budget conduct a review to determine the impact of the lowest price technically acceptable source selection process on national security, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The Safe and Smart Federal Purchasing Act is like asking a detective to check if getting the cheapest stuff for important jobs, like protecting the country, is safe or not. The detective needs to tell the grown-ups in charge what they find out in about six months.
Summary AI
H. R. 5528, known as the “Safe and Smart Federal Purchasing Act,” requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to evaluate how choosing the lowest price offers in federal contracts might affect national security. The Director must review the current procurement practices of both Defense and Civilian agencies to see if they create any national security risks. A report detailing the findings must be submitted to specific Congressional committees within 180 days of the bill's enactment.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The bill, known as the "Safe and Smart Federal Purchasing Act," is designed to assess the federal government's procurement processes, particularly the practice of selecting contracts based on the lowest price technically acceptable (LPTA) offer. The bill mandates the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to conduct a review to determine whether this approach poses any risks to national security. The director is required to compile and submit a report on the findings to designated committees in the House of Representatives and the Senate within 180 days.
Summary of Significant Issues
One critical issue with this bill is the lack of explicit criteria or metrics for evaluating national security risks related to the LPTA process. Without defined parameters, the assessment risks being subjective, potentially leading to biased or inaccurate interpretations.
Furthermore, the 180-day timeline for completing the review and submitting the report could be insufficient for a comprehensive assessment. Conducting thorough evaluations across multiple defense and civilian agencies is a complex task, and a rushed timeline may lead to incomplete or superficial analysis.
Additionally, the bill specifies that the report's findings will be submitted only to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability of the House and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate. This limited dissemination may hinder broader oversight and prevent other stakeholders—including the public—from contributing to the discussion on procurement practices.
Impact on the Public
This bill could influence public perception of how the government manages its procurement processes, potentially highlighting the tension between cost-effectiveness and national security. A finding that questions the LPTA process's safety may lead to calls for policy changes, which could, in turn, affect future government spending and contractual engagements with private sector entities.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Government Agencies: If the review identifies national security risks associated with the LPTA process, policy changes could result in revisions to federal acquisition rules, impacting how agencies evaluate and award contracts. This may lead to increased administrative burdens and require agencies to factor in additional criteria beyond immediate cost considerations.
Private Sector Contractors: Contractors who often bid with a focus on being the lowest-cost provider may see an adverse impact if the procurement criteria shift away from LPTA. This could favor contractors offering higher quality or more robust solutions, even at a greater cost, thus changing competitive dynamics in federal contracting.
National Security Interests: A critical examination of the LPTA process might protect national security by ensuring that cost considerations do not eclipse the importance of technical superiority and reliability of services procured, ultimately leading to safer and more secure procurement practices.
In conclusion, while the bill seeks to ensure national security is not compromised by cost-driven procurement rules, the lack of detailed evaluation criteria and the potentially insufficient timeframe for review may limit its effectiveness. The limited scope for oversight might also stifle broader discourse and engagement on revising federal procurement strategies.
Issues
Section 2: The review conducted by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget is focused solely on evaluating the national security risks associated with the lowest price technically acceptable source selection process under section 15.101–2 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation. However, the section does not specify what specific criteria or metrics will be used to evaluate these risks, leaving the review potentially subjective and open to bias or misinterpretation.
Section 2: The timeline of 180 days for the Director to conduct a review and submit a report might be insufficient for a thorough assessment of procurement practices across multiple Defense and Civilian agencies. This rushed timeline could lead to incomplete analysis and oversight, ultimately impacting the validity of the findings.
Section 2: The requirement for the report to be submitted solely to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability of the House and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate might limit the scope of oversight or review. This exclusion could potentially prevent other relevant stakeholders, including the public, from examining the review's findings and contributing to the discourse on national procurement practices.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the document states that the official name of the act is the "Safe and Smart Federal Purchasing Act".
2. Review to determine the impact of the lowest price technically acceptable source selection process on national security Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to examine if the government's method of choosing the lowest price for contracts could harm national security. Within 180 days of this law being enacted, the Director must send the findings to specific committees in the House of Representatives and the Senate.