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
H. R. 856 is a rule that asks a special boss to check if buying things for the government in the cheapest way might be bad for keeping the country safe, and then tell grown-up leaders what they find in 180 days.
Summary AI
H. R. 856, titled the “Safe and Smart Federal Purchasing Act,” mandates a review by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. The purpose is to assess if the lowest price technically acceptable source selection process, as outlined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation, poses any risks to national security. The findings of this review must be reported to relevant congressional committees within 180 days of the Act's enactment.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
Overview of the Bill
The "Safe and Smart Federal Purchasing Act" aims to scrutinize a specific procurement process used by federal agencies, known as the lowest price technically acceptable (LPTA) source selection process. The bill specifically mandates the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to conduct a thorough review of how this process might pose risks to national security. Within 180 days after the bill's enactment, the findings are to be reported to the pertinent Congressional committees, focusing on overseeing government management and homeland security.
Significant Issues
The bill introduces several noteworthy issues:
Broad Scope and Ambiguity: The directive to review procurement practices across all Defense and Civilian agencies lacks precise guidelines about what constitutes a "national security risk." This broad and somewhat vague scope might challenge the review's effectiveness and clarity.
Lack of Methodology: No specific methodology is outlined for conducting this review, which could lead to inconsistent results and, consequently, undermine the credibility of its findings.
Short Review Timeline: The stipulated 180-day timeline for the report's submission might not be sufficient. Considering the complexity of governmental procurement systems and the large number of agencies involved, there is a risk that the analysis may be incomplete or rushed.
Unclear Follow-up Actions: There is no directive on how the government is expected to act upon the findings, especially if the review uncovers serious risks. This gap could lead to inaction or improper handling of potential national security threats.
Lack of Ongoing Oversight: The bill does not propose any continued oversight or follow-up, which could be a significant shortcoming if substantial risks are identified.
Accountability Gaps: If the review finds that the procurement process poses national security risks, there are no accountability measures to ensure appropriate actions are taken or to hold responsible parties accountable.
Potential Public Impact
If the findings prompt changes, the bill might significantly improve the security and efficiency of federal procurement practices, which could positively impact national security. It aims to ensure that governmental acquisitions are not just affordable but also secure, potentially alleviating concerns about vulnerabilities in crucial supply chains.
Stakeholder Impacts
Government Agencies: These bodies could face increased scrutiny, necessitating changes in their procurement strategies, which might require additional resources or alter existing vendor relationships.
Contractors and Vendors: Those relying heavily on the LPTA process may need to adjust to potential shifts in how contracts are awarded. This could affect small businesses disproportionately, as they often compete on price.
National Security Entities: These stakeholders stand to benefit if the review leads to strengthened security measures in acquisitions, potentially reducing vulnerabilities and enhancing national defense capabilities.
In summary, while the "Safe and Smart Federal Purchasing Act" aspires to address crucial national security concerns related to governmental procurement, its efficacy will largely depend on the clarity of its implementation and the robustness of subsequent actions based on the review's findings.
Issues
The review's broad scope across all Defense and Civilian agencies (Section 2) lacks specificity in defining 'national security risk' related to procurement practices, raising concerns about the clarity and focus of the review, which can impact its effectiveness and the validity of its findings.
The absence of a clear methodology in Section 2 for conducting the review could lead to inconsistent analysis, undermining the credibility of the findings and any resultant policy recommendations.
The 180-day timeline for the report submission in Section 2 may be insufficient given the potential complexity and breadth of reviewing procurement practices across numerous agencies, risking incomplete or rushed analysis.
The bill (Section 2) does not specify how the findings will be acted upon, nor what measures will be in place if procurement practices indeed pose a national security risk, which could lead to inaction or improper handling of significant issues identified.
Lack of ongoing oversight or follow-up mechanisms after the report submission in Section 2 could be problematic if substantial risks are found, as it leaves no room for rectifying issues or monitoring future compliance.
The absence of accountability measures in Section 2 if the review finds current procurement processes have created national security risks leaves gaps in addressing responsibility and ensuring corrective actions.
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 Act states its short title, which is “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 review the procurement practices of certain government agencies to see if they pose any national security risks and report the findings to specific Congressional committees within 180 days. It also defines key terms used in the section.