Overview
Title
An Act To amend title 41, United States Code, and title 10, United States Code, to provide best value through the multiple award schedule program, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The "Value Over Cost Act of 2024" is a plan to help the government buy things. It wants to make sure that when the government buys stuff, they get a good deal, which means they sometimes spend less or get better things for what they pay.
Summary AI
H. R. 9596, also known as the "Value Over Cost Act of 2024," aims to amend specific sections of titles 41 and 10 of the United States Code. The bill focuses on improving the multiple award schedule program by ensuring that government contracts result in either the lowest overall cost or the best value for the federal government, as determined by the Administrator of General Services. This change seeks to promote the best interests of the federal government when acquiring goods and services.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The bill titled "Value Over Cost Act of 2024" aims to amend titles 41 and 10 of the United States Code. Its primary objective is to enhance procurement practices within the federal government by potentially prioritizing not just cost but also value when awarding government contracts. This change targets the multiple award schedule program and allows for a broader interpretation of what constitutes the most beneficial use of government resources. Essentially, it gives federal contract administrators the ability to choose contracts based on overall value rather than solely on the lowest price.
Summary of Significant Issues
The significant issues stemming from this bill revolve around the amendments’ lack of specificity and potential for subjective interpretations. One major concern is the role given to the Administrator of General Services in deciding what constitutes 'best value.' Without clear performance metrics or criteria, this discretion could lead to inconsistencies and potential biases in decision-making. The term 'best value' itself, while a recognized concept in procurement, is not explicitly defined in the bill, which might cause varying interpretations.
Moreover, the bill redundantly amends both titles 41 and 10 without clarifying the necessity for this repetition, potentially leading to confusion during implementation. Additionally, how the decisions are justified and documented remains a murky area, possibly affecting transparency and accountability.
Impact on the Public
The introduction of a 'best value' consideration could lead to better outcomes for the public if it means that federal procurements are more effectively meeting the needs of citizens. If administered correctly, this focus could ensure higher quality services and products are procured, ultimately benefiting taxpayers by optimizing the quality-to-cost ratio. However, if not managed transparently, it could lead to suspicions of cronyism or wasteful spending.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For government agencies, the bill provides an opportunity to focus on quality and efficiency rather than being restricted to selecting the lowest bidder, which can often lead to compromised service with budget constraints. Contractors, particularly those offering premium products or services, could benefit from the ability to compete on factors beyond price alone. Conversely, this could disadvantage smaller businesses or those focusing on low-cost solutions who might be edged out if 'best value' frequently equates to higher costs.
Overall, while the bill has the potential to improve governmental procurement processes by emphasizing quality alongside cost, it also poses risks of inconsistency and opacity unless further refined with clear guidelines and accountability measures.
Issues
The discretion given to the Administrator of General Services to determine 'best value' in Section 2 may lead to subjective decision-making, which could result in a lack of accountability and transparency in federal procurement processes.
The term 'best value' is referenced from the Federal Acquisition Regulation in Section 2, which could be ambiguous without an explicit definition in the bill, potentially leading to inconsistencies in interpretation and application.
There are no specific performance metrics or evaluation criteria established in Section 2 for determining 'best value', which might lead to inconsistency and could make it challenging to ensure fairness and objectivity in procurement decisions.
The amendment text duplicates between title 41 and title 10 in Section 2 without clarifying why this repetition is necessary, which may create redundancy and potentially confuse implementation across different governmental departments.
Potential complexity and lack of transparency in how decisions to opt for the best value instead of the lowest overall cost are justified and documented, as outlined in Section 2, might affect public trust and the effectiveness of federal spending.
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
This section states that the official name of the Act is the "Value Over Cost Act of 2024".
2. Providing best value through the multiple award schedule program Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends parts of the United States Code related to how government contracts are awarded, allowing contracts to be awarded based on either the lowest cost or the best value for the government, as decided by the Administrator of General Services.