The "Safe and Smart Federal Purchasing Act" mandates a review of federal procurement practices to determine if prioritizing the lowest price has created national security risks.
Byron Donalds
Representative
FL-19
The "Safe and Smart Federal Purchasing Act" mandates a review by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget of federal procurement practices, specifically assessing the impact of the "lowest price technically acceptable" selection process on national security. A report on the review's findings must be submitted to the House and Senate committees within 180 days.
| Party | Total Votes | Yes | No | Did Not Vote |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Republican | 218 | 211 | 0 | 7 |
Democrat | 215 | 206 | 0 | 9 |
New Bill Orders Review of 'Lowest Price' Purchasing to Check National Security Risks
The "Safe and Smart Federal Purchasing Act" orders a hard look at how the government buys stuff, specifically whether always going for the "lowest price technically acceptable" option is creating national security problems. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director has 180 days from enactment to dig into this and report back to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Price Check: Is "Cheapest" Really Best?
This act focuses on whether choosing the absolute cheapest option that technically meets requirements—a process called "lowest price technically acceptable"—is actually smart in the long run. The concern is that cutting costs might also cut corners in ways that impact national security. The review covers both Defense and Civilian agencies, as defined in section 133 of title 41, United States Code. So we are talking about a huge amount of procurement.
Real-World Rollout
Imagine a government agency needs new cybersecurity software. Under the "lowest price technically acceptable" approach, they'd have to pick the cheapest option that meets the minimum requirements. But what if a slightly more expensive option offers significantly better protection against hacking? This bill forces a review of whether the current system pushes agencies toward potentially riskier choices just to save a few bucks upfront. It's like choosing between a basic padlock and a high-security system for your front door – one's cheaper, but the other might be a whole lot safer.
The Bottom Line
This isn't about immediately changing how the government buys things, but about checking if the current rules are creating unintended security risks. The required report (SEC. 2) will give Congress a clearer picture of whether prioritizing low prices is potentially jeopardizing security. The challenge will be in how "national security risk" gets defined and measured – that definition could shape the entire review. The 180-day deadline means we should see results relatively quickly, which could lead to further legislative action depending on the findings.