Legislation Targets Alaska 8(a) Firms Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill says she will propose ending Alaska Native Corporations’ special contracting preferences. Alaska Sen. Mark Begich is promising to fight the legislation, which would put ANCs on an equal footing with other 8(a) firms. In a statement on its website, the Native American Contractors Association charged McCaskill’s bill “would sever a longstanding congressional promise to promote economic self-sufficiency for Alaska Native people.” McCaskill first raised concerns about the Alaska companies last year at a hearing by her Contracting Oversight Subcommittee of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Reform Committee. Since then the Washington Post has published a series of articles showing evidence that some of the companies were serving as fronts for non-8(a) businesses and were otherwise flouting program rules. “Congress must remedy SBA’s failure to manage and oversee existing program requirements and restore fair competition in the program,” McCaskill said in a statement. She also called on the SBA inspector general to investigate evidence of abuses. From 2000-2008 the Alaska companies received $6.6 billion in sole-source 8(a) contracts that exceeded the $3.5 million limit for sole-source awards to other 8(a) firms, according to an investigation by the Contracting Oversight Subcommittee. McCaskill’s bill would repeal the ANCs ability to win sole-source awards in unlimited amounts. She wants to take away the companies’ ability to form multiple 8(a) subsidiaries. Other 8(a) business owners are permitted to have only one company in the program. McCaskill’s subcommittee found 19 ANCs had formed 248 8(a) subsidiaries. In addition, the bill would end the Alaska companies’ automatic eligibility for 8(a) status. Each corporation would have to prove that it is economically disadvantaged. That might be a tall order since several of the companies have grown to multibillion-dollar size on the strength of their 8(a) contracts. Alaska Sen. Begich, a Democrat like McCaskill, told Government Executive magazine, “This bill is misguided, misinformed and shows a clear lack of understanding for how important the program is for the people of Alaska.” ANCs and their supporters contend their special treatment is justified because they return a portion of their profits to impoverished native communities. However, McCaskill’s subcommittee estimated the largest ANCs have provided only $615 per shareholder in benefits each year. McCaskill’s legislation would seem to have little chance of passage this year, since Congress faces a busy agenda during its short lame-duck session beginning Nov. 15. One possibility is to piggyback the bill onto the annual defense authorization bill, a frequent catch-all for contracting changes.