Masonry Magazine April 1966 Page. 6
Special Report:
An important statement vital to every mason contractor
ROBERT L. LEGGETT
Congressman
4th District, California
ANTI BID SHOPPING LEGISLATION
By Congressman Robert L. Leggett
Masonry is pleased to present this statement by Congressman Robert L. Leggett concerning H.R. 489. This address was presented by the Congressman at MCAA's recent Convention held in Washington, D.C. Part 1 appeared in the March issue.
PART II
Last year my staff was instrumental in interesting the Small Business Administration and members of the Select House Committee on Small Business in this legislation and hearings under the chairmanship of Congressman Abraham Multer of New York took place last August. The record of the hearings is now being published. The Specialty Contractors Association and the Lathers and Plasterers Association testified primarily on the current industry needs to enact legislation such as I have introduced.
A hypothetical example testified to at the hearing concerned the Masonry industry.
"Subcontractor Tom Mason, in a theoretical case, submitted a bid of $500,000, the lowest of four masonry bids the highest bid was $525,000. He is reputable, experienced, financially strong, bondable, and should ethically expect to be awarded the subcontract on the masonry.
"Shortly after the general contract has been awarded. Tom Mason receives a phone call from the general contractor who tells him that he would like to have him do the masonry work on the building, but that Dick Mason bid $495,555 and that if Tom can do the masonry for the same price, maybe the general contractor and Tom can do business together. In the meantime, Harry Mason is called, and by now, the alleged 'low' masonry bid is $490,000. If Harry can do the work for that figure, he may well be considered for the masonry subcontract.
"In this instance, Harry Mason hadn't even bid the work to the general contractor-yet the masonry contract is still offered to him.
"And so the process continues until by the time the subcontracts are let, a full year may have elapsed, and the general contractor may reduce the aggregate amount of the subcontracts by as much as 10 percent. If the general contractor has contracted to construct the building for $5 million which included a 5-percent profit of $250,000, he now has tripled his profit-and the owner receives no rebate from the windfall.
I will concede that perhaps the limits mentioned in my bill are too low. The administrative regulations, however are perhaps too high.
The latest success was recorded last November 13 1965 when Secretary Udall prescribed a uniform procedure of listing for the Department of Interior nationwide on building and remodeling contracts only in excess of $150,000 and requires the listing of contractors for plumbing. heating, ventilating, air conditioning, masonry, ele