Comment on FR Doc # 2026-11765
W GrayOpposeIndividual
Summary: A U.S. Army veteran and small business owner opposes the proposed rule to eliminate the rebuttable presumption of social disadvantage for 8(a) applicants. The commenter argues that the rule is not truly race-neutral, as it ignores historical systemic discrimination and selectively exempts large entity-owned firms while creating significant barriers for individual applicants.
I am a United States Army veteran and a small business owner in Georgia.<br/>I am submitting this comment in opposition to the proposed rule eliminating the rebuttable presumption of social disadvantage for individually-owned 8(a) applicants.<br/>This rule is being framed as race-neutral. It is not neutral in application.<br/>The 8(a) program was created specifically to address the documented, systematic exclusion of Black Americans from federal contracting opportunities — exclusion that was not accidental but written into law, enforced by government policy, and sustained across generations. Requiring individual applicants to now prove personal discrimination ignores the documented historical record that IS the proof.<br/>Under the Biden administration, over 2,200 businesses were admitted to the 8(a) program over 4 years. Under the current administration, 65 were admitted in all of 2025. That is not reform. That is elimination by paperwork.<br/>Furthermore, this proposed rule explicitly exempts entity-owned firms including Alaska Native Corporations — billion dollar defense contractors — from any of these new requirements. If the stated goal is race-neutrality and program integrity, that exemption is indefensible. You cannot apply a race-neutral standard selectively.<br/>When a rule is written to appear neutral on its face while producing racially disparate outcomes in application — that is not reform. That is policy dressed as procedure.<br/>I urge the SBA to withdraw this proposed rule in its entirety.<br/>United States Army Veteran<br/>Georgia Small Business Owner