Pennsylvania House Bill HB2014

Pennsylvania 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/24
• Refer: 2/5/24

Caption

Further providing for contracts for public works to use or supply steel products and for restrictions on payments by public agencies under certain circumstances.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would significantly impact state laws regarding procurement for public projects by ensuring compliance with domestic sourcing of steel products. The amendments would stipulate that no public agency can authorize payments unless documentation verifying that the steel was melted and manufactured in the U.S. is presented. This act emphasizes a commitment to support local economies and could alter the purchasing landscape for public projects, potentially increasing costs if domestic steel prices are higher than imported alternatives.

Summary

House Bill 2014 aims to amend the Steel Products Procurement Act by requiring that all public agencies in Pennsylvania mandate the use of steel products manufactured in the United States for any public-funded projects. This change is prompted by the belief that using domestically sourced steel will promote local industry and stimulate the economy. HB2014 would impose this requirement on projects involving construction, reconstruction, alteration, repair, improvement, or maintenance when public funding or tax incentives are involved.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB2014 appears to be predominantly supportive among those advocating for local manufacturing and job creation. Legislators who back the bill argue that it fosters job security within the state and promotes a robust manufacturing sector. However, there are concerns regarding potential cost implications for public projects, especially if the sourcing requirements lead to increased expenses due to limited availability or higher prices of domestic steel.

Contention

A notable point of contention surrounding HB2014 involves the potential for increased costs associated with enforcing strict sourcing requirements. Critics argue that while supporting domestic production is important, the cost burden may fall on taxpayers and could affect the feasibility of public projects. Ensuring compliance and managing the documentation of steel sourcing is another issue pointed out by detractors, raising questions about the administrative overhead associated with the bill's implementation.