Beginning in 1974 (PL 93-237), Congress requires SBA to provide "special consideration" to veterans in all of SBAs programs (Report Language called it special preference). Short version, In 1982 SBA defined how it intended to provide special consideration then in 1995 SBA eliminated most of its regulatory framework for that delivery. In 1997 (PL 105-135) and again in 1999 (PL 106-50) Congress began defining in Statute what special and full consideration for veterans at SBA actually meant. Is this bad math an updated version of SBA trying to provide special and full consideration to veterans, if so, there is still a very long way to go for SBA to fully define this required delivery across all of its programs and policies?
Beginning in 1974 (PL 93-237), Congress requires SBA to provide "special consideration" to veterans in all of SBAs programs (Report Language called it special preference). Short version, In 1982 SBA defined how it intended to provide special consideration then in 1995 SBA eliminated most of its regulatory framework for that delivery. In 1997 (PL 105-135) and again in 1999 (PL 106-50) Congress began defining in Statute what special and full consideration for veterans at SBA actually meant. Is this bad math an updated version of SBA trying to provide special and full consideration to veterans, if so, there is still a very long way to go for SBA to fully define this required delivery across all of its programs and policies?
Maybe AI was programmed to use common core math where the "answer" is not as important as following the acceptable methodology.
What they are doing here is no different than the intent with affirmative action. You don't correct one mistake by committing another!
How many of the "other sole source authorities" are judged by the same standards? This has the potential to be Minnesota Medicaid!!
Makes sense!