Rep. Steve Knight’s (CA-25) bill, H.R. 2333, Small Business Investment Opportunity (SBIO) Act of 2017, passed the House Monday with unanimous support. The SBIO Act increases the amount allocated for the SBIC programs to reflect inflation and provide access to additional funding.
The Small Business Investment Opportunity Act would make improvements to the Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) Program, an initiative administered by the Small Business Administration (SBA) that allows privately owned and managed investment funds to invest in small businesses. Current law limits the amount of capital SBICs can invest in growing firms, but Knight’s bill would raise that limit to $175 million so small businesses can have access to additional funds that would help them expand their companies and hire new employees.
“Increasing funds to our SBIC programs helps our small businesses have access to capital to grow and expand their businesses,” said Rep. Knight. “This legislation would finally match the appropriate funding level for our community entrepreneurs and their businesses. Increasing funds like this helps our economy and create more jobs.”
H.R. 2333 is a part of an ongoing effort of Rep. Knight to expand opportunities of investment and innovation for small businesses. As a member of the House Committee on Small Business, Knight continues to support and introduce small business specific legislation like for programs like the Women’s Business Centers (WBC), Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR), and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs.
###
Representative Steve Knight, (R-Antelope Valley), represents California’s 25th Congressional District in the US House of Representatives, which includes the communities throughout the Antelope, Santa Clarita and Simi Valleys.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Tweet This
Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
RSS
REAL NAMES ONLY: All posters must use their real individual or business name. This applies equally to Twitter account holders who use a nickname.
8 Comments
So, Mr. Knight, if I understand this correctly, you’re okay with taking away health care from millions of people, but you’re okay with taking taxpayer money and making it more available for small business loans and such. Your priorities seem backwards.
His priorities are anything that is good for him and gets him ahead, not to be trusted and I am a republican…
His priorities are anything that is good for him and gets him ahead, not to be trusted and I am a republican…
Watch out for this one, he talks out of both sides of his mouth, not to be trusted
Watch out for this one, he talks out of both sides of his mouth, not to be trusted
So he does something with bipartisan support and he still gets burned?
This is good news.
Private money from private companies being allowed to increase investment into private small businesses to help the small business grow and, in return, the small business can eventually hire more employees giving those employees gainful employment, increasing local economies and, ultimately, allowing for the private investors to make a potentially larger return on their investment enabling further economic growth.
Well done.
Mr Knight also should be applauded for understanding that, at this time, health care is not a right to be guaranteed by our government. He understands that the access to health care be guaranteed but the payment to it by our government should not as is presented to us by the current ACA.
If one is to think that certain necessities to attain a higher quality life, i.e.. free health care to all, must be paid for and guaranteed by our government then one must also consider other necessities., i.e.. housing, food, clothing etc.
All of these things are most certainly necessary for life sustainment. One can’t live in our society without shelter, or food, or clothing but, technically, one COULD live without a doctor’s care.
My point being, if health care is demanded to be guaranteed and paid for by our government then why stop there? Citizens should then demand that their government pay for their food, housing, utilities, transportation, fuel and clothing for the whole family (maybe with a $25 co-pay?) from cradle to grave. Some more short-sighted would consider this scenario utopian. Others who consider long term would see the oppression inherent to the system.
Single-payer ACA is a slippery slope that must not be descended regardless of how “fair” or “nice” it appears to be on the surface.
What is “Fair” must never be confused with what is “Just”.
Turning from a free society where the individual is accountable for his/her choices to a system where your government has the right to make your decisions for you is not a choice to be made flippantly, nor emotion-fed. This is an issue that must be made with decades if not centuries of posterity to be considered.
I stand with Knight on his position on ACA with the freedom of the individual and our longevity as a free nation as his major concerns (as imperfect or as “unfair” it may appear).
I keep saying, VOTE THIS POS OUT!!!!