Can you make a reply for this discussion board post? It's about public procurement .

1. Why is the Sherman Antitrust Act important for a public procurement professional?

In order to analyze how the Sherman Antitrust Act is pertinent to the field of a public procurement professional, one must articulate the designation of the act. First, the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 is foundational in the aspect that competition is promoted along with the prevention of conspiracy. For example, consider the scholarship offered in The Essential Principles and Structure "Section 1 of the statute prohibits any contract, combination, or conspiracy that results in a restraint of trade that impacts interstate commerce. The key to a Section 1 violation of the Sherman Anti-trust Act is proof of collection action by two or more entities. Section 2 of the statue prohibits every person from monopolizing any part of interstate trade or commerce. In contrast to a Section 1 violation, a Section 2 violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act is primarily concerned with unilateral conduct and requires a showing that the targeted entity possesses substantial control over the market for a commodity" (Flynn, Buffington and Pennington, 2020, p.9). Additionally, when considering the correlation to public procurement, the Sherman Antitrust Act assists in regulation of fair, open, and competitive practices along with evaluation and promotion.

For example, public procurement professionals must be alert for the potential risk of behaviors along with manipulation of the market as this should always be addressed in organizations "For example, when a group of dentists in Indiana collectively refused to provide x-rays of patients to insurance companies who wanted to use the x-rays to reassess the dentists' charges for services and implement cost containment measures, such an agreement violates the prohibitions of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. From the perspective of the public procurement professional, one of the most common violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act is bid rigging- an agreement by two competitors to not bid against one another for a public works job" (Flynn, Buffington, and Pennington, 2020, p.9). Third, this takes the form in suppression, complementary bids, bid rotation, and customer along with market allocation. Lastly, it is important to consider that along with the promotion of a competitive and anticompetitive environment, the concern of large financial interests is important to the public procurement process. As there is a great reliance on situating that public procurement professionals must act with accountability and conduct duties of competition in a transparent manner, this foundational legal framework is an important aspect. Both to organizations and individuals, the Sherman Antitrust Act serves to promote and prevent distinctly.

2. What are some of the constraints to statutory law regarding public records requests?

When addressing some of the constraints to statutory law associated with public records, the position of the public procurement official should be defined under several conditions. With the construction of the guidelines to the public for records by the government for review, procurement files along with standards must be considered. As certain Statutes vary in locality and through context of jurisdiction scenarios, negotiation and finalization of a proposal is at the duty of the law. For example, in The Essential Principles and Structure the scholarship articulates "Within the context of public records, the public procurement professional must have a full understanding of the conditions under which a potential supplier submits proprietary and trade secret information to the public entity for evaluative purposes. Typically, this information is submitted as a confidential document by the potential supplier in a segregated part of the proposal, consistent with instructions in the solicitation. These practices rely on potential application of an exemption under most open records or Freedom of Information laws. A common analysis exempts from disclosure trade secrets, privileged information, confidential commercial, and financial data where disclosure would be likely either to (1) impair the government's future ability to gain necessary information or (2) harm the competitive position of the person providing the information" (Flynn, Buffington, and Pennington, 2020, p.17). For example, in the State of Florida, the Sunshine Law is significant in the accessibility to the public through the provisions and interpretations of the court. As this is also a significant component to consider as commercial and financial data may not be included in disclosure, procurement officials must be respondent in how the laws affect the information submitted.

1. What is the Law of Agency?

The Law of Agency can be defined as the manner in which individuals are employed to act on behalf of the conduction of a business along with common law. For example in Fundamentals of Law and Authority the authors claim "Within the context of public procurement, a local, state, or federal law will usually grant the power to contract to a government official or entity. In turn, where authorized, the government official or entity will delegate, either by law, administrative rule, or some other writing, the authority to enter into contracts to a public procurement officer. While such delegation of authority to an agent could be oral, it is highly recommended that the authority be provided in writing to clarify what the agent has been specifically authorized to do" (Flynn, Buffington and Pennington, 2020, p.338). Moreover, the ways in which a delegation takes place can guide the agent to relation to act in certain circumstances "An agency relationship created by operation of law can occur in two circumstances. First, a local, state, or federal statute may grant authority to another person. Second, a court of law may rule that an agency relationship exists as a matter of law, even though there is no agreement between a principal and an agent and there is no local, state, or federal law that creates an agency relationship. The creation of an agency relationship by common law usually occurs in the context of some dispute" (Flynn, Buffington, and Pennington, 2020, p.338).

1. Why is transparency important in public procurement?

Transparency in public procurement is pertinent to our discussion as this principle regards how participation is and competition be in the market. For example, the scholarship presented in Desiderata: Objectives for a System of Government Contract Law argues "In procurement, compliance indicates not just high standards of integrity, but also the maintenance of system transparency, the maximization of competition, and the furtherance of a host of Congressionally mandated social policies. Any one of these issues opens to door to a host of pitfalls. For example, integrity in public procurement implicates issues related to, inter alia, personal and organizational conflicts of interest, gratuities, bribes, handling and disclosure of proprietary source selection information, contractor certification of compliance with numerous social programs (such as contractor size status, disclosure of cost or pricing data, or origin of end products delivered), contractor maintenance of a drug-free workplace, contractor allocation fo specified unallowable costs to specific pools, appropriate supervision and cooperation by government employees, proper use by contractors of mandated supplies or raw materials, faithful execution by contractors of inspection and testing provision, etcetera" (Schooner, 2002, p.5). With public procurement oversight and procedural guidelines must be carried out exhibiting transparency.

1. What is the purpose of a Public Procurement Policy Office?

The establishment of the Public Procurement Policy Office set forth to separate policymaking and operational functions to be regarded as an independent entity. With the aims to provide a direction for policies and procedure, the office and arrangement to the public sector. For example, the 2000 ABA Model Procurement Code states "Placement in the executive branch as a separate entity is the preferred arrangement as it would further ensure the professional integrity of this important policymaking body, and appropriately elevate the entire procurement process in the public sector. (3) While the American Bar Association endorses the separation of policymaking and operational functions, few States adopting versions of the Code have embraced this approach. A Policy Office may require an additional administrative body requiring support and staffing. Combining the two functions eliminates the need for separate administration" (American, 2000, p. 11).