SB 4477, the Davis-Bacon Repeal Act, would repeal the federal wage requirements contained in subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40 of the U.S. Code, which are the core provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act. In practical terms, the bill would eliminate the federal prevailing-wage mandate for many federally funded or assisted construction projects, removing the requirement that contractors pay workers at least locally prevailing wages and benefits on covered public works projects.
The bill also provides that any statutory references to the repealed Davis-Bacon wage requirements would become null and void. Its effective-date provision delays implementation for 30 days after enactment and preserves existing contracts and bids already outstanding on that date, limiting disruption to projects already underway or formally solicited.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would substantially change federal labor and procurement law by repealing the Davis-Bacon wage framework and ending prevailing-wage obligations for covered federal construction contracts going forward. This would affect contractors, subcontractors, workers, labor unions, federal agencies, and state and local entities involved in federally funded projects that currently incorporate Davis-Bacon requirements. Existing contracts and pending bids would be grandfathered, but future projects would no longer be subject to the repealed wage provisions.
Sentiment
No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or recorded support/opposition in the materials supplied. Based on the bill’s sponsorship and title, the measure appears to be part of a deregulatory effort favored by sponsors who oppose federal prevailing-wage mandates. The absence of hearings, amendments, or votes in the provided context means broader legislative sentiment cannot be determined from the record here.
Contention
The central point of contention is the Davis-Bacon prevailing-wage requirement itself. Supporters of repeal are likely to argue that the mandate raises construction costs, limits competition, and increases federal spending, while opponents are likely to argue that it protects local wage standards, supports skilled labor, and prevents underbidding on public projects. The affected parties most likely to be divided are construction contractors, labor organizations, public agencies, and workers on federally funded projects.
To provide that the rule submitted by the Department of Labor relating to "Updating the Davis-Bacon and Related Acts Regulation" shall have no force or effect.