President to Take On Government Contracting
At 10 a.m. today President Obama will sign a presidential memorandum to reform government contracting, an action that the President will say grew out of a bipartisan consensus forged at last week’s fiscal responsibility summit.
Over the last eight years, government spending on contracts has doubled to more than $500 billion; in April 2008, the Government Accountability Office issued a report after having looked into 95 major defense systems, concluding that the projects had surpassed their original budgets by a total of $295 billion and were delivered, on average almost two years late.
Calling the system of government contracting "broken," an administration official tells ABC News that the President’s action today will aspire to make sure "that the American peoples money is spent to advance their priorities, not to line the pockets of contractors who have figured out how to work the system, or to maintain projects that don’t work."
Some of the steps that will be taken include opening up the contracting process to small businesses, stopping the outsourcing of services that should be performed by the government, ending unnecessary no-bid and cost-plus contracts, and strengthening oversight. The President will say such steps can potentially save the American people up to $40 billion annually.
The president will say, the official says, that he will "do whatever it takes to defend the American people, which is why he’s increased funding for the best military in the history of the world." but he will also assert that "he does not accept billions in wasteful spending." He will discuss steps being taken by Defense Secretary Robert Gates to reform procurement, and will praise the bipartisan work on this issue being done by Sens. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and John McCain, R-Ariz., the chair and ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Beginning today, Peter Orszag, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, will work with Cabinet officials and agency heads "to develop tough, new guidance on contracting by the end of September," the official says. -jpt
Email
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Knowledge is power and that is why there was very little reporting done by the Republican-owned media, that it was George Bush who pushed for minority home buying…. not Clinton as they love to distort about, and gave Speculators the go ahead to get minorities to buy homes in the hundreds of thousands.
Bush – “Calling a home the “foundation for families and a source of stability for communities,” President Bush proposed three new initiatives designed to enhance existing federal home buyer assistance programs by helping African- and Hispanic-Americans buy homes. According to the White House, fewer than half of all African and Hispanic Americans currently own their homes, compared to nearly three-fourths of white Americans. “We must begin to close this homeownership gap by dismantling the barriers that prevent minorities from owning a piece of the American dream,” said the President in a nationwide radio address. To close the homeownership gap, President Bush proposed legislation funding the following new initiatives:
American Dream Down Payment Fund
This program would provide money to qualified low-income families to assist in making the down payment on a home. “The single greatest hurdle to first time homeownership is a high down payment requirement that can put a home out of reach,” said President Bush. White House analysts estimate that the American Dream Fund will assist some 40,000 low-income families annually in making down payments on homes.
Tax Credits to Create Affordable Housing
This proposed initiative would provide home-builders and developers with nearly $2.4 billion in tax credits for building affordable single-family housing in distressed areas. The tax credits would help make 200,000 new affordable homes available to low-income buyers over the next five years.
Home Buyer Education
To assist home buyers deal with the complexity and difficulty of the purchasing process, this program would provide funds to agencies working to better educated first-time home buyers. Consumers would be advised of their rights and responsibilities as home buyers, and trained to recognize and avoid abusive and unscrupulous lending practices. “Financial education and housing counseling can help protect home buyers against abuses, greatly improve the loan terms they are offered, and help families get through tough times with their homes intact,” said President Bush “Owning a home lies at the heart of the American dream,” Bush said. “My approach to broadening home ownership focuses on empowering people to help themselves and to help one another.” Source: Dateline: 06/18/02
And because there were no Regulations to protect said homebuyers who had a balloon interest at the end, well we see what has happened, and they still want to blame the homebuyers instead of the scam perpetrated by lenders who first lowered interest rates to put people into homes then raised their interest rates so they could no longer afford their homes. Someone should go to jail for this!
Posted by: Angellight | March 4, 2009, 8:07 am 8:07 am
“….he doesn’t accept billions in wasteful spending?” HA! That is the best flip-flop old Barry has done yet. He is out-spending any other administration in decades, putting us so far in the hole that we’ll never see the light of day, and he has the brass ba_ _ s to say he doesn’t accept wasteful spending!!!
2012 can’t come fast enough.
Posted by: No$$$forNobama | March 4, 2009, 8:21 am 8:21 am
What does that have to do with the article?
Government contracting reform will likely end up only being applied to government contracts less than $50M because larger contracts are political, and the politicians just can’t help themselves from playing in the game.
Posted by: rhino67 | March 4, 2009, 8:23 am 8:23 am
Raise your hand if Obama has helped you find a job, keep your house, get a loan for your small business, get a tax refund, sell your home, get inexpensive comprehensive healthcare, or saved your 401k or IRA savings from evaporating.
No one??? I thought so.
Posted by: cindi | March 4, 2009, 8:28 am 8:28 am
Angellight- You lost me at “Republican owned media”. If you’re referring to ABC, CNN, NBC, and CBS, these social platforms promote a liberal agenda daily.
Be they investors with Madoff because he promised unrealistic double digit returns or the homeowner “glorified renter” who opted for a interest only/balloon payment/ect mortgage, there is no substitute for personal accountability. I don’t think we can legislate stupidity. Bad decisions make for a bad life. Big government should not baby sit/manage your life for you; not at my expense.
Posted by: fedup_11 | March 4, 2009, 8:31 am 8:31 am
it was the republicans in congress that finally tried to reign in Fannie MAE and Freddie Mac. The democrats stopped them You can see clips of Barny Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Chris Dodd. Harry Reid all praising them in fact they let the former head walk off with a 100 million golden parachute.if you are not smart enough to know what a balloon mortgage is, you don’t deserve a tax funded bail out
Posted by: madmax | March 4, 2009, 8:32 am 8:32 am
we let the teachers union in Mich buy insurance through their union the mea. it is a wasteful program. but the union will not let them bid it out to other carriers. since they are big supporters of the democrats, you can bet they wont reform them
Posted by: madmax | March 4, 2009, 8:35 am 8:35 am
Article appears to have lost original comments. Sumpin’ broke. This is about BO fixin’ gubment contracting. Not about Angellight’s mantra….but I couldn’t resist reacting.
Posted by: fedup_11 | March 4, 2009, 8:36 am 8:36 am
Angellinget: Republican-owned media? James Carville and Paul Begala of CNN and George Stephanopolus consult with Roerts Gibbs every morning in order to discuss what the democrat talking points will be. Knowledge is power.
Posted by: mm | March 4, 2009, 8:37 am 8:37 am
angellight –> did you even read what you pasted in? One program helped people to get a down payment together, one made the home less expensive, thus easier to afford, and the third educated home buyers on how loan companies try to take advantage of them. Also, if the media was Republican owned they sure boosted Obama in the last election. The AP refuses to make a negative comment about him, and the rest are slanted.
Posted by: common sense | March 4, 2009, 8:37 am 8:37 am
GEORGE BUSH had no guts when he failed to veto any spending and OBAMA is even worse because he lied and said no earmarks but there are thousands of them. Read Maureen Dowd in the N.Y. Times today and see what a N.Y. Times writer thinks of Obama and his accepting Nancy Pelosi’s sins as o.k. Change in Washington? Right? Right and Santa Pelosi will give you an earmark for it. America cannot handle this OBAMA lunacy and I am glad at least one liberal person in the media(Dowd) wrote an honest article instead of tingling in her leg like another media idiot(Matthews) does when Obama speaks.
Posted by: rockychance | March 4, 2009, 8:41 am 8:41 am
There are a lot of private agencies that do a better, cheaper and more efficient job than their government run predecessor. There are a lot of private companies that get money from the government and waster it, and somehow get more. I hope this targets the right thing, and does not create more wasteful, bloated, and bureaucratic agencies that waste more money.
Posted by: huh? | March 4, 2009, 8:42 am 8:42 am
GEORGE BUSH gave his buddies(Haliburton big contracts. The real AXIS OF EVIL was GWBush, CHENEY and the NEOCONS who got 4000plus of our brave young people killed plus tens of thousands missing limbs. How do you look in the mirror GW and not see a heinous monster who put all these people in a grave. OBAMA is taking out the troops GW, why didn’t you and Darth Vader Cheney have the guts to do the same-because you are cowards that is why and you never saw military action and could not possibly have done that if you did. Take out Saddam, fine but then allow military vehicles to run repeately over bombs in the road is the height of arrogance and ignorance. I say turn Bush over to the War Crimes Tribunal and let him rot behind bars for the crimes he committed and I am a conservative who cannot liars who cost others their lives.
Posted by: rockychance | March 4, 2009, 8:48 am 8:48 am
Um….actually….
It was Carter who initially pushed so hard for minority and underpriviledged home buying.
And this has what to do with government contracting?
And this all came out after bipartisan consensus? Must mean that Nancy and Harry were both there. The current administration does not even want the Republicans in the same building when they hammer out policy or laws.
Posted by: gunner | March 4, 2009, 8:48 am 8:48 am
Obama is blowing smoke. People, better quit being apathetic, complacent, and WAKE UP. BO is contradicting himself again.
Posted by: RobertG | March 4, 2009, 9:02 am 9:02 am
Just another way to award govt contracts to non-male, non-white companies. Obama president naw.
Posted by: End Socialism | March 4, 2009, 9:06 am 9:06 am
rockychance – Put a sock in it – GB is GONE. Let him rest in peace. You have a heck of a lot more to worry about now with BO in Washington. A LOT more!!
Posted by: M. Summer | March 4, 2009, 9:10 am 9:10 am
First off this whole idea is a sham. The defense department isn’t the only government agency that contracts. Every government agency holds contracts that employs contractors, from the DoE, DoS, DoJ, NSA, DoHD, etc. They all have contracts that employ contractors. From how it is portrayed, it would seem that these contract changes only apply to the DoD.
Second, does anyone know why contracting came about? It was to make up for shortfalls in key area’s. Since the late 80′s, as the DoD drew down in size, many of the requirements stayed the same. There simply was not enough active duty members available to do the job. So the government services expanded, and eventually contracting expanded to fill these gaps. As budgets were cut, the services restructured to hire cheaper contractors to do the job active duty used to do. Everyone LOVES to harp on Haliburton but you know what? Their logistics chain they provided to Iraq freed up our limited logistics capability to concentrate on essential military supplies, such as ammunition.
Third, just as significant of a problem with contracting is the government itself. When the government puts money to a contract, the balance at the end of that contract must be 0. If it is not 0, whatever is left over is taken out the next year. Heck even active duty units struggle with the same thing. When I was flying in the Navy, I remember we would have down days in July because they were afraid we wouldn’t have enough fuel to fly at all in September. Well, when September rolled around, they realized they saved too much and there would be a frenzy to use up that fuel so we would still have it for the next year.
So before the administration runs pointing fingers at contractors, they need to look at how the government itself operates inefficiently and try to fix that as well.
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 9:10 am 9:10 am
WHINE WHINE WHINE.
Do you cynics ever stop?
Well, there are WHINERS and WINNERS.
POTUS Obama has consistently outfoxed, outmaneuvered and outflanked all opposition for the past 2 years including the primaries.
(If you think whines equate to wins, I’ve got news for you)
KEEP ON WHINING.
OBAMA WILL KEEP ON WINNING.
How’s the crow tasting?
Posted by: Conscious Thought | March 4, 2009, 9:14 am 9:14 am
Raise your hand if Obama has helped you find a job, keep your house, get a loan for your small business, get a tax refund, sell your home, get inexpensive comprehensive healthcare, or saved your 401k or IRA savings from evaporating.
No one??? I thought so.
Posted by: cindi | Mar 4, 2009 8:28:54 AM
*********************************
Seriously … do you know how dumb you sound?
Posted by: Democrat | March 4, 2009, 9:17 am 9:17 am
KR:
Halliburton was also inept! We did not get what we paid for especially when charged $8 per bottle of water for our troops. As well, what about the faulty craftsmanship in the barracks that led to deaths. Give me a break. The fact that Obama is talking about reforming government contracts just gives you a chance to condemn it. In other words, whatever needs to be done by him to reform government will never be looked upon favorably by you and others that hate him. You’re just jealous because a conservative didn’t do it and now you are left to defend no-bid contracts. Hmm. You work for Halliburton? Perhaps you’re the sham!
Posted by: JV | March 4, 2009, 9:22 am 9:22 am
With repubs in civil war trying to figure out not only who their fearless leader is, but who are they going to PRETEND to be next, 2010 looks to be quite disastrous for the elephant circus troup.
If you think they’re whining now, the popcorn will be flowing at the whine a thon after the 2010 elections.
When will they learn?
You’ll never win the Kentucky derby with a few donkeys running against a pure thoroughbred.
Posted by: Conscious Thought | March 4, 2009, 9:22 am 9:22 am
Spend. Save. Spend. Save. So,
Posted by: shiggybop | March 4, 2009, 9:28 am 9:28 am
“The fact that Obama is talking about reforming government contracts just gives you a chance to condemn it. In other words, whatever needs to be done by him to reform government will never be looked upon favorably by you and others that hate him. You’re just jealous because a conservative didn’t do it and now you are left to defend no-bid contracts.?
I’ve worked on both sides of the fence, government and contracting, but your smarter than me about it that’s for sure. I guess my points are all political.. yup that’s what it is.
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 9:29 am 9:29 am
As the stock market, economy and jobs continue to tank throughout this year, there will be more an more calls for impeachment. Most people don’t react to anything until they are affected personally.
Posted by: Kathy | March 4, 2009, 9:29 am 9:29 am
“no-bid contracts.”
Do you even know what no-bid contracts are? Let me fill you in on how they work cause its a great political hammer to throw around if people are uneducated about them.
Sometimes a contract is awarded that requires an upfront investment of materials. Some of those materials (especially some that are secret technologies) are patented by the companies that develop them. They bring a special capability that no one has. The government wants that capability, no one else has it, so it’s a no bid contract.
But of course, politicians do a good job of getting people riled up as long as they aren’t educated on what it is.
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 9:32 am 9:32 am
“As well, what about the faulty craftsmanship in the barracks that led to deaths.”
I’m sorry, what? I’ve never seen anything about that. I’ve just went and searched and found nothing of the sort. Are you making things up?
I have heard of things we hired Iraqi contractors to build that failed. That was pretty common. Maybe it was something like that, as a Haliburton sub-contractor?
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 9:37 am 9:37 am
Although I disagree with a majority of his bogus propositions, I believe this is a necessary overhaul of our proposed government budget. After all, one Blackwater operative earns almost 2 k in one day of combat compared to our military’s meager salary. Add it up over time, and you’ve got a lot of spent tax $’s
Posted by: TL | March 4, 2009, 9:40 am 9:40 am
This is very welcome news as the last 8 years government contracting was sinful to say the least. Thank you President Obama for cleaning house!
Posted by: eyeonyou | March 4, 2009, 9:46 am 9:46 am
Do you understand that you need to have a plan of action to get anything done? Change doesn’t just happen. Maybe saying what we want done is easier than making it happen. I like how he is budgeting the government the same way we are cutting costs in our homes. This speaks to the times. If you can come up with a better way you do it.
Posted by: immichalus | March 4, 2009, 9:48 am 9:48 am
“Although I disagree with a majority of his bogus propositions, I believe this is a necessary overhaul of our proposed government budget. After all, one Blackwater operative earns almost 2 k in one day of combat compared to our military’s meager salary. Add it up over time, and you’ve got a lot of spent tax $’s”
There is no doubt that there is wasteful spending. Though in terms of Blackwater it was a little different. I won’t go into it, but essentially they were doing things our military could not do (i.e. working for the Iraqi government, on the Iraqi’s dime) to fill for a lack of capability the Iraqi’s had. They also protected contractors and free’d up active duty units for other things. But yes, they were very expensive, as are all contractors in combat zones.
But lets keep one thing clear when all this is going on. Wasteful government spending isn’t just in the DoD. There are tons of wasteful spending everywhere the government is, be it education or even these wonderful stimulus transportation projects.
I am afraid that, as most liberals in the past do, they target the DoD for political reasons, letting everything else slide. I’m not sure why they always target defense. I guess cause they never want our military to go to war, and we can’t if its gutted sufficiently? I don’t know, can’t figure it out.
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 9:50 am 9:50 am
I’d feel much more confident in this executive order if it also applied to ACORN spending of US Taxpayer dollars.
But I suspect i’d die holding my breath waiting for that memorandum.
Posted by: patriot | March 4, 2009, 9:54 am 9:54 am
“I like how he is budgeting the government the same way we are cutting costs in our homes.”
You know in your home to save money, you’d look at ways of using less electricity, less water, cutting down on the grocery bill etc.
Only talking about these reforms as it pertains to the DoD is like saying your going to save so much money but not having your security system monitored anymore, ignoring all the other things you can do.
Why is this so narrowly focused on the DoD contracting when much of the stimulus will end up in the hands of contractors… i.e. = jobs etc.
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 9:55 am 9:55 am
Conservatives made a killing … and did some killing on no bid contracting with OUR money. The Right is crying. Keep crying.
Posted by: newz4i | March 4, 2009, 9:57 am 9:57 am
“No-bid contract is a popular term for what is officially known as a “sole source contract.” A sole source contract implies that there is only one person or company that can provide the contractual services needed and that any attempt to obtain bids would only result in one person or company being available to meet the need.”
Educate yourself, it’s liberating.
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 9:58 am 9:58 am
Keep it up Obama Keep CLEANING UP The Bush/Cheney DESTRUCTION, I know its Hard But your doing a Good Job! Bush and Cheny Have Wasted Billions of our Dollars Senseless!
Posted by: Angie in PA | March 4, 2009, 10:00 am 10:00 am
This sounds good.
I agree with KR about Blackwater.
Posted by: MayBee | March 4, 2009, 10:00 am 10:00 am
“The 2008 Department of Education budget included 758 congressional earmarks NOT REQUEST BY THE DEPARTMENT, totaling $327 million. Further, the Office of Management and Budget has identified 47 duplicative, unnecessary or ineffective programs totaling $3.3 billion.”
“Reps in Congress helped win earmarks worth $37 million for a technology NOT REQUESTED BY THE MILITARY.”
Who’s the real wasteful spending culprits here?
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 10:08 am 10:08 am
Would you want a piece of life saving equipment, bridge or aircraft built by the lowest bidder or the most qualified engineers. There is a reason for no-bid contracts.
Posted by: John Keenan | March 4, 2009, 10:09 am 10:09 am
Thank you for giving us a good view to know what is coming out of the talking part. Now I can better keep watch out here to see what comes out the other end.
Posted by: Mark | March 4, 2009, 10:12 am 10:12 am
KR:
The faulty showering wiring was by KBR not Halliburton.
About your explanation on no-bid contracts:
The “sole source contract” in the case of Iraq was awarded to Halliburton because according to the definition, they were the only ones with the resources. Yet, you forget to mention that the VP at the time was the CEO of that company. You also forget to mention that this format VP/CEO, was the Secy of Defense for the previous invasion to Iraq. Is it possible that those in charge AND Halliburton knew we would attack Iraq again if Bush was elected? According to the “Project for the New American Century” the answer is yes. Iraq was on the checklist before 9/11 for the neo-cons. Not only are you a victim of staging but are compliant to the effects of their propaganda.
“In all affairs it’s a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.” – Bertrand Russell
Posted by: JV | March 4, 2009, 10:12 am 10:12 am
Reading these blogs, couple of things have become clearer to me:
1) GOP is a party of the 19th century, not 21st.
2)GOP is the political haven for the reactionary rich and for the terminally stupid.
3) I suggest GOP follows the North Korean example and make Rush Limbaugh its “Dear Leader” while Michael Steele can have the title of “Great Leader”. This way everyone will be happy.
Posted by: Sam | March 4, 2009, 10:14 am 10:14 am
KR:
Don’t make me quote Eisenhower’s farewell speech!! Don’t make me do it.
The DoD’s budget is one of the biggest pieces of the pie. Therefore, trimming the FAT there FIRST will be more effective before moving on to other departments.
Posted by: JV | March 4, 2009, 10:18 am 10:18 am
@”Educate yourself, it’s liberating.”
The last 8 years were all about making bush and cheney’s buddies in the military contracting and energy industry filthy rich.
Let me give you a brief history of the bush administration…
1. Rich kid earns nothing and gets to be president of the united states; a position gifted to him and George Sr by the filthy rich pigs who own 90% of our nations wealth.
2. Rich kid pays back the pigs who bought his election by letting them run rampant in the government doing whatever they please; spending the other 99% of us into trillions of dollars in debt while he distracts us with the iraq war.
Wake up…Bush screwed this country over, if you can’t see that then you’re an idiot.
Posted by: bob | March 4, 2009, 10:20 am 10:20 am
KR: “No-bid contract is a popular term for what is officially known as a “sole source contract.” A sole source contract implies that there is only one person or company that can provide the contractual services needed and that any attempt to obtain bids would only result in one person or company being available to meet the need.”
==========================================
And who was in charge of defining the ‘need’?
The friends and the big donors of the Bush/Cheney Admininistration essentially wrote “what the government needed” and Hey Presto! Only my company can satisfy that need!
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | March 4, 2009, 10:22 am 10:22 am
Will he call for repeal of Davis Bacon that requires payment of “prevailing [read union] wages” and is estimated to inflate the cost of federally funded construction projects up to 15%? HIghly unlikely.
Posted by: John F. | March 4, 2009, 10:24 am 10:24 am
There is a reason for no-bid contracts.
Posted by: John Keenan
==========================================
Yep. To shaft the competition and shower your friends. Especially when you don’t have to pay for it yourself
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | March 4, 2009, 10:27 am 10:27 am
JV,
“The DoD’s budget is one of the biggest pieces of the pie. Therefore, trimming the FAT there FIRST will be more effective before moving on to other departments.”
In the early 1950′s, the defense budget was nearly twice that of what it is today. I believe in Kennedy’s administration it was something like 41% of the total federal budget. Today its below somewhere around 13% last I looked. It’s no longer the “biggest piece of the pie”. Trimming the fat off defense, if lucky, might yield a fraction of a percent of the total federal budget.
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 10:28 am 10:28 am
“Yep. To shaft the competition and shower your friends. Especially when you don’t have to pay for it yourself”
Can you folks read? Or do you only soak in what you want to believe?
If a company develops a new radar that no one else has, and the government want’s to buy it because it will increase the effectiveness of the military, who the hell is going to bid against them when no one else has that radar? How is this illogical?
No-bid contracts get funded by CONGRESS, not the President, typically in the form of earmarks.
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 10:30 am 10:30 am
Hey you know what? Get rid of no-bid contracts cause you know what will happen when you do? Contracting offices (contracted by the government) will run the paperwork (and charge the government) for the bid process…
and only 1 company will bid, knowing full well they will be the only company that bids, and they will set the price.
End result, it will induce more spending. No-bid contracts were designed to circumvent the process that costs money to induce, thus intent to save money.
So you know what, get rid of it. In the end, only one company will bid anyway and tax payers will pay extra for it. That’s brilliant.
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 10:35 am 10:35 am
If a company develops a new radar that no one else has, and the government want’s to buy it because it will increase the effectiveness of the military, who the hell is going to bid against them when no one else has that radar? How is this illogical?
Posted by: KR
=============================================
You still don’t understand it, don’t you?
Governments continually determines what is ‘needed’ based on developments in the field and if current equipment and resources – in your example – meet those needs or of it needs an update or amenment. The government is informed of that by it’s own employees. Government then goes out in the market and searches for solutions and looks at alternatives.
In the case of the Bush/Cheney administration, it was the Radar Company that told Government “Hey, I see you don’t have my radar and you really really really need to have that”.
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | March 4, 2009, 10:45 am 10:45 am
Same old stuff from Obama. Big on style but short on substance.
Posted by: BubbaRight | March 4, 2009, 11:02 am 11:02 am
Two questions:
Isn’t this the guy who said any spending is stimulus? Then why do we care if the govt. overpays on a contract. It gets more $$ out in circulation in the economy and will create more jobs–right?
Seriously, isn’t it a little contradictory to have just signed a bill the main object of which was to flood the economy with billions of $$ in a way that any reasonable person would agree is an invitation to waste and abuse? (no offense to Sheriff Joe Biden)
Posted by: John F. | March 4, 2009, 11:03 am 11:03 am
“The government is informed of that by it’s own employees. Government then goes out in the market and searches for solutions and looks at alternatives.”
Oh right, so no companies develop technologies in house before the government asks for it? Is that what your saying? I know of 2 examples, radar specific, developed by a company that the military did not have. The radar wasn’t even developed for the use it was deployed in, but it was modified for use. The company is the only one that developed it. Military did not ask for it, but today it saves lives and the military want it.
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 11:10 am 11:10 am
There will be no more bids for any job, just say your a democrat and you have it no matter how much you spend, because in the end we will take away all your profits.
Posted by: Lizzie | March 4, 2009, 11:21 am 11:21 am
Btw, there are also things the government does, partnering with companies to develop a technology or capability. It comes in many forms, sometimes its a split development cost situation. But in the end, the government partners with a company to develop a technology, to fit a need, and in the end, that company gets a no bid contract, based on an investment the government put into the R&D of that technology. It simply isn’t possible for anyone else to bid on it.
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 11:24 am 11:24 am
I was just listening to Rush and he was BEGGING barry to come on his show and debate the issues with him, or emanuel, biden, geitner.
Obviously, that will never happen. Barry is weak, and barry also knows that his socialist policies would be destroyed by Rush.
Posted by: Dave | March 4, 2009, 12:28 pm 12:28 pm
It’s about time someone took a look at this—my husband just bid a job a a major army base in Virginia. They told him what they would pay him for the job before he even bid it. When he told them he could do it for less—they said go ahead and charge the full amount the government is paying and all the other contractors would do it! Good thing some people still have good morals and values and care about the future of this company. Isn’t this what got us into this mess in the first place? GREED!!!
Posted by: Kim | March 4, 2009, 2:27 pm 2:27 pm
Someone needs to read all the regulations an laws passed by congress that govern procurements by the Government….it is just NUTS. Getting rid of all the special provisions for all the special interests would help…oh then there is the ‘small business’ requirements….that cost MORE money….idiocy!! AND YOU PEOPLE want the GOVERNMENT to take care of you with universal health care….we will all be dead.
Posted by: redfcar | March 4, 2009, 3:02 pm 3:02 pm
Dems like Taxes, except when they have to pay them.
Posted by: Da Truth | March 4, 2009, 3:28 pm 3:28 pm
Dems like Taxes, except when ‘they’ have to pay them.
Posted by: Da truth | March 4, 2009, 3:29 pm 3:29 pm
Good, it was long overdue, finally someone that wants accountability, we have wasted enough of the tax payer’s money although we all know that until we get rid of all of the dinosaurs in the Senate, the ones that sleep with the large corporations and lobbyist, there is no hope for much change
Posted by: etozzi | March 4, 2009, 4:49 pm 4:49 pm
“the ones that sleep with the large corporations and lobbyist, there is no hope for much change”
Will have to kick both parties out under that criteria. Maybe that’s what we should do.
Posted by: KR | March 4, 2009, 6:16 pm 6:16 pm
This is great news! We can save $40 billion on next year’s $3.5 trillion budget.
Posted by: shiggybop | March 4, 2009, 7:51 pm 7:51 pm
Hopefully President Dufus doesn’t fix this like he’s fixed the economy. Anyone beginning to wonder what we have done electing this moron? Soon we all will be wondering what we’ve done.
Posted by: TxBoB | March 4, 2009, 11:20 pm 11:20 pm
The bidding process for govt contracts should be changed. Throw out the highest bid for obvious reasons, throw out the lowest bid because the work will be shoddy or the time frame will be unrealistic. Average the rest of the bids and the one closest to that average is awarded the contract.
Posted by: Pudntane | March 5, 2009, 7:23 am 7:23 am
For those who lost jobs, fine… I am all in favor of helping them. But, for a huge number of homeowners, this plan is bailing out people who were irresponsible in the first place. Bailing out people whose mortgage pmt is more than 31% of monthly income is ludicrous. Many people purchased homes they could not afford in the first place, their income is the same as it was when they purchased, and now we, the taxpayers, are going to reward them. Sounds like just another name for wealth redistribution. So, instead of rewarding those who are living below their means, saving, driving old cars, living in modest homes, etc., we are rewarding those who have homes they can’t afford, new cars in the driveway (purchased with subprime auto loans), and let’s not forget their huge credit card balances to buy all the new furniture for those homes. I ponder this while I sit on my thrift store furniture, in my modest fixer-upper, and see my second hand car in the driveway.
Posted by:
SEbethD 7:24 AM
Posted by: SEbethD | March 5, 2009, 7:32 am 7:32 am
Under the Clinton Administration, with the threat of ‘redlining’ hanging over their heads, banks vis a vis Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae, were forced to relax their underwriting standards or risk losing market share or opening new branches. They had to make mortgages to people who could not afford them, using food stamps and questionable income to qualify. Now those same people, with no loss of jobs or other extenuating circumstances, will have their mortgage rates dropped, part of their principle written off, and all on the backs of the taxpayer.
The foreclosure mess is not Bush’s. The genesis was the Clinton Administration. And, the media does mention it… at 6 a.m. on a Sunday morning or in a small article below the fold, or during times that no one is watching their show anyway. Heaven forbid that the media could be called biased!
Posted by: SEbethD | March 5, 2009, 7:37 am 7:37 am
The entire contract system is flawed. First you have to give minority contractors preferential treatment, whether or not they are qualified to do the job. Then small businesses, ditto. Then the qualified contractors who have the means, the experience, the personnel, the equipment, etc. People can compain all the want, but Halliburton/KBR was the only contractor who had the means to take on the troop support in Iraq. Ask any soldier, airman, Marine, etc., who had enough time in that country and enough experience to rate their services. By and large, you could get any type of food at any time unless you were out in the field. Beats K-rations/MREs.
As far as the headlines about millions unaccounted for and all the hoopla…. if you are paying cash to Iraqi or Afghani informants, there is no paper trail, period. We talking about people in fear of their lives for helping Americans. Do you really think they are going to write up a contract and give you a receipt so some reporter can stick a camera in their face, wanting to know how they spent the money? Get real!
Posted by: sebethd | March 5, 2009, 7:43 am 7:43 am
This is funny. We’re going to take no-bid contracts out of the system because we don’t trust anyone to make good decisions, but we’re going to have them run our health care system. What am I missing.
Posted by: shiggybop | March 5, 2009, 8:27 am 8:27 am
Congratulations Mr. President! Thank you so much for saving 25 police jobs today. I am sure the nice poeple in those cities, will be glad to pay their salaries with their tax dollars, when the stimulation is over. For the first time in my adult life, I feel ashamed to be an American!
Posted by: onehunglo | March 6, 2009, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm