So do companies that contract with the government, get a bail out too? Or are they too ‘evil’ and ‘wasteful’ to get that kind of hand out? lol (sorry, I had to say it)
Seriously. This is interesting, and we’ll see if the necessary changes happen, to make contracting a more efficient and well managed process. I applaud the effort and I would like to emphasize that this is not an ending of contractor use, but a critical look at how the government does business. The true test of this effort, will be the end result out in the field and actual money saved.
Will the government do the necessary things to implement and manage these contracts out there, or will it all be more talk as usual? Will they put enough staff and manpower in place to manage this stuff? I am sure they will save money with this new framework, but will they truly get involved with watching these contracts out there, to insure people don’t get hurt or killed? Will these new measures, insure that another soldier doesn’t get electrocuted in a shower, or that another Custer Battles doesn’t come on to the scene? Only time will tell.
Also, is the government truly interested in contracting “non-inherently governmental activities that can be provided commercially” that “are subject to the forces of competition”? Or will this turn into a knee jerk reaction by the government that hinders those forces of free market competition? Plus, I will be really interested to hear what the government’s definition of ‘inherently governmental activities’ is? There is a war going on, so choose wisely….please. –Matt
——————————————————————
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
March 4, 2009
Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies
Subject: Government Contracting
The Federal Government has an overriding obligation to American taxpayers. It should perform its functions efficiently and effectively while ensuring that its actions result in the best value for the taxpayers.