Offensive Defense Contractors
Politico's story "Defense contractors buy lobbying muscle" highlights how defense contractors are hiring public relations experts and lobbyists to fight off the bad press and legislative oversight efforts that have stemmed from contracting scandals. A day doesn't go by without an article on KBR, Blackwater, or the Air Force tanker deal. Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA) even started the Smart Contracting Caucus, stating that he wanted to "make sure others who care about procurement have a forum to discuss and push for sound procurement policy."
I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and state that Rep. Davis' mark on contracting won't end when he retires later this year. As Politico pointed out, David Marin, formerly the Republican Staff Director on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee (i.e., Ranking Member Davis), is working at the Podesta Group, an influential lobbying shop serving many large defense contractors and the Professional Services Council (PSC). Can you hear the pro-contractor lobbying train coming?
PSC, known for educating Congress about federal contracts, is offering similar services to the public. Its pro-contractor spin on federal spending can be found at www.smartcontracting.org. OMG, what a coincidence--that's the same name as Rep. Davis' new caucus!
No matter what, federal contracting is an issue that divides many and needs many more "reforms" to ensure that taxpayers are being protected. And for those individuals who question the system, keep an eye on where people land when they leave the Hill and the executive branch in the next year--some of them might be more influential outside the government than they were inside it.
-- Scott Amey
Scott,
Read Paul Light's latest, A Government Ill Executed. Read just about any GAO report on a troubled program or contract. The GAO seems to bend over backwards to not name contractors in messes (of course it rarely names officials, even by title). But the thrust of all these troubles usually: bad requirements, low-ball budgeting, unrealistic timeframes, bad oversight, ineffective cost monitoring and cost controls. You know the longer list. And I am not just talking about big weapons or IT systems. Little ol $100K task orders can have all of these in miniature. Many do. Contractors can kind of work to rule and not get nailed; over time they are becoming as risk averse as the USG, which is a shame. Government people can screw up royally. No one gets fired or disciplined. (Contractors can and do get fired, sometimes totally out of view or not because of the client, e.g., the job lost money or personnel were maltreated.) The lessons aren't learned most of the time, and the govt and contractor mistakes are repeated ad infinitum. Every 3-5 years there is a seminal commission or study group that opines strikingly familiar prscriptions, which take forever to implement if they ever are, and little change results. Certain leading lights seem to have trouble with deep-think dissections of failure. IGs are to blame, media to blame, Congress to blame. You have to motivate us, not blame us, yada, yada. Again, responsibility and accountability disappear into the haze.
We get the kind of government we deserve, which is in steep decline. Government corruption remains uncommon; incompetence is rife, and negligent management is the new (former) incompetence. Among contractors, not questioning clients as ineffective as the ones they have results in woeful waste. False claims or other cheating is a tiny percentage of all the millions of contract actions (30M) every year. So, most people in the acq community are "good" but really inept and not serious, but they gotta make a profit if they are public, and that is not hard in legally, ethically, and morally correct ways.
Posted on: Jul 10, 2008 at 04:38 PM
I respect your comments. I agree that there is a fuzzy line between the government and industry and fault should be placed on either party or both. Good government extends to all parties and all players. You would be surprised at how many times I ask sources, Hill staffers, and the media about the government's lack of oversight and controls that often times leads to waste, fraud, and abuse in federal contracting. A few differences come to mind: (1) companies often profit from mistakes or willful wrongdoing, whereas the government and public servants do not (the concept of public service is based on helping the general public, not the interests of one industry or a company), (2) ethics standards are different for government and contractor employees, resulting in accountability issues, and (3) people can voice displeasure with government by voting and holding government officials accountable for their actions or inactions. I would love to hear from more people who have instances when contractors are doing the right thing and government agencies are the bad boys. Finally, POGO products include recommendations (reforming the suspension/debarment system, enforcing contractor responsibility rules, limiting conflicts caused by the revolving door, government acquiescence to powerful special interests, etc.) for improving the system and they generally point a finger at the government and its processes, not contractors.
Posted on: Jul 10, 2008 at 02:36 PM
Connie,
I can agree with almost all of Scott's factual points (in multiple posts) and even many of his conclusions! I am only looking for more context and balance. Especially with what's been called the growing "intimacy" between the government and contractors, I believe the two are, like it or not, two peas in a pod. It is no accident that "inherently governmental" persists in not being clarified--because many in the exutive and leg branches don't want it to be crisp. And, certain things get leveled over time, e.g., the soon to be implemented ethics certifications, the growing bureaucratic style of contractors on client sites because they are immersed in the, pardon this, sloth, of the government--and increasingly may have recently slithered out of it. Further, both sides link arms to defend against pesky intrusions by overseers. It is unusual for government to throw the contractor under the bus, even though some give the government a strong rationale for that, e.g., some of the big names (no, not KBR) in Iraq, some of our largest SI firms. Don't get me wrong. I don't want to see the standards for industry or government performance and quality set too high--then nothing would get done, and who the hell would enforce it. But I don't want to, pardon my stale legalese, give the world or government reasons based on prima facia impressions or biases to doubt every contractor performance and to believe that all the firms are guilty until proven innocent--even though it is inviting to see many government organizations that way these days. Does any of this make sense to you, Connie? Scott?
Posted on: Jul 10, 2008 at 10:31 AM
KSBR -
I for one think that Scott's posting is "right on." One of Scott's better blogs.
Now if Scott could only get his boss to stop making apologies to Davis.
Connie
Posted on: Jul 09, 2008 at 05:07 PM
Exactly! Look at some of the clones of the Podesta Group such as the Cohen Group (CohenGroup.net). Examine the Cohen Group's source of funds (i.e., big defense firms, government contractors, etc.). What needs to be done is that these groups don't infiltrate the next administration! It makes you wonder if Democrats like Podesta and Cohen are in the same mindset of Democrats like Senator Webb and Congressman Waxman.
Do a search in opensecrets.org for groups like Cohen Group, and you'll see who is paying off who. Or open this link to see who is paying the Podesta Group:
http://opensecrets.org/lobby/firmsum.php?lname=Podesta+Group&year=2008
Posted on: Jul 09, 2008 at 04:17 PM
Scott,
There you go again. Four legs good, two legs bad. All contractors are guilty until proven innocent. That's the persistent tone of your material. The Politico article was strange. Started with a familiar KBR riff, but then transmogrified into a blunderbuss at all the evil contractors. No connection, no statistical proof. Just the reporter's misunderstanding, buttressed by your klaxon today. And you put your little finger on how things look in the so-called media: as they hardly ever scoop, they tell the same stories over and over and over.
Just for fun, you might try implementing a standard that assumes that contractors are like their clients, but less so.
For example, catch 2-3 contractors looking at passport files, then, hmm, find out that its an annual rite of tens of employees over at State, per a recent audit. Or hundreds per year, including criminally convicted, over at the ole IRS, where the people's private documents are oh so sacred. What I am saying is that the government is much of the time a far easier target for the POGO rapier when it comes to alleged fraud, abuse and waste than its trusty contractors. You just don't seem very even-handed about it. Give it a try.
Posted on: Jul 09, 2008 at 04:04 PM