By MANDY SMITHBERGER
The Pentagon just posted their list of the top contractors for fiscal year 2010 (in terms of contract dollars awarded). Comparing their rankings to last year, not much has changed:
| Contractor | 2010 Ranking | 2009 Ranking |
|---|---|---|
| LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION | 1 | 1 |
| THE BOEING COMPANY | 2 | 2 |
| NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION | 3 | 3 |
| *GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION | 4 | 5 |
| RAYTHEON COMPANY | 5 | 4 |
| *OSHKOSH CORPORATION | 6 | 9 |
| L-3 COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS INC. | 7 | 7 |
| UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION | 8 | 6 |
| BAE SYSTEMS PLC | 9 | 8 |
| *SAIC INC. | 10 | 11 |
| * = Contractor on the rise! |
The top three contractors are still Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman, and the only newbie to the top 10 from last year is SAIC (which was number 11 last year). While not in the top 10, this year the government of Canada broke into the top 20 after being number 78 in 2009.
Of the top 10, Oshkosh Corporation is the only company that does not have any instances of misconduct in our contractor misconduct database. In addition to Oshkosh, SAIC Inc. also did not have any instances of misconduct from our 2010 data. Our database has a total of 21 instances for the top 10 contractors in 2010 (click on the contractor name to see their full misconduct profile):
| Contractor | Instances of Misconduct | Misconduct $ (in millions) |
|---|---|---|
| LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION | 4 |
$10.9 |
| THE BOEING COMPANY | 5 | $5.3 |
| NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION | 3 | $18.4 |
| GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION | 3 | $15.3 |
| RAYTHEON COMPANY | 1 | $0 |
| OSHKOSH CORPORATION | 0 | $0 |
| L-3 COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS INC. | 1 | $0.3 |
| UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION | 1 | $3 |
| BAE SYSTEMS PLC | 3 | $507.4 |
| SAIC INC. | 0 | $0 |
As the Pentagon considers efficiencies, one of the hot topics is the status of the industrial base, particularly whether there is insufficient competition, which makes it harder for the government to get a good price and may make it harder for them to hold contractors accountable for instances of waste, fraud, abuse, and other misconduct.
But POGO wants to know what our expert readers think about these numbers. Do they say anything about the state of competition in the industrial base? Should the top 10 mostly stay the same over time?
Mandy Smithberger is a POGO Investigator.
Since President Eisenhower, in the 1950's, we have known of and been wary of the military industrial complex and now all of a sudden we are saying "my God, look at what these war profiteers are doing. We, the people of peace, have been saying this for decades. Especially since Viet Nam. The escalation in technology is fascinating but it is also very deadly,and should be intolerable. And the making of profit from it should be outlawed. But what are you gonna do? There is enough or even more than enough human cannon fodder for wars and more wars.
Posted by: Mike Jones | Sep 13, 2011 at 01:09 AM
Given that the F-16, the Nimitz-Class carrier, the Abrams tank, and a dozen other defense systems have been in production and subject to high dollar support contracts since the late 1970s, it's not at all surprising that the same contractors appear in the Top 10 year over year. A 1 year time horizon is insufficient to show what you're trying to show in terms of competitiveness in the industry.
Go back ten years and you might be able to show something meaningful.
Posted by: Andy Wagner | Jun 05, 2011 at 11:36 PM