||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ROBERT O'HARROW JR, WASHINGTON POST - A recent congressional report
estimated that federal spending on contracts awarded without "full and
open" competition has tripled, to $207 billion, since 2000, with a $60
billion increase last year alone. The category includes deals in which
officials take advantage of provisions allowing them to sidestep
competition for speed and convenience and cases in which the government
sharply limits the number of bidders or expands work under open-ended
contracts. Government auditors say the result is often higher prices for
taxpayers and an undue reliance on a limited number of contractors.
"The rapid growth in no-bid and limited-competition contracts has made
full and open competition the exception, not the rule," according to the
report, by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
Keith Ashdown, chief investigator at Taxpayers for Common Sense, a
nonpartisan watchdog group, said that in many cases, officials are
simply choosing favored contractors as part of a "club mentality."
"Contracting officials are throwing out decades of work to develop fair
and sensible rules to promote competition," Ashdown said. "Government
officials are skirting the rules in favor of expediency or their favored
contractors."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/22/
AR2007082200049.html?nav=rss_politics
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ROBERT O'HARROW JR, WASHINGTON POST - A recent congressional report
estimated that federal spending on contracts awarded without "full and
open" competition has tripled, to $207 billion, since 2000, with a $60
billion increase last year alone. The category includes deals in which
officials take advantage of provisions allowing them to sidestep
competition for speed and convenience and cases in which the government
sharply limits the number of bidders or expands work under open-ended
contracts. Government auditors say the result is often higher prices for
taxpayers and an undue reliance on a limited number of contractors.
"The rapid growth in no-bid and limited-competition contracts has made
full and open competition the exception, not the rule," according to the
report, by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
Keith Ashdown, chief investigator at Taxpayers for Common Sense, a
nonpartisan watchdog group, said that in many cases, officials are
simply choosing favored contractors as part of a "club mentality."
"Contracting officials are throwing out decades of work to develop fair
and sensible rules to promote competition," Ashdown said. "Government
officials are skirting the rules in favor of expediency or their favored
contractors."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/22/
AR2007082200049.html?nav=rss_politics
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
No comments:
Post a Comment