Contractors required to disclose political contributions: draft order

Obama considers new transparency rules

The Obama administration is determining how to require companies competing for government contracts to list their political contributions when submitting a contract bid, another effort to separate money from its influence, according to a draft executive order.

“To increase transparency and accountability to ensure an efficient and economical procurement process, every contracting department and agency shall require all entities submitting offers for federal contracts to disclose certain political contributions and expenditures that they have made within the two years prior to the submission of their offer,” the order states in its current form. (Read the order.)


Related stories:

How outsourcing keeps America on top

Industry dealings could be more transparent in open-source tracking system


The White House has not released the order, which was obtained by Federal Computer Week. It’s currently going through the standard review and feedback process, an administration official said today.

Although the order would leave many details up to the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council, the administration wants company disclosures to include:

  • All contributions or expenditures to federal candidates, parties or party committees made by the company, its directors, or any affiliates or subsidiaries it controls.
  • Any contributions made to a third party with the intent to use those contributions to make independent expenditures or election advertisements.

Companies would have to disclose the information if the total amount of contributions exceeded $5,000 in a year, according to the draft order. Furthermore, the Obama administration wants the contribution data made public through a searchable online database.

“Taxpayers deserve to feel confident that federal contracting decisions are based on merit alone and are not influenced by political favoritism,” the administration official said.

The regulatory council has until December to adopt the rules.

The order furthers the president’s reforms to government contracting policies, which began with his procurement reform memo in March 2009, soon after his presidential term began.

“The president is committed to bringing more accountability and transparency to a federal contracting system that has long needed reform,” the official said.

The order also highlights various states’ “pay-to-play” laws, some of which require companies to disclose contribution information. Others limit political contributions by contractor companies and particular officials at the companies.

“This state innovation toward better government should be encouraged, and the federal government should draw from the best practices developed by the states,” the Obama administration's order states.

Reader Comments

Mon, Apr 25, 2011

I have not yet seen a contract where amount and type of political contributions is a part of the selection criteria leading to award. Thus, I see no legitimate reason to require such disclosure.

Fri, Apr 22, 2011 Ma.

I am more worried about contracts being awarded on the basis of who you did or did not contribute for political reasons rather than who you contributed to 'get the contract'. Remember that the administration also has an interest in receiving political contributions for their contract decisions. This works both ways. It only appears to be a means of 'cleaning up the process'. It's just as likely to be a means of deciding that you lose the contract because you failed to contribute to the "right" side.

Fri, Apr 22, 2011 Grand Rapids, MI

One more requlation to drive up the cost of government procurement.

Fri, Apr 22, 2011 Olde Sarge DC

If they sqeal, there's a deal. Kyle probably is associated with the contractors who need oversight. The easy solution is to require all federal contractors provide this information to OMB annually. Don't link it to the specific contract. Then publish the information to data.gov. If its not included in the RFQ/RFP responsed it can't influence the selection process. However, having the information already disclosed makes the IGs job much easier if an award is challenged or is investigated for COI reasons.

Thu, Apr 21, 2011 Fred the Fed (Contractor)

I just love it. The patriotic thing to do is bar these contributions in the first place. If not, the second best thing is to expose them immediately upon funds transmittal to the political candidate or cause. The trigger should not be a bid, for goodness sake. Like individual contributions, a company's contribution should quickly become a public record. We have far too much COI, winking, and legalized corruption in the MI Complex to fail to shine a light on this, or to avert our eyes.

Show All Comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

What is your e-mail address?

My e-mail address is:

Do you have a password?

Forgot your password? Click here
close
SEARCH
contracts DB

Trending

  • Dive into our Contract Award database

    In an exclusive for WT Insider members, we are collecting all of the contract awards we cover into a database that you can sort by contractor, agency, value and other parameters. You can also download it into a spreadsheet. Read More

  • Is SBA MIA on contractor fraud? Nick Wakeman

    Editor Nick Wakeman explores the puzzle of why SBA has been so silent on the latest contractor fraud scandal when it has been so quick to act in other cases. Read More

Webcasts

  • How Do You Support the Project Lifecycle?

    How do best-in-class project-based companies create and actively mature successful organizations? They find the right mix of people, processes and tools that enable them to effectively manage the project lifecycle. REGISTER for this webinar to hear how properly managing the cycle of capture, bid, accounting, execution, IPM and analysis will allow you to better manage your programs to stay on scope, schedule and budget. Learn More!

  • Sequestration, LPTA and the Top 100

    Join Washington Technology’s Editor-in-Chief Nick Wakeman as he analyzes the annual Top 100 list and reveals critical insights into how market trends have impacted its composition. You'll learn what movements of individual companies means and how the market overall is being impacted by the current budget environment, how the Top 100 rankings reflect the major trends in the market today and how the biggest companies in the market are adapting to today’s competitive environment. Learn More!