Lawmakers want competitive sourcing on the table

Twenty-one House members have urged Appropriations Committee Chairman Rep. Harold Rogers (R-Calif.) to allow agencies to put up fiscal 2012 funds for public/private competitions.

A group of Republican Study Committee members asked Rogers to keep the remaining funding bills this year free from “provisions inhibiting the utilization of the private sector,” according to the July 14 letter.

“Government performance of commercial activities adversely affects the U.S. economy by duplicating activities available from commercial providers,” they wrote.

Read the letter.

They also said keeping commercial work in house increases the government’s payroll and reduces tax revenues paid to the government. By doing commercial work, agencies even divert money from inherently governmental functions, or work that only a federal employee can perform.

Agencies have more than 850,000 employees in positions that are commercial in nature, they wrote, citing data gathered from Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act reporting. Fewer than 10 percent of those positions have undergone the “Yellow Pages test,” according to the letter. A position may be determined as commercial if an agency can find a company in the Yellow Pages.

“That activity should be reviewed for performance by a tax-paying, for-profit company, not a government entity,” they wrote.

This year, the House has passed several fiscal 2012 appropriations bills and the fiscal 2012 National Defense Authorization Act that allow for competitive sourcing, which is based on the policy known as the Office of Management and Budget A-76. The Senate has not passed any appropriations bills.

However, the Appropriations Committee soon will debate two spending bills that already contain provisions banning competitive sourcing. The 21 House members hope to change that.

Across the government, competitive sourcing continues to be controversial. Some Obama administration officials say the government has outsourced too much work to the private sector, leaving the federal workforce depending on those contractors. The government needs employees with knowledge about its agencies' operations, instead of overly relying on companies, they say. Meanwhile, other federal officials say agencies have hurt the economy in lean times by insourcing too much work, particularly work that isn't inherently governmental in nature.

About the Author

Matthew Weigelt is a freelance journalist who writes about acquisition and procurement.

Reader Comments

Thu, Jul 21, 2011 Drew

Now this is funny: "They also said keeping commercial work in house increases the government’s payroll and reduces tax revenues paid to the government." Uh, yeah, and just where are those funds coming from? And we wonder why we are in such a deep malaise? This from our 'Leaders'.

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
 Top 100 Slideshow
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