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

Trending

  • POWER TRAINING: How to engage your customers

    Don't miss our Aug. 2 Washington Technology Power Training session on Mastering Stakeholder Engagement, where you'll learned the critical skills you need to more fully connect with your customers and win more business. Read More

  • PROJECT 38 PODCAST

    In our latest Project 38 Podcast, editor Nick Wakeman interviews Tom Romeo, the leader of Maximus Federal about how it has zoomed up the 2019 Top 100. Read More

contracts DB

Washington Technology Daily

Sign up for our newsletter.

Terms and Privacy Policy consent

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.