Lawmakers urge Defense to halt competitive sourcing

Key Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee on Friday asked the Pentagon to cease all public-private job competitions immediately.

Reps. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., chairman of the committee, and Solomon Ortiz, D-Texas, chairman of the panel's Readiness Subcommittee, urged the Defense Department to stop any pending competitions under the guidelines in Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76, refrain from initiating new contests and rescind a 2008 policy memorandum on competitive sourcing.

"This will allow the administration and Congress time to conduct a comprehensive review of the department's A-76 program and to determine the best course for moving forward with a sound competitive sourcing policy," they wrote in a letter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The congressmen sent a separate letter to OMB Director Peter Orszag, informing him of their request.

Competitive sourcing was a key component of the Bush administration's management agenda. The controversial policy was widely pursued at Defense, where the military services were encouraged to outsource work Bush administration officials believed could be done more efficiently by the private sector.

"Originally, the A-76 process was intended to be used as a tool to determine the most competitive and efficient source for performing 'commercial' work -- either in the public or private sector," Skelton and Ortiz wrote in the letters. "However, it became almost a mandate in recent years for pushing more and more work into the private sector, even work that is closely associated with inherently governmental functions, in order to meet arbitrary competition goals."

Federal labor unions and Democrats have long opposed public-private competitions, maintaining they often fail to deliver promised efficiencies and cost savings and unduly burden federal agencies. The 2009 omnibus appropriations act signed by President Obama earlier this month prohibits new competitive sourcing activity governmentwide through the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30. But it does not prevent ongoing competitions. In their letter to Orszag, the lawmakers said they were concerned that the "competitive sourcing policies set in place in the 2001 President's Management Agenda are continuing to be fully implemented at the Department of Defense by the same official who advocated so strongly for such policies during the Bush administration."

Skelton and Ortiz cited 2008 Defense inspector general findings that Air Force officials felt pressured to conduct A-76 studies and that the Army was undergoing a number of efforts that affected competitive sourcing planning, such as war, base closings and an expansion. This created "undue burdens" on the services, the lawmakers wrote.

Many competitions "have dragged on far beyond the time limits authorized in the 2003 revised Circular A-76, as well as those imposed by statute," the lawmakers wrote. "This creates an unfair strain on the federal employees whose jobs are being competed, as well as the contractors who have submitted bids for the work. In many cases, an individual service has requested a cancellation -- either because the installation is seeking an alternative approach or because the original study was not appropriate -- only to be denied by the department."

In their message to Orszag, Skelton and Ortiz noted that their request is in keeping with President Obama's March 4 contracting reform memorandum. The president asked administration officials, including Gates, to establish a clearer definition of inherently governmental work by Sept. 30.

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
FROM OUR SPONSORS
JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Close [ x ] More from GovExec
 
 

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from GovExec.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

    Download
  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

    Download
  • Federal IT Applications: Assessing Government's Core Drivers

    In order to better understand the current state of external and internal-facing agency workplace applications, Government Business Council (GBC) and Riverbed undertook an in-depth research study of federal employees. Overall, survey findings indicate that federal IT applications still face a gamut of challenges with regard to quality, reliability, and performance management.

    Download
  • PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

    This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

    Download
  • Toward A More Innovative Government

    This research study aims to understand how state and local leaders regard their agency’s innovation efforts and what they are doing to overcome the challenges they face in successfully implementing these efforts.

    Download
  • From Volume to Value: UK’s NHS Digital Provides U.S. Healthcare Agencies A Roadmap For Value-Based Payment Models

    The U.S. healthcare industry is rapidly moving away from traditional fee-for-service models and towards value-based purchasing that reimburses physicians for quality of care in place of frequency of care.

    Download
  • GBC Flash Poll: Is Your Agency Safe?

    Federal leaders weigh in on the state of information security

    Download

When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.