GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Acting GSA administrator backs broad cooperative purchasing plan

• 63478
  

  Before Lurita Doan was forced out of GSA earlier in the year, this was one of her big lobbying initiatives. If GSA contractors could sell to State and Local customers from any GSA contract, this could double IFF revenue (.75%) for GSA. Keep in mind, that when you combine total state and local spending in all 50 states, it exceeds total federal spending. This could be a very good thing for GSA and their role in USG procurement.

  Brian Dunn Posted November 21, 2008 11:45 AM
• 63460
  

  In a situation of GSA, or any Fed Rep, actually negotiating the "best deal" this would be an excellent idea. However, I am far from convinced that those doing the "negotiating" for federal purchases, including our FEP health insurance plans, know or care enough about what they are doing to "negotiate" a "best" price and term arrangement. The appearance is that the "negotiator for Feds" hears an offer to discount the product or service 10% and thinks that is some kind of "deal" for a high volume, or bulk, type of purchase. What a misconception for which we all pay the higher price. Some people just don't have it in their character to actually "negotiate" or "bargain" for a beneficial agreement. For example, I have friends and others that I know, that go to buy a car and when the salesman says we can take a thousand off of the sticker they think that is a tremendous savings and jump on it with out even attempting to haggle.

  Basically, I don't know if there is any real incentive for the state, local, or others to take the GSA, or Fed otherwise, up on a supposed opportunity to buy at the Fed "negotiated" price. They likely obtain better pricing, or just as good, on their own; unless Federal Gov contract negotiators are better educated in the art of negotiating in consideration of what ever market/product they are pursuing. Sorry, but I am not impressed with what I have seen representing a Federal negotiated deal of any kind. Is anyone else impressed?

  26+yr Fed Posted November 21, 2008 10:14 AM
• 63458
  

  The interim rule expanding Schedule 84 to state and local governments as required by the Local Preparedness Acquisition Act (Pub. L. 110-248) is found at 73 Fed. Reg. 54334, 9/19/2008.

  I'm just not sure just who is going to conduct the GSA Contracting Officer-to-State/Local Contracting Officer training that would be necessary under such a Schedules expansion. State & Local COs speak a similar general language of procurement, but it is very different dialect than the FAR-based terminology of Federal COs. Nothing in the the Federal Acquisition Regulation is binding on State and Local government COs.

  Dave Clemens Posted November 21, 2008 10:10 AM
• 63436
  

  In addition to IT, the 84 schedule, for security products, was recently opened for Cooperative Purchasing via legislation passed earlier this year. An interim rule has been published and contract modifications are imminent.

  Larry Allen Posted November 21, 2008 7:42 AM