GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Mass. lawmakers urge Army to keep multimillion-dollar contract in state

• 81635
  

  The truth is this contract or a good portion of it has already been manufactured in Puerto Rico with high quality and timely results. Check your history, our citizens in Puerto Rico have fought and died for our country in every major conflict we have been engaged in over the last 50 years. For any lawmaker to treat them as a foreign country is naive and self centered political posturing. They are Americans and deserve to be treated as such, they need the work too. ATK should do what is in the best interest of their company and the support of the war fighter. Politics should not decide this one.

  Steve Posted June 30, 2009 9:15 AM
• 81563
  

  Dayton and Springfield Ohio could use the work. There is high unemployment in Springfield, why not contract with a company in springfield to do the work. You can get a quality product right here in the good old USA! Try it.

  DJ Posted June 29, 2009 11:38 AM
• 81266
  

  Too many things to look at here - not withstanding the sweatshop terminology. Other than that I'm all for keeping the work in country - which does indeed mean that Puerto Rico is part of the deal. Tell these representatives to learn the statutes, regulations and laws that we in government contracting have to look at when we award a government contract. You should not be in your positions if you think that what you want is what you get just because. You'll probably find that the work was being performed in Puerto Rico all along.

  Lee Posted June 25, 2009 11:12 AM
• 81265
  

  Puerto Rico - needs to "poop or get off the pot" - i.e., vote to become a state or "We the People" cut them off from being a U.S.A. territory. They don't pay income taxes, companies get unique tax exemptions, and they bring NOTHING to the U.S.A. except welfare recipients. Then again, MA is an ugly, anti-Second Amendment, anti-Military state. Hmmm... Terminate the contract! T-for-C due to thier "illegal hiring practices"...

  Pancho Villa Posted June 25, 2009 11:12 AM
• 81263
  

  Far better to give the jobs to illegals than US citizens. Why didn't kerry, kennedy and frank haul the company to a congressional hearing and ask WHY?? Could it be that ACORN has already got these people registered to vote??

  dan m ketter Posted June 25, 2009 11:10 AM
• 81256
  

  Reality of Gov Contracting in this day and age is we taxpayers are seeing the rookies take charge. Are they doing a good job on our behalf? Answer to these items will tell. Why would the Army agree to three contract changes that have to be bilateral changes (both parties must agree):
  1. Inspection point for the goods was the plant and locality in the original bid.
  2. Acceptance point for the goods may have to change also.
  3. FOB point may have to change and this could mean more shipping costs to the Army.
  Even if they agree to the three changes above, the plants may have different cost profiles - not to worry. Cost Accounting Standards rules in the contract prevent the company from doing this with the costs untouched. Can't pocket a windfall savings because of accounting changes. Thank you very much.

  Gnatman Posted June 25, 2009 10:33 AM
• 81241
  

  Way to go! Play hardball with these companies; that's what they need.

  bobbi Schell Posted June 25, 2009 9:36 AM
• 81233
  

  Unfortunately for MASS, the company is well within its contractual rights to do whatever work it wants to do in Puerto Rico.

  Bob Ramos Posted June 25, 2009 9:12 AM
• 81200
  

  Silly me, but I thought Puerto Rico was a U.S. Territory. I have no problem with Frank, et al, trying to keep their constituents employed, but they can at least use some honesty in their arguments. Sheesh...

  Maybe I Flunked Social Studies Posted June 25, 2009 7:14 AM