Panel advances OMB procurement nominee, prison industries bill
David Safavian now awaits Senate approval.
The Senate Governmental Affairs Committee on Wednesday unanimously approved a former lobbyist nominated to head procurement policy at the Office of Management and Budget.
The full Senate must now vote on David Safavian, selected by President Bush nearly five months ago to succeed Angela Styles as head of OMB's Office of Federal Procurement Policy. In that position, Safavian would preside over the administration's controversial competitive sourcing initiative, as well as traditional acquisition policy.
At his confirmation hearing late last month, Safavian pledged to carry competitive sourcing forward, but said he would be open to tweaking some of OMB's rules for job contests. He also expressed optimism about reforms such as share-in-savings contracting, where contractors are paid from the savings their work generates.
Supporters urged the committee to send Safavian's name to the Senate floor quickly, because the post has been open since Styles' departure last fall.
Committee members also advanced several management-related bills Wednesday morning, including postal reform legislation (S. 2468) and a measure that would allow federal agencies to shop for products they've traditionally had to buy from prison workshops.
The prison bill (S. 346), sponsored by Sens. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Craig Thomas, R-Wyo., would unravel the near-monopoly on government contracts that Federal Prison Industries has enjoyed.
The committee passed the legislation with one amendment, offered by Levin, which would establish an "Enhanced In-Prison Educational and Vocational Assessment and Training Program" within the Federal Bureau of Prisons. This program would "provide, at a minimum, a full range of educational opportunities, vocational training and apprenticeships, and comprehensive release-readiness preparation for inmates in federal prisons."
The amendment could address some of the concerns aired by opponents of Levin's legislation. Critics have argued the bill would undermine the Federal Prison Industries program, which was created in 1934 to help inmates develop the work skills and habits needed to hold down jobs upon release.