Re: GAO report on outsourcing the State
Eubulides wrote: February 27, 2004 COMPETITIVE SOURCING Greater Emphasis Needed on Increasing Efficiency and Improving Performance GAO-04-367 http://www.gao.gov/ [click through to the report] -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University michael at ecst.csuchico.edu Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901
GAO report on outsourcing the State
February 27, 2004 COMPETITIVE SOURCING Greater Emphasis Needed on Increasing Efficiency and Improving Performance GAO-04-367 http://www.gao.gov/ [click through to the report]
Re: outsourcing the State redux
Hmmm. Fighting terrorism by terrorising workers. Fighting terrorism by removing legal rights. Fighting terrorism by destroying the UN and International Law. What's next? Cheers, Ken Hanly - Original Message - From: Ian Murray [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2003 11:41 PM Subject: outsourcing the State redux [yet more evidence that Conservative is a pretty meaningless label...] Overhaul of Federal Workforce Sought By Christopher Lee Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, June 8, 2003; Page A01 The Bush administration, citing national security concerns, is pressing Congress to enact the biggest overhaul of the federal civil service system in a quarter-century. In the name of reshaping the federal bureaucracy to better counter global terrorism, administration officials are seeking the authority to rewrite long-standing pay and personnel rules governing 746,000 civilian employees at the Department of Defense. The powers would be similar to those won by the administration last year in a contentious battle over the formation of the Department of Homeland Security, which has about 180,000 employees.
Re: outsourcing the State redux
- Original Message - From: k hanly [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 7:14 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] outsourcing the State redux Hmmm. Fighting terrorism by terrorising workers. Fighting terrorism by removing legal rights. Fighting terrorism by destroying the UN and International Law. What's next? Cheers, Ken Hanly Invading Canada to stop BC bud from destroying young WASP's. Ian
Re: Re: Re: outsourcing the State
[here's the AFGE press release...] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 14, 2002 Contact: Diane S. Witiak (202) 639-6419 AFGE STATEMENT ON OMB RELEASE OF DRAFT PUBLIC-PRIVATE COMPETITION PROCESS (Washington, D.C.)-AFGE believes contractors and their allies in the Bush Administration have insisted on rewriting the OMB Circular A-76, which governs the public-private competition process, because it doesn't allow contractors to take federal employee jobs often enough or fast enough. Bush Administration officials are at war with reliable and experienced rank-and-file federal employees; they are systematically conspiring to bust their unions, gut their civil service protections, and hand over their jobs to politically well-connected contractors. AFGE approaches the Bush Administration's rewrite of OMB Circular A-76 with considerable skepticism. However, until experts both inside and outside of AFGE have had an opportunity to carefully review the rewrite, we will reserve judgment. During AFGE's review of the new process, it will keep these ten important considerations in mind: 1. Does it ensure the government-wide establishment of a reliable and comprehensive system to track the cost, size, and responsibilities of the massive federal contractor workforce, which some observers have estimated to be twice the size of the federal workforce, both generally as well as for specific contracts? 2. Does it eliminate the pernicious practice of contracting out work performed by federal employees without public-private competition, whether direct conversions promoted by the infamous Office of Management and Budget (OMB) quotas or the Army's Third Wave wholesale privatization initiative? 3. Does it protect the interests of taxpayers by ensuring that any use of the controversial and subjective best value approach is limited to a genuine pilot project that would allow for a careful and objective review of the results? 4. Does it ensure that taxpayers will receive the level of services they need at the lowest possible prices, or will it allow agency managers to charge taxpayers for unneeded bells and whistles? Given that the revolving door problem-senior officials awarding contracts to firms for which they intend to work once their federal careers are over-will be significantly exacerbated by the introduction of any subjective best value process, what steps does the rewrite take with respect to eliminating conflicts of interest? -more- 5. Is it being introduced as part of a broader effort to ensure that federal employees and their union representatives have the same legal standing currently enjoyed by contractors? 6. Does it reduce the impact of wages and benefits on award decisions, so that privatization no longer results in significantly reduced living standards for those who do government work? 7. Does it ensure that agencies will finally begin to subject new government work and government work performed by contractors to real public-private competition, as they do with respect to work performed by federal employees? 8. Does it repudiate the use of numerical or functional privatization quotas, which are even more foolish and ill-advised when agencies are attempting to adapt to a wholly new and unprecedented public-private competition process? 9. Does it err on the side of caution with respect to protecting and preserving robust in-house capabilities, especially given the acknowledgement by Bush Administration officials that at least two major agencies have privatized inherently governmental work? 10. Does it envision the reestablishment of real labor-management partnerships that are necessary if in-house employees are to be given fair chances to prevail? Although the relentlessly pro-contractor Bush Administration's record offers little encouragement, AFGE will carefully review the rewritten public-private competition process to determine how it stacks up in relation to the factors discussed above. Given the impact and complexity of this effort, it is deeply regrettable that little more than four weeks are allowed for affected groups to provide their comments.
outsourcing the State
[preparing for GATS] (11-14) 12:32 PST WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush plans to subject as many as 850,000 federal jobs to competition from the private sector, administration officials said Thursday, a sweeping reform long sought by Republicans and stiffly opposed by labor unions. Nearly half of the government's civilian work force could be affected by the plan to be published in the Federal Register on Friday. After a 30-day public review period, Bush can impose the new rules without congressional approval. This is inherent to getting the taxpayers the best deal for their dollars and the best service from the government, said Trent Duffy, spokesman for the Office of Management and Budget. Bush and his fellow Republicans have long favored opening public sector jobs to competition from outside government. They argue that competitive bidding will force government bureaucracies to improve service and lower costs -- or lose business to the private sector. Public employee unions are expected to fight the proposal, which could cost their rank and file jobs. The Bush administration officials are at war with reliable and experienced rank-and-file federal employees, said Bobby L. Harnage Sr., president of the American Federation of Government Employees. They are systematically conspiring to bust their unions, gut their civil service protections and hand over their jobs to politically well-connected contractors. The proposal comes at the heels of last week's GOP victories in congressional elections ,which emboldened Bush and his agenda. The White House is poised to beat back union opposition to another administration initiative, this one in Congress: the creation of the Homeland Security Department. Current federal rules allow for public-private competition, administration officials say, but the regulations are so cumbersome that private firms are often reluctant to seek government contracts. Under the plan, commercial activities conducted by the government -- from lawn mowing to hanging drywall and secretarial work -- will be open to competition. There are 850,000 such jobs in the federal work force; Bush has set a goal of putting 50 percent of those jobs up for grabs in the first stage of the plan, officials said, with the intention of eventually opening the total 850,000 to competition. White House spokesman Scott McClellan would not talk about the job prospects of the affected employees, but said, What we're trying to do is make government work better for the American taxpayer. Traditional high-ranking government positions would not be subject to the proposal, according to administration officials who outlined the proposal. One reform would encourage agencies to complete competitive bid reviews within a year. Under current rules, the competitive bid process can take four years -- a delay that scares off private sector bids, officials said. Rules under which the government buys goods and services will be streamlined to allow for more competitive bidding, officials said. The Government Accounting Office has determined that public-private competition will save taxpayers 30 percent on each contract. Expecting opposition from public employees unions, administration officials argue that the initiative would encourage unions to compete and win contracts; it does not mandate that the private sector takeover the jobs. Bush picked this new fight with federal unions one day after it became clear that he had won another battle with them. With Republicans ready to take full control of Congress, Democrats were largely abandoning their demands for union protections at the new Department of Homeland Security. The House easily passed a bill that would establish the department on Wednesday, and the Senate was ready to follow suit.
Re: outsourcing the State
This is inherent to getting the taxpayers the best deal for their dollars and the best service from the government, said Trent Duffy, spokesman for the Office of Management and Budget. It's called building a permanent Republican party gravy train. The only thing inherent in the plan is the stench of corruption. The Government Accounting Office has determined that public-private competition will save taxpayers 30 percent on each contract. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! And they charged poor Andy Fastow for pilfering the petty cash box! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: Re: outsourcing the State
- Original Message - From: Tom Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 6:09 PM Subject: [PEN-L:32236] Re: outsourcing the State This is inherent to getting the taxpayers the best deal for their dollars and the best service from the government, said Trent Duffy, spokesman for the Office of Management and Budget. It's called building a permanent Republican party gravy train. The only thing inherent in the plan is the stench of corruption. The Government Accounting Office has determined that public-private competition will save taxpayers 30 percent on each contract. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! And they charged poor Andy Fastow for pilfering the petty cash box! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Tom Walker 604 255 4812 = The Bush administration officials are at war with reliable and experienced rank-and-file federal employees, said Bobby L. Harnage Sr., president of the American Federation of Government Employees. They are systematically conspiring to bust their unions, gut their civil service protections and hand over their jobs to politically well-connected contractors. An altogether contrasting approach, on the other hand, has been to make the government again lose its autonomy, not to the economist, but now to the economic system whose agents within a pluralistic political regime play the policy influencing game that determines the policy outcome. The lobbies compete for policy outcomes; the government is a de facto playground where this competition or conflict results in policy outcome. The government has no ego, no identity in this approach. It is best described as the *clearinghouse government* approach to political economy modeling. [J. Bhagwati, Political Economy and International Economics]
Re: outsourcing the State
The Repugs may well overreach themselves. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
