Content area
Full Text
ABSTRACT. Nearly $200 billion a year is funneled through the federal procurement system to buy everything from paper clips to stealth fighters. This procurement system can be thought of as an oscillating pendulum as it swings from one extreme of unresponsiveness to mission needs to the other extreme of hypersensitivity to mission. Out of a sense that the procurement pendulum had swung too far towards over-regulation, two major procurement reform laws were passed: the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 and the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996. Many observers suggest that these two laws have led to a revolution in the way the government buys. Are these reforms permanent? The view here is they are not because of various political forces.
INTRODUCTION
About $200 billion a year is funneled through the federal procurement system to buy everything from stealth fighters to paper clips. The federal procurement system more or less consists of hundreds of thousands of contracting officials in thousands of contracting organizations in every federal agency. An incessantly changing body of procurement regulations guides the work of these officials. Of all the federal government reforms attempted during the 1990s either by reinventing government initiatives, reform laws, or other administrative action, procurement reform of defense and civilian agency contracting has been widely praised as the most successful. These procurement reforms are viewed by many as permanent positive changes. In the manner of tilting at windmills, it is being argued here that political forces inherent in the American democratic system will undermine the permanence of these reforms. If the history of federal procurement is a guide, then no procurement reform is permanent.
THE PROCUREMENT PENDULUM
Since the Revolutionary War, the federal procurement system has oscillated between two extremes. At one extreme the system can be characterized as consisting of very tight and burdensome controls. At the other extreme the system is in a relaxed regulatory condition. Forces such as the nation's wartime arms needs would lead to relaxed procurement rules so the nation could arm quickly. Opposite forces such as contractor profiteering and waste would lead to a tightening of procurement rules and controls. This pattern of oscillation is easily discerned throughout the history of federal procurement. For example, at the outset of the Civil War,...