A bill signed by President Obama three weeks ago includes a requirement that sole-source federal contracts can not be awarded for more than $20 million unless they are justified in writing and in public.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski says this requirement has “destructive implications” for the system under which Alaska Native corporations have gained billions of dollars worth of sole-source contracts.
The language does not ban no-bid contracts of more than $20 million, but Murkowski said it "would have a chilling effect on all contracting officers government wide . . . "
The “chilling effect” would come because federal contracting officers would have to take detailed steps to explain why it is in the government’s best interest to not go out to bid for a service.
The contracting officers, who sometimes use sole-source contracts because it is a way to get around federal red tape, may be hesitant to say why they didn’t use the normal procedures requiring a competitive process.
Murkowski said the effect of the new rule would be to limit the use of the Native American 8(a) program for Alaska Native corporations.
She wrote to the federal director of the Office of Management and Budget Thursday to say she was “deeply discouraged” by the language placed in the National Defense Authorization Act “at the 11the hour in a conference agreement.”
“It is language that history will judge as one of those ill-conceived federal Indian policies,” she said.
Murkowski issued a press release saying she intends to put forward an amendment to delay the new rule until the Small Business Administration and the Department of Defense issue a report to Congress about the impact of requiring written justification on contracts.
Alaska Native corporations enjoy special privileges under the 8(a) program for small disadvantaged businesses because of legislation pushed through by former Sen. Ted Stevens in 1986.
For most enterprises that qualify as “disadvantaged,” sole-source contracts are limited to $5.5 million for products or $3.5 million for services, but since 1988 there has been no limit on the size or number of contracts for the Native Alaska firms. In addition, the Alaska companies can stay in the program indefinitely, while others are limited to nine years of eligibility.
Four Alaska corporations are now among the top 100 federal contracting firms. From 2000 to 2008, Alaska firms received $6.6 billion in 8(a) sole-source contracts, according to a congressional study.
“These include a $480 million Army Corps technology support contract awarded to Eyak Corporation; a 10-year, $500 million Air Force contract awarded to Chugach Corporation to provide base operations support at MacDill Air Force Base; and a 10-year, $475 million Customs & Border Patrol contract awarded to Chenega to maintain metal detectors, x-ray machines, and other equipment at airports and along the U.S. border,” the report by the Senate subcommittee on contracting oversight said.
“The single largest Alaska Native 8(a) contract is the Inter-Service Supply Support Operations Program (ISSOP) which was awarded in 2002 by the Defense Department to FSS- Alutiiq, a joint venture of Arctic Slope Regional Corporation and Afognak Native Corporation. This contract, which is used in the United States, Puerto Rico, Guam, the Middle East, and elsewhere to provide logistics and supply support services to the Navy, is valued at $1.13 billion. To date, FSS-Alutiiq has received over $570 million through the ISSOP contract.”
The same ones gloating about this are the ones who would still be shrilly justifying their thoughts if the natives were perceived as begging.
Why don't Mcaskill and the rest of the Carpetbaggers, Republican, Democrat and Independents, go after KBR and their mother, Halliburton? Because they're bought off! Carpetbaggers who's ancestors should have been shoved back out to go back to whatever country kicked them out of, when they invaded our country.
What I did say is this: "When a white owned non-minority corporation gets in on a no bid contract as a sub contractor for an ANC and gets 95% or more of that contract, that is the very definition of abuse of the taxpayers money."
Can you see the difference? As for federal employees not doing a good enough job, what is far more likely is that their work is compromised by politicians and lobbyist who apply pressure to dole out contracts as political favors. I have no direct evidence but we all have seen how the game of no bid contracts is played. The Iraq war has seen how this type of thing goes on under our noses. Direct payment for political favors.
I am no supporter of the 8A ANC program although I am sympathetic to its goal. Giving native communities some hope of a real economy instead of continuing to live in a welfare state. Ted Stevens gave Alaska natives a chance to succeed. However, I fear native leaders have squandered this opportunity. It truly is a sad situation.
To me it seems time to either fix this or else let the ANC's, at least in this unlimited contract size and scope stand on their own.
When anyone tries to cut government spending here comes all the "not me" crybabies.
How can I use this to get re-elected? That is the only reason any of these NUTS are in DC passing out money like it is water.
I was told one time that we were all created equal, when did that change? When did the race card come into play? Guess we should ask Russia if they would like Alaska back because we did not give them a fair price for it back then.
In this case they are called lobbyist, greasing the wheels for non-native owned corporations to steel taxpayers money.
What would you call it Power of the O?
__________________________
Fiction
13 C.F.R. 125.6 requires the prime contractor (the ANC) to perform 51 percent of the work.
Get the chip off your shoulder...you will feel better.
When a white owned non-minority corporation gets in on a no bid contract as a sub contractor for an ANC and gets 95% or more of that contract, that is the very definition of abuse of the taxpayers money.
What would you call it Power of the O?
True Power O, but is Boeing an ANC? Lockheed? You completely missed my point. These big corporations are getting in on the ANC 8(A) no bid work as subs to the native corporations and this amount is huge. The Caucasian owned corporation gets a native owned corp to sub them out. This was the "abuse" I assumed you were talking about.
Sorry but you will have to find another issue to use the race card. The white man is not the reason for the failures of the ANC 8A program.
Yes it has been abused but you failed to say who was abusing it. That would be white owned and operated firms which simply need a paper connection to a native group or corporation in order to snatch up lucrative fed contracts. What the minorities get is literally pennies on the dollar. These White owned corporations are most often in the range of a billion dollars a year or more in revenue and get by far the largest benefit at the expense of the taxpayer.
"(ironic that the Obama adminsitration/democratic congress is trying to kill it)"
Maybe they are trying to kill it because its benefits which were supposed to go to native and other minorities are instead going to white owned business.
Slick lobbyists cheat truly disadvantaged
I find it interesting that during the election, Begich made lots of promises to the native community and now he is silent. You have to wonder if the native community is second guessing their vote.
So poo, where do you stand on it then? Do you stand with your fellow republicans like Stevens and Murkowsky in favor of this so called "welfare program"? Or do you stand with the Obama administration who is against it?
I am almost certain based on your prior posts that you really want desperately to Bash Obama and yet it is hard to do in this instance based on your belief system. So you indirectly bash him because without this program it is going to cost the state money.
Silly man...
It is essentially an indirect welfare program that provides funding (in an extremely inefficient manner) to native communities. If the program is significantly cut back it will result in less revenue going to the villages. If that happens than the State will have to increase its support of the villages. Alaska villages are the verge of economic disaster. Most of them have no chance of survival without huge subsidies. The burden that Alaska villages place on the State are ALMOST as great as the PERS/TERS system.
No, the question folks should be asking is "Should the government award contracts to native corporations simply because of "200 years of broken treaties, broken promises, seized land, miserable BIA policies and flat out incompetence" in perpetuity? Or should native corporations, along with all other corporations wishing to engage in contracts with the government, be held to the same standards and follow the same guidelines to ensure fairness and quality?
Victimhood is not a qualified defense. Twenty years is long enough for these corporations to come up with logical, detailed justifications for their entitlement that should fulfill the requirement. If not, why not? And Republicans whine about the "nanny state"...
The question folks should be asking is what MORE justification and approval does the Government need before providing economic opportunity to Native people? Anyone who is knowledgeable about the history of U.S. Government interaction with Native people would recognize that the last 200 years of broken treaties, broken promises, seized land, miserable BIA policies and flat out incompetence is justification enough.
Am I missing something here? Is Murkowski afraid that the corporations are incapable of defending their entitlement to the contracts they've held for the past 20 years? If the contractors are the best workers for the job, why be concerned? If they're not, though, then they should be concerned.
Or does Murkowski believe that 6.6 billion over an 8 year period is not worth accounting for, given the $13 billion in “questioned” or “unsupported” costs that KBR (the former Halliburton subsidiary) bilked the government for in Iraq. Of course, they've been so BUSY over in Iraq, right from the beginning, with a $33.8 billion, 10-year deal signed in 2001. Then came the pre-invasion order to repair oil facilities in Iraq; $28.2 million to build POW camps; and $40.8 million to accommodate the Iraqi Survey Group, deployed after the invasion to find weapons of mass destruction. It's just gravy after that, with an estimated
That's separate from the $80 million in bonuses they were paid for their shabby work that resulted in the electrocution of more than a dozen U.S. soldiers, one fatally, in the shower of a baracks they built in Iraq. But hey - you go to war with the crony's you have, right? But accounting for our tax dollars? Apparently, not a big deal - unless the Democrats are writing the checks.
Murkowski has to go to bat for the native corporations...the same corporations who have shown their love for the democrats.