Youtube video - Uploaded by SenatorMcCaskill on Mar 29, 2012
U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill recently chaired a Senate hearing aimed at exploring a seemingly simple question—is it cheaper for American taxpayers when the federal government contracts with private companies, or uses federal employees?—and highlighted the fact that the answers are not as clear as previously thought.
Having been in the business of government contracting and witnessed first-hand how "Corrupt" government contracting is within the Dept of Defense, I applaud any Senator or Congressman or woman, for their efforts in trying to tame what's sadly become such a wild uncontrollable beast. As America has been at war for over a decade...
One point the Senator makes is how government contractors are sitting side my side federal employees. In my experience, I witnessed government contractors provide consultant advice to my former Commanding Officer, aiding him in making critical strategic warfare decisions, which included budget decisions!!
Let's keep in mind these contractors are working for "Private" companies.
So you best believe, they are taking this "Inside Information" back to their companies to let them know what future planning and development are coming down the pike with the U.S. military, and what the command’s budget limits are!!
While active duty military personnel, transfers from one command assignment to another; every 2-3 years, civilian contractors remain on staff and easily become an integrate member of the command.
In most cases, what I experienced at my last command, the civilian contractors, especially the senior budget analyst was considered the command's the "Subject" matter expert.
Government contracting has become so rampant, that military units commanding officers and budget officers loosely assign command duties and responsibilities to civilian contractors. Such responsibilities are in violation of Federal Acquisition Regulation, also known as the FAR.
These responsibilities are considered to be "inherently governmental functions, which are considered duties that can only be performed by “government employees” not defense contractors!!
Case in point, in early 2007 after I was fired from my job for blowing the whistle on my former boss, instead of replacing me with an active duty military Supply Corps officer; my former commanding officer (Capt. John Sturges) appointed 3 civilian contractors to do the work of 1 Navy officer.
Instead of gainfully employing me, I was directed to stay at home, for 2 years, this was before and after my military court martial trial. My only military duties were to call and report in to work no later than 0730 each morning, while still collecting my military paycheck.
During this time, I made numerous complaints to the Dept of Defense IG about the blatant abuse of American tax dollars.
Nearly all of my complaints were stonewalled and the Navy IG investigators selectively chose which of my allegations to investigate and which ones to ignore.
I was severely punished for blowing the whistle on my former bosses.
News Videos and articles of my case:
At the time, my annual military salary was roughly $120K, when the salary of 3 defense contractors (including fees and other added cost to their company) was close to $400-600K.
The contractors worked for a veteran stocked-owned defense contracting company which has since increased its revenues by hundreds of millions, of tax dollars.
The veteran stocked owned currently monopolizes a certain sector of the Navy's expeditionary logistics warfare mission.
As you can see, as a result of this 10 year WAR, defense contracting has become BIG BUSINESS. Defense contractors are scoring big bucks (of American's tax dollars) with the HELP of senior military officers, looking to cash in their "Post Government Employment "Retirement" Plan."
Before the senior officers retire they will approve/award a defense service contract to a particular company to perform various services. The norm is usually for consultant services. After the senior officers retire, he/she is immediately rehired by the company, as Quid Pro Quo for their efforts.
In the event the Feds are tipped off on their Ponzi Scheme, the company (Prime Vendor) will begin to shuffle the employees around a number of their "Subcontracts or Sub-companies".
One day a defense contractor may be working for company X, a few weeks later, he/she may show up to work with a polo shirt advertising a new company logo. This is an indicator that something shady is going on....
Food for thought: The Truth is Not So Self-Evident!!