Kelman partly to blame for lack of competition in buying

In response to his most recent column, Steve Kelman can make better use of his time better in the classroom environment where he can control the variables rather than in the real world trying to defend actions by the administration that he was part of.

He had his chance in the '90s and his efforts are a prime reason why we have no competition in government buying today. Pushing the Total Quality Logistics principles employed in the Japanese model on an American economic system predicated a reduction in competition and resulted in fewer and larger long-term contracts. This has had a direct effect on the skyrocketing costs of Defense Department weapon systems. Pushing a reduction in the vendor base and increasing the length of contracts have caused us now to have so few American sources we are considering allowing Europe to join the competition for military aircraft and other major weapon systems.

So the next time someone tells you a destroyer costs $3 billion-plus ask why. Dollars to small business have increased for most industries during the period of time in the article but the number of awards and successful small business winners has decreased. Kinda hard to wait around for the re-compete when you have a 10-year term on a contract. You could lose your house, car and business.

Anonymous
Navy Department