Letter: Delays are only part of the federal funding issues
A reader writes about some of the problems in federal funding, such as the approval process and low funding.
":
Regarding "A transition challenge: We have no money Never mind a presidential transition — the delays in federal funding seem to be occurring every year.
A more appropriate article would be titled: "The true cost of issuing a continuing resolution."
First, agency projects are told to run on minimum funding — no procurement beyond absolute necessity, which actually causes some project work to cease until equipment, supplies and contractors are available. Government employees most often are not idle, but they are not able to work as efficiently as possible.
Second, contract obligations for computer and software support and maintenance, and other services are repeatedly reissued for the period of each continuing resolution issued. This takes extra staff to perform all of the extra paperwork. This also has an impact on the vendors having to repeatedly reauthorize their services under these chopped-up contracts. These costs and inefficiencies are eventually passed on to the agencies (and the public) in the cost of goods and services after businesses recognize they are absorbing them.
The performance requirements for budget approvals need to be pay-based for all involved in this approval process. The last appropriations to be approved every year should always be the pay for the full staff and members of the Senate, House, Office of Management and Budget, and White House.
One story has a leader dissatisfied with the time required for a quorum of lawmakers to make timely decisions, so he allowed them their time but ordered the roof removed from their building while they were pondering and debating. Needless to say, their reduced personal comfort level provided the needed incentive.
Anonymous
What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to letters@fcw.com (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.
A more appropriate article would be titled: "The true cost of issuing a continuing resolution."
First, agency projects are told to run on minimum funding — no procurement beyond absolute necessity, which actually causes some project work to cease until equipment, supplies and contractors are available. Government employees most often are not idle, but they are not able to work as efficiently as possible.
Second, contract obligations for computer and software support and maintenance, and other services are repeatedly reissued for the period of each continuing resolution issued. This takes extra staff to perform all of the extra paperwork. This also has an impact on the vendors having to repeatedly reauthorize their services under these chopped-up contracts. These costs and inefficiencies are eventually passed on to the agencies (and the public) in the cost of goods and services after businesses recognize they are absorbing them.
The performance requirements for budget approvals need to be pay-based for all involved in this approval process. The last appropriations to be approved every year should always be the pay for the full staff and members of the Senate, House, Office of Management and Budget, and White House.
One story has a leader dissatisfied with the time required for a quorum of lawmakers to make timely decisions, so he allowed them their time but ordered the roof removed from their building while they were pondering and debating. Needless to say, their reduced personal comfort level provided the needed incentive.
Anonymous
What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to letters@fcw.com (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.
NEXT STORY: House passes bill to restore pay