Letter: Readers weigh in on ending cost-plus contracting

Regarding "": The proposal to eliminate cost-plus contracts and rely on fixed-price contracts indicates a lack of understanding of acquisition options. The reality is that the requirements and capabilities areoften not sufficiently developed up front to support a firm fixed-pricecontract. Firm fixed-price contracts are appropriate for routine,repeatable goods and services. Regarding "": Cost plus contracts, if properly used, save money. If contractors bid on work that is not well defined, but necessary (repairing jet aircraft, when you don't know everything that is broken???), the contractor must cover his cost. If in doubt, he willbid the maximum cost possible, if he must bid firm fixed price. So...if only a small amount of work is really needed, the government is out the balance (we paid too much). Sen. McCain is correct to challenge misuse of cost-plus contracts,but we all should challenge any misuse of any type contract.Sen.  McCain should staff government contracting with an ample supply ofqualified COs, and let them do their work.Regarding "": This is so typical of the political pandering that isrampant during the election process. Only a truly uninformed orwillfully ignorant person would believe that the U.S. government couldcontinue to function in an environment that allowed only fixed-pricecontracts. I can easily visualize the amount of time and resources thatwould be consumed arguing over "scope" issues. People tend to forget that a cost overrun does not necessarily equal more profit for thecontractor. The problem is lack of oversight and "scope creep" far moreoften than than the contractor's deliberate action to drive cost up.Regarding "": It is simply foolish to believe that a year-long effort would not overlap with new presidential directives, legislation, political appointee changes, technology and security directives, personnel changes, etc. So to lock into a fixed-price contract is not providing the best evolutionary solution to the problem. Actually we have found that the Agile methodology provides for more coverage of dynamically changing requirements.Regarding "": With 26 years as a senator, McCain should know better. Fixed-price contracts are great when there are few if any unknowns. Nobody in their right mind would suggest or sign a fixed-price contract when development of new capabilities/technologies/products is needed. Failure of the A-12 aircraft program is a case in point. Fixed price is the pathway to zero technological progress. McCain is either firing a cheap shot, purposefully lying to further his political ambition, just plain stupid, or both.