More

Congress Demands Pentagon Cut Waste

JIM ABRAMS   04/28/10 04:56 PM ET   AP

Defense Waste

WASHINGTON — The House went after Pentagon waste Wednesday, saying improvements in how the Defense Department buys equipment and services can save taxpayers billions of dollars every year.

In legislation passed 417-3, lawmakers demanded that the federal government's biggest buyer do a better job in ensuring that it pays proper prices and gets what it pays for.

"For many years, we've witnessed waste in the Department of Defense's acquisition system spiral out of control, placing a heavy burden on both American taxpayers and on our men and women in uniform," said House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton, D-Mo.

Many of the provisions outlined in the bill are basically requirements for better business practices. But with the Pentagon owning 86 percent of government assets estimated at $4.6 trillion and spending about 50 percent of its procurement dollars on service contracts, those add up. Sponsors of the bill said efficiencies and the elimination of waste, fraud and abuse could save taxpayers up to $135 billion over five years.

The legislation is a follow-up to a measure enacted into law last year to stop massive overruns in the Pentagon's weapons acquisition system. Weapons account for about 29 percent of spending; Wednesday's bill, which Skelton said deals with everything from paper clips to boots to food, represents the rest, about $1 billion in spending every day.

Among the provisions, it requires the Pentagon to set up standards to measure performance and hold everyone accountable, takes steps to make sure units get what they need when equipment is purchased and requires that the Pentagon's financial management system is subject to audits.

It also sets up a system of rewards to motivate good performance by the procurement workforce, improves training for that workforce and increases its size. Efforts would be made to expand the industrial base so that more small businesses can participate and prospective contractors and major subcontractors must show that they do not have serious tax debts.

The Pentagon has long been infamous for its $600 hammers and $300 toilet seats, and Rep. Rob Andrews, D-N.J., who for the past year has headed a panel with Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, working on recommendations for the acquisition bill, said such abuses are still common.

He cited one example of the Air Force paying $13,000 for a refrigeration unit on a plane, and then paying $32,000 for the same unit two years later. He recounted that the Pentagon paid $201 million to truck petroleum products from Kuwait to Iraq even before a contract was signed, and that it can take nearly seven years to go from a proposal to buy information technology to actual use of the technology, by which time it is often obsolete.

The House on Wednesday also passed a measure requiring federal agencies to move more aggressively to stop improper payments to contractors – such as when they pay twice for the same service or pay for a service they never receive – and retrieve money that should never have been paid.

Rep. Patrick Murphy, D-Pa., a chief sponsor, cited an estimate that poor federal oversight resulted in $98 billion in improper payments in fiscal year 2009, out of total spending of about $2 trillion. He said that was double the budget of the Department of Homeland Security, and triple the budget of the National Institutes of Health.

President Barack Obama, in a statement, said the bill was "another critical step toward increased fiscal responsibility" and urged quick Senate action. Both bills now go to the Senate.

___

The defense acquisition bill is H.R. 5013. The improper payments bill is H.R. 3933.

On the Net:

Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
Filed by Jeff Muskus  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 248
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (8 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
davidmjoyce
01:44 PM on 05/02/2010
What is interesting is that only 20% of the DoD budget is spent on weapons. Most funds go for services contracts and military/civilian salaries. Also, Congress maintains an excessive number of installations within the country to provide jobs within their districts. A key concern is the current arms race in Asia and the fact that the US has not built new tanks, aircraft, ships or submarines in significant numbers since the Reagan years. The F-15s, M-1s, F-16s, SSN-688s, CG-47s, etc. are all two-decades old with few replacement platforms planned. Just my personal viewpoint supported by data from CBO.
photo
guveqzero
Inventor and Innovator
04:24 AM on 04/30/2010
Bringing bases back home is better than cutting spending. I'd like to see the money our soldiers spend help our economy instead of Japan, Germany, Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan.
01:21 PM on 04/29/2010
Government waste? If only they could run our health care system.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
JStading
Trust me, I'm an attorney...
01:24 PM on 04/29/2010
You're assuming that government waste in health care would exceed the profit and advertising of private industry. Based on what we've seen here in California over the past few years (read: a 35% increase in premiums across the board courtesy Anthem Blue Cross IN ONE YEAR), I'm guessing that it won't.

Reality check - every western country has government run health insurance. Surprisingly, the people who tend to be against American public options fall into one of two categories -

(1) those who have never been outside the country [resorts excluded];
(2) those who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo due to employment or investment.

Which category do you fall under?
02:59 PM on 04/29/2010
I am a librarian at our local rural school. Yes, I like my health care and retirement investments. I learn all I need to through reading books. I prefer to stay local as to not create such a large imprint, can you say the same?
01:12 PM on 04/29/2010
How about Congress cut their waste by cutting their budget?
12:39 PM on 04/29/2010
Congress to cut "defence" spending?

Right, they will cut their own jugular!

I am not holding my breath. [ I am holding my pocket book however ]
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:34 PM on 04/29/2010
The Penatagon will spank those pesky little congressmen!
photo
BBackSoon
Hello, I must be going.
11:29 AM on 04/29/2010
One other thought, I am all for this except you realize that the savings will come in the form of less services and supplies for the grunts. We already have soldiers wearing lesser armor and helmets, and they routinely offer sub par post service health care, so I hate the fact that the Generals and Admirals will cut at the bottom not the top.
photo
BBackSoon
Hello, I must be going.
11:13 AM on 04/29/2010
I for one would like to see the military taking care of most of its own business. Let them cook, clean and maintain for themselves. The idea that we have these highly trained fighting soldiers that are too expensive to let them do these menial tasks, so we pay a contractor more than it would cost to have the soldiers do it themselves. It is all about the profit for the contractors.

Time for KP, Laundry Duty and Corp of Engineers to take over again.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Fred Hood
Out of many we are one ...B.O.
10:27 AM on 04/29/2010
THREE POINT SEVEN BILLION A WEEK...........shifting more from us to them using fear
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Fred Hood
Out of many we are one ...B.O.
10:24 AM on 04/29/2010
I HAVE AN EXIT STRATEGY THAT IS GUARANTEED TO WORK!!!

Make the contractors that are ripping off billions ever week convert to non-profit to support our country during this time of great need..........BINGO war over its all about money people..

END IT NOW TODAY

CFJ
Nam 69-72
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
David Rozgonyi
Writer and traveler
09:13 AM on 04/29/2010
Which of our last post WWII wars/occupations/illegal actions/covert operations WEREN'T waste?? And if you have an example, back it up with your reasoning pretty please.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Fred Hood
Out of many we are one ...B.O.
10:56 AM on 04/29/2010
facts make them mad...........then they want to fight........something in the genes
08:55 AM on 04/29/2010
We don't need military bases in Germany, Italy, the Phillipines, South Korea, etc. As Bill Maher has said repeatedly- once we go into a country, we never leave. The Dept. of Defense has been the holy cow, and it's about time we make drastic cuts to save taxpayer money and cut the deficit. We could probably cut the money spent by 1/3 and it wouldn't hurt our security one iota.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Kevin Atlanta
Active Citizen 54
08:38 AM on 04/29/2010
Why does America require global military bases? Why are we fighting 2 illegal wars?
End the madness. End all Military contracting; Bush - Cheney's Praetorean Guard in the Prince/Blackwater/Xe contracts is only one example of the welfare for the Corporate Communists the Republican Cults of Jesus Inc feed the greed machine.
08:21 AM on 04/29/2010
Perhaps we would be better off spending a billion $ a day on solar panels and wind turbines for all Americans.
08:19 AM on 04/29/2010
Theres' a lot on money to be made

Supplying the army with the tools of the trade

as opposed to

Beating swords into plowshares