[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 16]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 22947]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




INTRODUCTION OF THE FAIRNESS AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN DEFENSE CONTRACTING 
                                  ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                     HON. LOUISE McINTOSH SLAUGHTER

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                       Friday, September 26, 2008

  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, today I am proud to introduce the 
Fairness and Accountability in Defense Contracting Act. This bill will 
provide much needed transparency to the growing defense contracting 
industry, and help shine light on any conflict of interest between 
Pentagon contracting officials, as well as any perceived ``revolving 
door'' between the Pentagon procurement offices and private defense 
contractors.
  As our military conflict and commitments have increased overseas 
since 2003, the Department of Defense has increasingly relied on 
private contractors to supply goods and services to support our armed 
forces. In January, 2007, the Acquisition Advisory Panel issued a 
report to the Office of Federal Procurement Policy and the United 
States Congress on the procurement policies of the Federal Government. 
In this report, the advisory panel devoted an entire chapter to 
evaluating the appropriate role of contractors in supporting the 
Government, and found that the potential for conflicts of interest 
``has increased significantly in recent years'' as the traditional 
lines between public and private functions are continually blurred.
  In July of this year, the Project on Government Oversight sent a 
letter to the General Services Administration and stated that a 
revolving door now exists between public and private sectors that has 
``become such an accepted part of Federal contracting in recent years 
that it is frequently difficult to determine where the Government stops 
and the private sector begins.'' The conflict of interest that results 
from this ``revolving door'' between private contractors and Government 
contracting offices can create serious conflicts of interest that may 
result in an environment of favoritism and profiteering that will only 
serve to misuse Federal tax dollars and betray the public's trust.
  While a revolving door culture would be disturbing in any instance 
where public funds are used, it is particularly heinous during a time 
when our country is at war and the lives of our men and women in the 
armed services depend on the equipment that is supplied to them by our 
procurement offices. Unfortunately, and to my complete dismay, there 
have been far too many instances over the past decade where the 
Pentagon's procurement policies have sold our soldiers short.
  In January of 2006 it was revealed by the New York Times that an 
internal Pentagon memo reported that 80 percent of the Marines killed 
in Iraq due to upper body wounds could have survived if they had extra 
body armor. This troubling news followed earlier revelations that our 
troops went into Iraq without enough bulletproof vests and armored 
vehicles necessary to safeguard their lives. In light of these reports 
I requested that the Department of Defense Inspector General conduct an 
investigation into the Pentagon's body armor procurement policies. The 
Inspector General's initial findings, while incomplete, uncovered a 
troubling trend: 13 of the Army's 28 body armor contracts between 
January, 2004, and December, 2006, did not either require, perform, or 
have documentation to support proper first article testing as required 
by Federal Acquisition Requirements. While I am waiting for the 
Inspector General to complete a more thorough audit of the overall body 
armor procurement policy, these initial results should spark the desire 
for greater contracting oversight in any civic minded person.
  In addition to the DoD IG's findings on body armor, there have been 
numerous recent public cases where the Pentagon's procurement policies 
have failed our troops. Earlier this year it was revealed that in 2007, 
the Army awarded a contract worth over $200 million to two 22 year old 
boys to supply ammunition to Afghan troops. Appallingly, this 
ammunition was found to be from the Cold War era and completely 
inadequate for the Army's needs. Additionally, the botched contract 
award by the Air Force for KC-135 tankers, which was, challenged, 
reviewed by GAO, and ultimately reopened, received even greater public 
scrutiny. And perhaps most damning is the recent GAO report that the 
Pentagon has wasted about $300 billion in defense spending.
  These public examples show a disturbing trend of the failure of 
Pentagon procurement policy. They also suggest that an increasingly 
blurred line between the public and private sectors as identified by 
the Advisory Panel, as well as the perceived ``revolving door'' between 
contracting offices and private contractors, have consistently 
undermined the public's best interest.
  This legislation will fight the revolving door between Pentagon 
contracting offices and private defense contractors by strengthening 
the transparency and reporting requirements for private contractors 
bidding on and receiving defense contracts. The Fairness and 
Accountability in Defense Contracting Act will require contractors who 
are bidding on contracts to disclose any Defense Department employment 
history of its employees. This legislation will also require that 
contractors submit a yearly report, for each year that a contract is in 
effect, which discloses this Defense Department employment history. The 
Department of Defense will also be required to submit a report to 
congressional defense committees that details the employment 
information reported by the contractor as required by this Act. And 
finally, this legislation will direct the GAO to submit a report to 
Congress on the implementation and enforcement of rules governing 
future employment negotiations of contracting officials.
  These measures will provide the transparency necessary to ensure that 
conflicts of interest with the Defense contracting offices, and a 
perceived revolving door to the private sector, are not undermining the 
public trust and selling the American taxpayers short. Most 
importantly, this legislation is necessary to ensure that defense 
contracting policies serve to provide the best possible equipment for 
our men and women in uniform at the best possible value to the 
taxpayer.

                          ____________________