Bush loves small business

[RightIsWrong]

No link b/c it came across the Dow news service....but here is what I was able to copy/paste.

The gall of this administration and the current leadership all over Washington to clamor on and on about how small business is what generates real wealth in this country and creates the majority of jobs and then to sit back idly and watch as this administration bends them over and gives it to them hard and dry.

The disgusting details:

Washington Post Finds Bush Cheated Small Businesses Out of Over Half a TrillionDollars in Contracts

PETALUMA, Calif., Oct 23, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ --

A recent story by the Washington Post concluded that over 40 percent of the contracts federal agencies were supposed to give to small businesses actually were diverted to Fortune 500 firms. The Washington Post reviewed a sample of $13 billion in federal contracts that were reported as going to small businesses. In that sample, the Washington Post found over $5 billion or approximately 40 percent had actually been awarded to Fortune 500 firms such as Lockheed Martin, Dell Computer, L-3 Communications, SAIC, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics and British Aerospace (BAE).

The information reviewed by the Washington Post was the most accurate data the government has produced since 2000. In 2002, the General Accounting Office (GAO) launched an investigation based on information provided by American Small Business League (ASBL) President Lloyd Chapman (http://www.asbl.com/showmedia.php?id=10), which found thousands of large businesses were receiving federal small business contracts. The ASBL projects that the volume of federal small business contracts that were diverted to Fortune 500 firms was much larger in the earlier years of the Bush Administration, before the problem was exposed in investigative stories by CBS,ABC and CNN. (http://www.asbl.com/media2.php)

The most recent estimates from the Small Business Administration (SBA) Office of Advocacy reported that approximately $140 billion in government contracts and subcontracts had been reported as going to small businesses each year.The 40 percent figure uncovered by the Washington Post was just for Fortune 500 firms and other clearly large businesses. The Washington Post did not look at other large businesses that were not household names, but still would not qualify as small businesses. If all firms that did not qualify as legitimate small businesses were considered, the percentage could be much higher. Several government officials have put the percentage of federal small business contracts that were diverted to large businesses between 50 percent and 86 percent.

 

[OrByte]

this should be merged/posted with the "Trickle Up or Trickle Down?" thread.

 

[winnar111]

Are you saying that these small businesses are entitled to contracts regardless of whether it is a better deal for the taxpayers or not?

Should the government buy computers from Falcon Northwest instead of Dell?

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Originally posted by: winnar111
Are you saying that these small businesses are entitled to contracts regardless of whether it is a better deal for the taxpayers or not?

Should the government buy computers from Alienware type stores instead of Dell?

That would be a fantastic example if Dell didn't own Alienware.

 

[Ldir]

Originally posted by: winnar111
Are you saying that these small businesses are entitled to contracts regardless of whether it is a better deal for the taxpayers or not?

Should the government buy computers from Alienware type stores instead of Dell?

Yes they are by law. How do you know the small businesses did not offer a better deal anyway? Do you have proof? I bet they just do not have as many lobbyists writing big checks to Republicans.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy

Originally posted by: winnar111
Are you saying that these small businesses are entitled to contracts regardless of whether it is a better deal for the taxpayers or not?

Should the government buy computers from Alienware type stores instead of Dell?

That would be a fantastic example if Dell didn't own Alienware.

Yeah, I realized that, hence the edit. Fine, use Falcon Northwest.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Ldir

Originally posted by: winnar111
Are you saying that these small businesses are entitled to contracts regardless of whether it is a better deal for the taxpayers or not?

Should the government buy computers from Alienware type stores instead of Dell?

Yes they are by law. How do you know the small businesses did not offer a better deal anyway? Do you have proof? I bet they just do not have as many lobbyists writing big checks to Republicans.

How do you know they are a better deal? You're the one offering the 40% mandate.

 

[Skitzer]

Originally posted by: Ldir

Originally posted by: winnar111
Are you saying that these small businesses are entitled to contracts regardless of whether it is a better deal for the taxpayers or not?

Should the government buy computers from Alienware type stores instead of Dell?

Yes they are by law. How do you know the small businesses did not offer a better deal anyway? Do you have proof? I bet they just do not have as many lobbyists writing big checks to Congress.

Fixed it for you

 

[dawp]

the whole purpose of the program is to promote small business.

 

[Descartes]

Our small company went through a heated bid process for a large TSA project that took over a year and 500 pages of contracts. We lost out for unknown reasons and it was inexplicably awarded to a monolith of the industry for far more dollars.

Not saying this is related, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Many, if not most, of the companies, large or small, go after these contracts with the support of ex-Washington elites that serve as consultants for 100s of dollars an hour. Some are ex-Military, some higher up. In our case, we shelled out a lot to get nowhere.

It's a fairly corrupt process in my experience, but once you're on the books and have the contracts in place (all hundreds of pages worth) it's worth its weight in gold.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: dawp
the whole purpose of the program is to promote small business.

Yup, and if that is what the program's money is for - then that's where it should go. If the big companies can do things better, then don't put the grants out there for small businesses and then award them to large ones.

 

[Ldir]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Ldir

Originally posted by: winnar111
Are you saying that these small businesses are entitled to contracts regardless of whether it is a better deal for the taxpayers or not?

Should the government buy computers from Alienware type stores instead of Dell?

Yes they are by law. How do you know the small businesses did not offer a better deal anyway? Do you have proof? I bet they just do not have as many lobbyists writing big checks to Republicans.

How do you know they are a better deal? You're the one offering the 40% mandate.

It is a government mandate, not mine. The mandate is not 40%. That is the percentage that was misappropriated. You fail at reading AND logic.

 

[heyheybooboo]

I can't wait to see the cross-tabs on this one: political contributions <--->contract awards

 

[DealMonkey]

Honestly, I don't think there's a federal program or agency that this administration hasn't perverted in some fashion. And as usual, nothing will be done about it.

 

[Fern]

I've read the 1st link (2nd isn't working for me).

The investigation was launched Jan of '02, yet the article above carries a current date? Why is that?

Then I note the article above is mighty forceful in blaming GWB, even while the other is not. The other (and the one above) indicate that large companies were fraudulently marketing themselves as small business. I.e., I can't find where this is diversion perpetrated by the Whilte House.

The above article also states that the problem was worse in Bush's earlier years. Umm, if the investigation was launched in Jan '02, what "earlier years"? GWB would have only been in office for 11 months. Is this some spin *hit piece* now being revived because of the election?

Also, I can't tell from reading any of this info which agency (agencies) were responsible for properly awarding contracts etc.

While this angers me, I cannot see good reason to blame GWB yet, unless he installed some crappy appointees. I highly doubts in the months following 911 GWB had time to screw around with this stuff personally.

It looks a lot like the big companies committed fraud, thus the problem is one of crappy management rather than willful cheating by the federal government. But I do think the gov employees awarding this stuff inappropriately ought to be looked at for bribes just in case they knew what was up (and not deceived). If any company lied about their eligability, they should be prosecuted/fined.

But I've got a more recent/better example of GWB's screw ups. He recently signed an order that *officially* designates areas well outside of Appalacia as now being officially part of Appalachia. Makes no sense huh? But you see the government program to combat poverty in Appalachia has a pretty good budget, so now these non-Appalachia areas are getting those funds (yeah! less money for the real poor people). The place I read about was in Kentucky where they raise thoroughbred horses for racing. Sound like a poverty area to you?

The guy *GWB) is a screw up in many ways.

Fern

 

[Ldir]

Originally posted by: Fern
The investigation was launched Jan of '02, yet the article above carries a current date? Why is that?

Because the investigation took time maybe? That seems obvious. When was the investigation complete?

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: Fern
I've read the 1st link (2nd isn't working for me).

The investigation was launched Jan of '02, yet the article above carries a current date? Why is that?

Then I note the article above is mighty forceful in blaming GWB, even while the other is not. The other (and the one above) indicate that large companies were fraudulently marketing themselves as small business. I.e., I can't find where this is diversion perpetrated by the Whilte House.

The above article also states that the problem was worse in Bush's earlier years. Umm, if the investigation was launched in Jan '02, what "earlier years"? GWB would have only been in office for 11 months. Is this some spin *hit piece* now being revived because of the election?

Also, I can't tell from reading any of this info which agency (agencies) were responsible for properly awarding contracts etc.

While this angers me, I cannot see good reason to blame GWB yet, unless he installed some crappy appointees. I highly doubts in the months following 911 GWB had time to screw around with this stuff personally.

It looks a lot the big companies committed fraud, thus the problem is one of crappy management rather than willful cheating by the federal governmemt.

I've got a better example of GWB's screw ups. He recently signed an order that *officially* designates areas well outside of Appalacia as now being officially part of Appalachia. Makes no sense huh? But you see the government program to combat poverty in Appalachia has a pretty good budget, so now these non-Appalachia areas are getting those funds (yeah! less money for the real poor people). The place I read about was in Kentucky where they raise thoroughbred horses for racing. Sound like a poverty area to you?

The guy *GWB) is a screw up in many ways.

Fern

I live about as deep in the hills of southern Appalachia as you can get and it never ceases to amaze us how many 'flatland' counties are incorporated into the ARC.

Here's a current map

We typically have to go to private foundations to subsidize outreach now - the latest was a mobile pharmacy to deliver meds way up in the high country hollows (well beyond Deliverance country - lol).

It's changed a lot in my lifetime for the better. And we live in a more 'successful' area if it can be called that. The poverty level is probably around 14-15%, mostly elderly. Those that succeed pretty much move away - there are jobs but they all pretty much pay the minimum or you have to drive an hour down the mountain.

We are big-time now ... got a four lane highway a few years ago

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Ldir

Originally posted by: Fern
The investigation was launched Jan of '02, yet the article above carries a current date? Why is that?

Because the investigation took time maybe? That seems obvious. When was the investigation complete?

Not 6 years

 

[EagleKeeper]

Many times, large business sets up small companies to compete for SBA and then get swallowed back.

The SBA uses the filed paperwork.

Other time, large companies will get small eligible ones to act as proxies.
The small one may pass through the work and/or get swallowed up afterwords.

This is not just with the Bush but has been going on since the SBA was conceived.

Some SB are kept afloat by larger companies in order to boost the SB contract percentage - which gives them advantages for larger contracts.

 

[RightIsWrong]

I found a link to the WaPo story with a lot more details.

Here's some of the interesting info:

It was the Republican Congress that put this requirement into law (signed off on by Clinton)

Congress in 1997 established the government-wide goal of awarding 23 percent of its work to small businesses because they play an increasingly critical role in driving the economy.

The "big winners" of small business contracts:

To sample the data's accuracy, The Post examined contracts awarded to the top 200 winners that were also classified last month as small businesses, a total of about $13 billion in contracts. The analysis also scrutinized $1 billion in contracts won by eight specific Fortune 1,000 companies and their subsidiaries.

The most errors -- 70 percent -- were made by the Defense and Homeland Security departments and the General Services Administration, the Post analysis showed.

The Post found that 36 of the 200 companies at the top of the government's list do not qualify as small under government definitions and were improperly counted. Federal procurement officials either did not check or ignored readily available records, including the government's own small-business registry.

About $1.2 billion in work was won directly by international conglomerates with thousands of employees. That included global defense giants such as British Aerospace, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman and Science Applications International Corp. (SAIC) and their subsidiaries.

SAIC and its subsidiaries were the biggest winners of work that was improperly counted. The San Diego-based information technology firm and its subsidiaries won $258 million in contracts initially classified as small-business awards -- $223 million from the Defense Department. SAIC spokeswoman Laura Luke said the firm never presents itself as small and alerts the government that firms it has purchased should lose their small-business label.

Probably the reason why some companies might gobble up a small business that has had past contracts but "forgets" to inform the .gov that they should no longer be considered as such:

The main reason why mistakes persist is that no real sanctions exist for agencies that consistently overstate their small-businesses awards. The errors are unlikely to be caught, officials say, because the SBA lacks the staff and the clout to stop them.

.......

"These big companies have been allowed to get away with this for so long, they don't even bother to change or hide their name," said Bill Miera, chief executive of Fiore Industries, a military contractor in New Mexico. "The motivation is purely profit."

 

[CrackRabbit]

Originally posted by: Descartes
Our small company went through a heated bid process for a large TSA project that took over a year and 500 pages of contracts. We lost out for unknown reasons and it was inexplicably awarded to a monolith of the industry for far more dollars.

Not saying this is related, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Many, if not most, of the companies, large or small, go after these contracts with the support of ex-Washington elites that serve as consultants for 100s of dollars an hour. Some are ex-Military, some higher up. In our case, we shelled out a lot to get nowhere.

It's a fairly corrupt process in my experience, but once you're on the books and have the contracts in place (all hundreds of pages worth) it's worth its weight in gold.

Not to discredit you at all, but the street goes both ways.
I worked as an assistant to a purchaser for a major university, state law required that we purchase a certain percentage of the items from small and minority owned businesses.

Often times the bids that were send to the small businesses were more expensive and contained inferior quality goods. I can recall several times we purchased items and what we received was such junk we had to trash it and order the items again from a larger company.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: Fern
-snip-

I live about as deep in the hills of southern Appalachia as you can get and it never ceases to amaze us how many 'flatland' counties are incorporated into the ARC.

We are big-time now ... got a four lane highway a few years ago

You near the TN border?

I'm thinking you're about 30-40 minutes away from where I live (Henderson County)

Fern