Accountability in Contracting Act

From SourceWatch
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is a stub. You can help by expanding it.


Electionsgovernmentpolicylogo.png This legislation or issue article is part of the Congresspedia
Elections and Government Policy (U.S.) Portal.
This encyclopedia is written by people like you, so jump in:

Many individuals, businesses, organizations and foreign governments contract with the U.S. federal government to provide products and services. Oversight of that spending has been criticized in the past for not properly dealing with misuse or outright theft of taxpayer dollars. The issue was addressed in the 110th Congress with the Accountability in Contracting Act (H.R. 1362). [1]

Bill status

<USbillinfo congress="110" bill="H.R.1362" />

House

On March 15, 2007, the House considered the bill. Specifically, it would attempt to reduce abuse with regards to federal government contracts by:

  • Reducing the number of non-competitive, sole-source and cost-reimbursement contracts. The plan and goals for doing so would be applied only to agencies that awarded contracts of a total amount of at least $1 billion in the prior fiscal year. These agency heads would be required to make public within fourteen days any contract awarded on a non-competitive basis. The document would then be posted on the agency website and be available through the Federal Procurement Data System.[2]
  • Requiring all agencies to submit a quarterly report to Congress showing a list of audits or other reports that describe contractor costs in excess of $1 million that have been identified as unjustified, unsupported, questioned or unreasonable under any contract.[3]
  • Closing a loophole that allows former federal officials to accept compensation from contractors or related entities. The provision would require two years to pass before an official could lobby or consult on such contracts for reward. The official could accept compensation if the contract did not produce the same or similar products or services as the entity or contractor responsible for the underlying contract. The agency’s ethics office would be required to determine that the compensation is not a reward for any action leading to the contract award and would not affect the integrity of the procurement process.[4]

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), passed 347-73.

<USvoteinfo year="2007" chamber="house" rollcall="156" />

Articles and resources

Related SourceWatch articles

Sources

  1. Robert McElroy, "Government Contractors Face New Regulations Under Reform Bill," TheWeekInCongress, March 16, 2007.
  2. Robert McElroy, "Government Contractors Face New Regulations Under Reform Bill," TheWeekInCongress, March 16, 2007.
  3. Robert McElroy, "Government Contractors Face New Regulations Under Reform Bill," TheWeekInCongress, March 16, 2007.
  4. Robert McElroy, "Government Contractors Face New Regulations Under Reform Bill," TheWeekInCongress, March 16, 2007.

External resources

External articles