Keep Politics Out of Federal Contracts
The Obama administration floated a draft Executive Order in April that would require federal agencies to collect information about the campaign contributions and other political expenditures of any company applying for a federal contract. At first glance, this may seem like an acceptable method to promote transparency in the federal contracting process. In practice, however, it would create a number of disturbing consequences.
Thousands of jobs are generated through federal contracts -- including many in the state of Oklahoma. The federal contract process provides employment for workers at all levels in such fields as construction of roads and buildings, medical research, education, rural development, and military construction. Far from being a system that enables a privileged few to make a fortune on government work, it is actually a rare example of government spending creating jobs in the private sector. When the competitive bidding process works as designed, taxpayer money is protected because the most qualified, cost-effective company is selected for the project.
If the president's policy is implemented, politics will be injected into a process that should be based solely on professional capability. Company executives -- and the many workers they employ -- will have to worry that they will be rejected for government projects on the basis of past political activity. This would create a chilling effect on job creators' First Amendment rights to participate in the political process, and it would open to the door to a federal procurement system in which winners and losers are determined based on how well applicants' political views align with whichever political party happens to be in office.
To prevent this unacceptable politicization of the contracting process, I introduced an amendment to this year's Defense Authorization legislation to block the president's proposal. The amendment, which passed on a bipartisan vote of 261-163, keeps current disclosure laws in place but prevents federal agencies from requiring contract applicants to provide information on political contributions as a condition for eligibility.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce urged support for the amendment, stating that it "reaffirms the principle, currently embodied in federal procurement laws, that the executive branch has an obligation to procure goods and services based on the best value for the American taxpayer, and not on political considerations."
Besides being bad policy, the proposed Executive Order is yet another example of the Obama administration attempting to enact by fiat what they cannot pass through the legislative process. Congress already considered and rejected a similar policy in the last session, when the president's party controlled both chambers. To ensure the administration does not manage to push the policy through, I have joined Reps. Darrell Issa and Sam Graves in introducing the “Keeping Politics Out of Federal Contracting Act of 2011” Like my amendment, this bill would prevent the disclosure requirements from becoming law. U.S. Senator Susan Collins, Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, and Senators Lamar Alexander and Rob Portman introduced a companion bill in the Senate.
Government agencies should award contracts based on merit and value to taxpayers -- not politics. Americans should have the right to support the political candidates and causes of their choosing without fear that their income will be jeopardized. Political affiliation should not be a consideration in the federal procurement process, and the legislation I have introduced will ensure that it won't be.