• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Big Corps get Stimulus Money over Montanans

Mike

Well-known member
Boy.........this has to cut the Zer0 fans to the bone............ :lol: :lol:

State firms cry foul over stimulus projects
Federal approach to contracting tilts toward bigger players
By MICHAEL JAMISON
Missoulian

KALISPELL - Across the nation, local firms can expect to lose billions of economic stimulus dollars to large multinational corporations, thanks to a government contracting scheme that puts paperwork speed ahead of community recovery.

In Montana, that means qualified building firms are out of the loop, while many millions in federal construction funding will go to a California company that recently earned a stern rebuke for its failures in Iraq - a war-profits scandal that cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.

"It's a farce," said Dewey Swank of Kalispell's Swank Enterprises. "It stinks of politics and big special interests."

Over the past several years, Swank has teamed with Montana-based CTA Architects to successfully design and build four federal border stations. Several more ports now are being built along the Montana-Canada line, thanks to the massive stimulus bill, but this time Swank and CTA didn't have a chance to bid. That's because the government is using a controversial contracting method that speeds bidding but also tilts the playing field in favor of mega-companies. It's called IDIQ contracting, which is shorthand for "indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity," and it's essentially an all-you-can-eat money buffet for big corporations.

An IDIQ is a broad and open-ended agreement, in which the government essentially creates a sort of long-term, all-purpose contract under which specific tasks can later be defined. The scheme moves projects quickly, which is a priority for economic stimulus jobs, but critics argue it's anticompetitive, because only a handful of large firms can afford to engage on such undefined and unrestricted terms.

In Montana, where about $78 million is earmarked for border-station construction, that means Swank and CTA are out, while Parsons Corp., from Pasadena, Calif., is in.

Parsons, with 12,000 employees worldwide and revenues pushing $3.5 billion last year, is no stranger to IDIQ contracting, or to the controversy that comes with it.

The company entered Iraq in 2003, with just eight government contracts for reconstruction. But those few vague umbrella agreements eventually came to cover about 1,000 projects in 500 locations. Oversight was spread as thin as the contracts and, when projects stalled, taxpayer money hemorrhaged.

By 2007, the man in charge of overseeing Iraq's reconstruction issued a scathing report to Congress, charging that Parsons had failed to deliver. Hundreds of millions had been spent, Inspector General Stuart W. Bowen said, but 150 health centers did not get built and some work that got done was "substandard."

The company blamed the violence of an active war zone for its failures, although critics such as Bowen pointed out that other contractors continued to perform in Iraq despite the challenges.

"We were told the forces would go in, people would be happy we were there, it would be an easy place to work," company spokeswoman Erin Kuhlman said.

Lawmakers grilled Parsons, castigating management, but in 2007 decided not to exclude the company from future government work, including stimulus contracts.

Swank, for one, wonders why someone with Parsons' recent history is still winning government contracts, and then he answers his own question: "Someone's palm is getting greased."

In fact, Parsons ranked third among the nation's construction-services firms in terms of federal campaign contributions during the 2008 election cycle, donating about $600,000 split almost evenly between Republicans and Democrats. The company also spent more than $1.5 million lobbying federal lawmakers between 2004 and 2008, with $305,000 shelled out during the 2008 presidential election year.

"That," Swank said, "tells me a lot about how things get done."

Jobs at Swank Enterprises have been trimmed by a third, victims of an economic recession fueled by firms deemed "too big to fail." Jobs at CTA have been sliced by 10 percent.

And so before Swank hands over the financial keys to Montana's Hi-Line, he suggests people "take a look at this company's history of delivering the job in remote and difficult places."

Because while he would never suggest that Scobey resembles a war zone, the builder does wonder whether a company not "in-country" has the local experience needed to succeed in such far-flung places.

Asking a Pasadena firm to work Montana's northern border, he said, "is like asking me to work in a country where I don't know the language."

The Department of Homeland Security refused interview requests regarding its contracting methods, but Sahar Wali, at the General Services Administration, said her agency is choosing big firms with IDIQ contracts already in place because recovery funds must move fast if they are to stimulate the economy.

The money for Montana's border stations, for instance, can hit the ground in August, whereas a competitive process involving qualified locals could delay spending until year's end, she said.

"But it's not all about speed," countered Ken Richardson of CTA.

He says haste on Montana's ports will mean breaking ground in winter, which ultimately creates more delay than momentum.

For stimulus to stimulate, Richardson said, it needs to reach all parts of the economy, and not just a few multinational firms.

"I mean, golly, I'm pretty sure Congress wanted that stimulus money to be spread around a little bit."

That was surely the intention of Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., who in recent weeks has met with agency leadership to find stimulus-work opportunities for local firms.

His efforts have resulted in workshops for would-be government contractors and new language putting priority on hiring local subcontractors.

But as the IDIQ process becomes increasingly entrenched in recovery act projects, the trend is clearly toward locals losing to large mega-corporations.

Federal data show that job orders made through pre-existing IDIQ contracts (as opposed to individually bidding jobs) grew from 14 percent of total dollars spent in 1990 to 52 percent in 2005, and it's growing faster than ever now that the stimulus puts priority on speed.

Speed is important, Tester said, but local firms must have the opportunity to compete if the jobs bill is to have its intended effect.


Published on Tuesday, June 09, 2009.
Last modified on 6/9/2009 at 7:05 am


Copyright © The Billings Gazette, a division of Lee Enterprises
 

Mike

Well-known member
La Dee Da Dee Dayyyyyyyyyy

La Dee Da Dee Dohhhhhhhhh

Yoo Hoo...... are their any Liberal, Moonbat, Whacko, Buckwheat Boyz out there from Montana?

:lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Yanuck

Well-known member
Mike said:
The silence is golden? :roll:

wasn't it established a month or so ago that by not commenting it was "backslapping?" so apparently it must be okay that Montana jobs aren't going to locals?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Yanuck said:
Mike said:
The silence is golden? :roll:

wasn't it established a month or so ago that by not commenting it was "backslapping?" so apparently it must be okay that Montana jobs aren't going to locals?

It must be OK. But then they turn around and say that Buckwheat is clamping down on "Big Business"?

They have more than two sides to their faces..................... :wink:
 

Steve

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
I posted this same story (not the same exact article) about 2 weeks ago. To make a point, the same point. Big out of state companies are getting the jobs instead of the local companies which is totally against the idea of the stimulus

is it really totally against the intent of the writers of the stimulus bill?

or was it a flawed bill?

a bill that should have been read first and actually debated?
 

I Luv Herfrds

Well-known member
OK I just gotta ask.
Which is Tweedle Dee and which is Tweedle Dum? :wink: :lol:

as if I need to know. I knew that the money would not enter any local contractors pocket when they passed the stupid thing. Now I just wonder what piece of crap will be sitting at the border and how long will it last. I mean do those idiots even know how cold it gets up here?
 
Top