The Hill: Opposition To Contractors Disclosure Rule Grows Among Dems

Leaked: Obama E.O

Today in Washington, D.C. - May 13, 2011:
The Senate has adjourned and will reconvene at 2 PM on Monday. On Tuesday, the Senate is scheduled to take up the nomination of Susan L. Carney to be United States Circuit Judge for the Second Circuit.  Yesterday the Senate voted 94-0 to confirm Michael Urbanski to be U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Virginia.

The House today passed (392-15) a funding bill for 16 intelligence agencies, including the CIA, the National Security Agency and the Defense Intelligence Agency. they also used the funding bill to also commend the operatives who were critical in hunting down al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden. The Senate already passed a similar resolution 97-0, but House rules no restrict the use of resolutions. So, a provision was placed in the House funding bill which passed 406-0 with four Democrats voting present. The amount of current funding for specific intelligence agencies is classified.

Alan Zibel, Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES reported today that "House lawmakers unveiled seven bills Friday to speed up the eventual closure of government-controlled mortgage giants Fannie Mae ( FNMA) and Freddie Mac (FMCC), part of a Republican push to dramatically reduce the U.S. government's role in the mortgage market. The bills are part of a GOP strategy keep public attention on Fannie and Freddie, the two mortgage giants whose government takeover in fall 2008 has cost taxpayers about $138 billion so far.

The Hill reports today, “Democratic opposition is growing to a draft proposal under consideration by President Obama that would force prospective government contractors to reveal political contributions. Top Democrats in both chambers have come forward in recent days with concerns that such a mandate would politicize the bidding process at the expense of its integrity. They’ve joined Republican leaders and the business lobby in urging administration officials to scrap their plans to adopt the rule. The latest resistance came Thursday from Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee Chairman Joe Lieberman (Conn.), an Independent who caucuses with Democrats, and Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), head of the Homeland Security’s Government Contracting subcommittee, who sent a letter to President Obama expressing their dissent. . . . The concerns echo those from House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.), who told reporters Tuesday that political contributions should be immaterial to the bidding process.”

Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) pointed out the one-sided political nature of this executive order in an op-ed for Politico yesterday, writing, “While the White House is trying to frame this as a step in government ‘transparency,’ they continue, hypocritically, to refuse to apply the same so-called transparency requirements to their own liberal supporters and allies who receive billions of taxpayer dollars through federal grants and funding. There is just no way to ensure a fair and objective federal contracting review and award process under this policy. Instead, companies that donate to Republicans would risk the loss of business – even if they prove to be the most qualified competitor. It’s this fear of political influence that has led groups like the Professional Services Council – a coalition that represents 350 companies – to condemn the proposal aggressively. ‘The rule would actually do precisely what it is intended to stop,’ the coalition director said, by ‘inject[ing] politics into the source selection process.’”

Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey explained political nature of the executive order thusly: “[P]ose the question this way: would Democrats have agreed to give George W. Bush this authority?  Ronald Reagan?  In both cases, we would have heard screaming from the Left about political payoffs and crony capitalism. Or, even better:  How would they have reacted to Richard Nixon demanding to know which political organizations key executives supported before having his administration make procurement decisions? . . . If we’re looking at authority that we wouldn’t give to Nixon, then we shouldn’t allow Obama or any other President to exercise it, either.”

As Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said to reporters Tuesday, “I’m glad to see that somebody on the other side is standing up to this blatant attempt to intimidate people into either not contributing to causes the administration opposes or . . . basically, as Senator Collins has pointed out on several occasions, basically repealing the Hatch Act by putting politics back into the procurement process -- a truly outrageous suggestion, which the White House still has an opportunity to not go forward with. We’ll be watching that very closely.”

---

Tags: Washington, D.C., US Senate, US House, White House, Executive Order, government procurement, disclose procedures, free speech, Intelligence funding, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!