August 26, 2008

Letter: Baseless attacks on feds undermine public confidence

Your Aug. 22 story “Senator: Fed workers miss millions of hours” makes use of politically driven data to draw conclusions that are both speculative and unsupported.

The object of the report by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) — filled with innuendoes and extrapolations and completely without credibility — appears to be an effort to show that federal employees are not doing their jobs for the public. Any such charge is baseless.

The dedication to duty and commitment to excellence on the part of federal employees are widely accepted and appreciated in this country.

Although the political season usually shows an increase in attacks on these valued public servants, such attacks serve only to weaken unnecessarily and unwisely the faith of Americans in their government.

Colleen M. Kelley
National President
National Treasury Employees Union


What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to letters@fcw.com (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.

Comments (1)

August 19, 2008

Letter: Make set-asides fair for everyone

Regarding "Bill would kill rule on women-owned business": It is high time all targeted socioeconomic programs come under scrutiny. It would be most helpful first, however, if the data on which these programs get scrutinized are reviewed for accuracy.

The procurement data is often wrong because, as with any computer-based or Web-based system, the human operator is fallible and does indeed put garbage into the system. Then the Small Business Administration pays (how much?) to Rand to "study" the 2004-2005 (old) data, throwing good money after bad. They make a recommendation which causes "outrage" by certain Congressfolk. They try to kill the bill.

Stop wasting my money!

Here are the list of current set-asides:

Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, 8(a), Historically Underutilized Business Zone, Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business, Veteran-Owned Small Business, and finally, but not really, Woman-Owned Business. I say this because there is no set-aside or contractual preference for woman-owned businesses, only the appearance of a set-aside strategically veiled (most recently by President Bill Clinton via executive order) as a preference. But it is really only a "goal" that cannot be met without the authority to set aside for such businesses.

I am of the opinion that, in America, the free enterprise system should prevail. If you can compete and win a source selection, based on the criteria established at the best value to the taxpayer, then you should win the contract award. I don't care what color you are, where you live or what you did before you started your business. I care, as a taxpayer, only that you are the most qualified to meet the requirement at the best value to me.

However, if we continue to have set-aside programs based on race, unemployment stats, previous roles in life, then I am all for a gender-based preference as well. And while the 8a, SDB, SDVOSB, HUBZone preferences are not limited as to NAICS code, then why discriminate against the women, who, as a class of business owners, are indeed a minority concern worthy of the same protections as races that have been discriminated against historically?

Either wipe out the set-asides entirely or make them fair and equally applicable to each socioeconomic category in every NAICS code.

While I realize the political appointees at SBA might have to be appointed elsewhere, I don't think they would be missed by (m)any, either in or outside the government.

Anonymous


What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to letters@fcw.com (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.

Comments (1)

August 19, 2008

Letter: Expand trusted-traveler program to frequent foreign vistors

Regarding "DHS' trusted-traveler program expands": I feel deep respect for the women and men of  Customs and Border Protection who protect this country from possible terrorist attacks and other threats.

However, every time my mother, who is a Mexican citizen, travels to the United States, CBP makes her to stay in one of the rooms for a four-hour interview. The situation always ends in my mother being released, but she suffers the agony of thinking about the next time she will have to go through the same thing to visit her son, who is an American citizen.

Last time, when she explained that she was coming here to visit her family, the officer in charge told her that to avoid these kind of situations she "should become an American citizen," which is an insult to people who have no intention of living in the United States on a permanent basis.

My mother has a good financial situation and owns an apartment in the United States. Like other middle-class Mexicans who come to visit and not to stay, she has been making a contribution to Uncle Sam and the economy of the United States. Maybe extending the trusted-traveler program to foreign visitors would help people like my mother, who is 70 years old and frustrated traveling under the described conditions.

Anonymous


What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to letters@fcw.com (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.

Comments (0)

August 14, 2008

Letter: Terrorism intelligence key info for fusion centers

Regarding "Justice wants criminal intell systems to include terrorism info": The Justice Department is right on target with its suggestion to include terrorist-related intelligence within the criminal intelligence paradigm. As we have learned, local terror cells will fund their activities through criminal schemes.

Identity theft, credit card fraud, drug trafficking, and the sale of untaxed cigarettes provides robust levels of illicit dollars needed to support a cell's ability to move about at will while planning an attack.
New technology and processes has made it possible to tag data in such a way as to ensure that those people viewing secure information have the necessary security clearances.

The first step, which is presently being rolled out, is to sustain a uniform SAR (suspicious activity report) system that can be integrated with local criminal intelligence. Utilizing the $380M Fusion Center platform is a logical first step, but in view of Fusion Center information sharing failures noted in a recent Congressional report (1/18/2008, "Fusion Centers: Issues and Options for Congress"), the effort may never realize its true value. Much can be learned from local fusion center-like projects. In New York City, the NYPD's Real Time Crime Center (RTCC) is an example of how an organization 40,000+ strong can change the way they view information and their business: policing our streets.

In my view, federal projects overlook the importance of personnel involvement at the granular level. Except for federal agents working side-by-side with local law enforcement in the various JTTF units, federal views are more often lofty and from a distance. The RTCC employed a model where experience from real world working detectives was utilized to fashion investigative tools that have driven crime reduction and provided a model to countries and military branches throughout the world.

I feel privileged to have been a part of the RTCC as an analyst and a person whose experience was called upon to create custom data applications. In my current position as V.P. of the Data Vision Group's Public Safety Practice, I am always spreading the word about collaboration and sharing and the means to successfully and efficiently achieve it.

Fusing terror and criminal intelligence is not only logical, it's right for our country. When has looking at half a picture ever been better than seeing the whole picture? As long as we take steps to correct fusion center sharing issues, infusing terror intelligence will have an impact.

Gary A. Maio

What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to letters@fcw.com (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.

Comments (1)

August 11, 2008

Letter: Civil servants among the best

Regarding "Editorial: Encouraging mediocrity": Here goes another cry of "mediocrity" in the federal government. Your argument for action by congressional committees acting on White House nominations could have been better framed. But I guess your readers expect you to play the same ol' drum beat.

Although I understand the frustration you may have for the delays and/or failures by the Senate to approve the two nominees mentioned in your article, I take offense to the overall tone of your comments. The implication is that federal agencies are staffed by less than the "best and brightest." You all but say that it is only the mediocre who would consider working for a federal agency.

Most of my "so-so" co-workers, colleagues and I are very serious about the work we do, and we work very hard — often doing thankless tasks for the American people, the very people — like you, for instance — who have no more regard for us than to think that we are just a bunch of so-so, less than the best and brightest, overpaid people whose jobs can best be done and should be done by a contractor anyway.

For the record, I would not hesitate to line up the knowledge base and analytical skills (assuming that these are among the attributes that make them who they are) of any of my co-workers with any of the best and brightest who have chosen not to work in the public sector.

Nominees to federal agency positions come and go. All they do is voice and try to enact the sitting president's agenda for the particular agency. The people who really make things work are the many unknown and unheralded employees who enter federal buildings day in and day out. Many, by the way, happen to be some of the best and brightest that this country has to offer.

William Wilson


What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to letters@fcw.com (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.

Comments (1)