Budget bans disclosure of contractors' political contributions

[Editor's Note: This story was changed to correctly present the administration's intent of the provision. To read a new and updated version of this story, click here.] 

The Obama administration did not back off its efforts to require contractors to disclose political campaign contributions when they submit contract bids.

The idea first surfaced in April 2011, when the  administration began circulating a draft executive order that would have directed agencies to gather information from companies about their political contributions. The administration had hoped such transparency would prevent contributions from influencing contract decisions.

But in the administration's 2013 budget proposal, officials does not want to  forbid agencies from collecting such information.

The plan had sparked strong objections on Capitol Hill, leading to the introduction of several bills as well as congressional hearings.

During one hearing in May, senators warned Dan Gordon, then administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, of the consequences of such a rule. Gordon would not comment on the proposal at the hearing because it was only in draft form. However, he said evaluations of companies’ bids should be objective and should not be influenced by who or what a bidder supports. And if a company believes its bid was unfairly evaluated, he said the firm have recourse by filing a bid protest.

Congress has already blocked the controversial proposal though. With support among both Republicans and Democrats, the fiscal 2012 National Defense Authorization Act included a provision that blocks the disclosures with bids. President Barack Obama signed the bill into law in January.

About the Author

Matthew Weigelt is a freelance journalist who writes about acquisition and procurement.

FCW in Print

In the latest issue: Looking back on three decades of big stories in federal IT.

Featured

  • Anne Rung -- Commerce Department Photo

    Exit interview with Anne Rung

    The government's departing top acquisition official said she leaves behind a solid foundation on which to build more effective and efficient federal IT.

  • Charles Phalen

    Administration appoints first head of NBIB

    The National Background Investigations Bureau announced the appointment of its first director as the agency prepares to take over processing government background checks.

  • Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)

    Senator: Rigid hiring process pushes millennials from federal work

    Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) said agencies are missing out on younger workers because of the government's rigidity, particularly its protracted hiring process.

  • FCW @ 30 GPS

    FCW @ 30

    Since 1987, FCW has covered it all -- the major contracts, the disruptive technologies, the picayune scandals and the many, many people who make federal IT function. Here's a look back at six of the most significant stories.

  • Shutterstock image.

    A 'minibus' appropriations package could be in the cards

    A short-term funding bill is expected by Sept. 30 to keep the federal government operating through early December, but after that the options get more complicated.

  • Defense Secretary Ash Carter speaks at the TechCrunch Disrupt conference in San Francisco

    DOD launches new tech hub in Austin

    The DOD is opening a new Defense Innovation Unit Experimental office in Austin, Texas, while Congress debates legislation that could defund DIUx.

Reader comments

Tue, Feb 14, 2012 SuZieCoyote

Asking companies to put their political donations on bids opens the game up for many types of corruption. I.e., a company may not get a win if they give money to the "wrong" candidate - and in Defense, the wrong candidate is mostly democratic. I'm surprised the Obama administration would support such a thing.

Tue, Feb 14, 2012 fritz

Full disclosure of any contractors political contributions is a good idea and the contractors shouldn't have to hide anything unless these contributions were outright bribes.

Tue, Feb 14, 2012

Just more proof that our government is bought and paid for by corporations. Taxpayers are merely an income stream. I guess we need to change it to "Government of the people, by the companies, and for the companies."

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

More from 1105 Public Sector Media Group