"No one really cares about procurement, but Gerry dug his teeth into it"

Motorcity said:

Is the statement from Tom Davis accurate?

No experience to say one way or the othter but it would appear that the late Congressman was on committees that would have peaked his interest.

Motorcity said:

Is procurement sort of an afterthought for politicians?

From experience, albeit limited and from years back, yes and no. Their invovlement is fostered by personal interest yet in my view sometimes fostered by lobbyists and staffers.

Motorcity said:

Is FAR reform and procurement in general really seen as a political backwater or a chore by our folks on Capitol Hill.

History I would suggest supports that procurement is a rollercoaster, sometimes at the forefront and sometimes not. Today we are at the top of the ride.

Gerry Connelly coauthored the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA). Among other things it led to the way Governmentwide Acquisition Contracts (GWACS) are established, appointment of agency CIOs, and requirement for development and approval of business cases before proceeding with new systems. He also was as responsible as anyone for government use of cloud computer and establishment of processes, guides, and training to acquire.

On 5/22/2025 at 11:54 AM, Motorcity said:

He stated that no one really cares about procurement...

That's an exaggeration. It might be truer to say that nobody thinks about procurement/contracting very much until something goes wrong. However, I think congressional interest in procurement/contracting is much less intense today than it was in the past.

During the 1950s through the mid-1990s, congressional interest in procurement/contracting was fairly intense. During those years Congress regularly conducted lengthy hearings and published voluminous investigations of various issues in procurement/contracting, especially defense contracting, and especially about competition and contract pricing. But after the "reform" legislation of the 1990s congressional interest seems to have waned.

Since the mid-1990s intense partisanship has led to congressional malfunction, which continues in the present day. Today's Congress is not as interested in routine government functions as it was in the past. It's members now fight over issues of what should be the function, focus, size and political orientation and goals of government. But procurement/contracting is still of concern to some.

I think a systematic study of mentions of "procurement" and "contracting" in the Congressional Record over time would support my beliefs.