The administration’s push to undermine watchdog agencies may bring short-term gains, but will more likely damage the market and good government over the long haul. The Trump administration is systematically dismantling much of the government’s oversight infrastructure, which government contractors rely on to support a fair and even competitive environment.
The Government Accountability Office, which manages bid protests and tracks government operations, has been a popular target of the administration.
Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, has made no secret of his disdain for GAO and said it should not exist. His rancor for the watchdog agency was in response to GAO reports that several Trump administration actions ran afoul of federal law.
The administration also has vocally criticized and even fired several inspectors generals. They play a critical role at individual agencies hunting for fraud, waste, abuse and misconduct.
Trump fired the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics because he did not like the July jobs report. The move has raised serious concerns that BLS’ independence as a source of economic data has been undermined in favor of political goals.
After the Congressional Budget Office said the so-called Big Beautiful Bill would add trillions to the national debt, the administration and other Republicans said that CBO was “crazy” and worked to undermine the non-partisan organization’s credibility.
The Trump administration also has purged Democrats from multiple independent agencies and bureaus. The White House also has not spared Republicans who are seen as disloyal.
The underlying message is clear – Toe the line or you’re out.
For the Trump administration, the first duty of any official and any agency is to fall in step with the president. Facts don’t matter. The data doesn’t matter. Traditions don’t matter. Maybe even the mission doesn’t matter if it runs counter to Trump administration priorities.
Every president has the right to put his own people in charge of agencies to carry out his policies and objectives. But eight months into a second Trump term, we are seeing an attack on the underlying infrastructure of how agencies operate and the rules they follow.
There is disdain for anything that doesn’t support what the administration believes or wants to accomplish.
Many executives I have spoken with emphasize some positives they see from the administration, such as streamlining acquisition regulations and an emphasis on new technologies such as artificial intelligence. They are positives for sure.
Contracts and task orders need to be awarded more quickly and the barriers to entry for new companies and new technologies need to be lower. The administration’s major overhaul of the Federal Acquisition Regulation is long overdue and should continue.
Some potential benefits for contractors include quicker awards, which means faster growth, and easier pathways for introducing new technologies and other innovations that are being quickly adopted in commercial markets.
But the federal sector will never be a commercial marketplace and for good reasons. These are tax dollars, and they need to be protected from waste and misuse. You can modernize procurement while maintaining robust oversight – the two are not mutually exclusive.
To understand what the government is doing and how it is doing it, you need data that is unbiased and reliable.
Less oversight will mean it is easier to get the work done. Fewer headaches and delays.
But those short-term benefits come at a significant long-term cost. GAO, IGs and other oversight mechanisms may create friction, but they are critical to the long-term health of the market.
This will damage the market through reduced scrutiny of contractor performance, increased fraud risk, and weakened competitive guardrails.
Agencies may save money, but costs will likely increase because we will see more cost overruns and delays. More projects will miss the mark.
As the Trump administration drives toward less oversight and accountability, the market will be weakened instead of strengthened.
None of this is about political disagreements. It is about the dismantling of systems that create a functioning and predictable marketplace.
A healthy market needs reliable data and analysis, consistent oversight, independent regulatory frameworks and a professional civil service. All of that is being undermined by the current administration.
Without these institutions, the GovCon market will be more volatile and less predictable. Political favoritism will trump merit. Competition will be reduced. It will be harder to do business.
The ecosystem is not on a healthy path and we should all be concerned.
]]>
