Presidential Directive on Government Contracting: The presidential directive in 2009 was geared towards reforming the way in which the government acquires goods and services. The directive provided major federal contracting reforms to an extent that executive agencies could expect more accountability and completion in procurement activities of the federal government. The main reason behind the directive was the need for the federal government to take appropriate measures to lessen wasteful spending, fraud, and overcharges. Some of the key steps to be undertaken by the government to reform procurement activities include limiting the use of non-competitive and cost-reimbursement contracts, enhancing acquisition workforce quality, and lessening outsourcing of inherent government functions. The other steps are executing proposals by the Government Accountability Office on how to decrease overpayments and cost overruns and to review the specified high-risk acquisition programs (Moorhouse & Connolly, 2009). President Obama’s directive to lessen the use of cost-reimbursement contracts was based on the increasing preference for competitive fixed-price contracts. This preference was brought by the realization that cost-reimbursement contracting had increased significantly from $71 billion to $135 billion in less than a decade. Therefore, the president wanted to restrict cost-reimbursement contracts in order to lessen spending in government contracting initiatives. This would in turn increase the use of competitive fixed-price contracts while permitting the use of cost-reimbursement contracts only in situations that do not allow the agency to adequately describe its requirements. The preference for a Firm Fixed type contract is influenced by various factors other than the huge costs associated with other types of contracts. One of the major factors contributing to this preference is the significant increase in federal obligations in other types of contracts. This increase is coupled with the lack of a clear and complete picture of the use of cost-reimbursement contracts by the federal government. Actually, a considerable increase in federal obligations has been reported for contracts involving the use of combination strategies. Secondly, the government seems to prefer Firm Fixed type contract because of the recent decision to remove the use of combination strategies. This decision was made as part of initiatives to enhance the effectiveness of all new contract awards from the beginning of the 2010 financial year (“Extent of Federal Spending”, 2009). Third, preference for a Firm Fixed type contract was brought by the difficulties in determining rationales for using other types of contracts.
“President Obama’s FY2014 base budget request of $552.0 billion in discretionary budget Authority for the Department of Defense (DOD) and defense-related programs of other agencies (excluding war costs), exceeded by $53.9 billion the legally binding cap on defense funding for FY2014 that was enacted in 2011 as part of the BCA.” Similarly, in their initial actions on the annual defense funding bills for FY2014, the House and the Armed Servi...
Finally, set aside enough time to carefully review your proposal. During this review, ensure that your story is consistent. Proposals should make a strong case, show a compelling need and show how the proposed activities will effectively address that need. Your Action Plan should name the same target substances you identified in your Community Needs section. The strategies and activities in the action plan should directly relate to your target substances, and your budget should include only the costs associated with those strategies and activities. Use the scoring criteria and point allocations to make sure all RFA requirements are addressed, and score the section as though you were the reviewer. Lastly, allocate enough time at the end of this process to address any delinquencies you find, before submitting your final proposal.
During the study of various reforms that were proposed and denied, both the GOP and Democrats attempted to find a balance that would guarantee the success of their proposals. Years of research, growing ideologies, political views and disregard for the country's constitution sparked an array of alternatives to solve the country's healthcare spending. The expenditure of US healthcare dollars was mostly due to hospital reimbursements, which constitute to 30% (Longest & Darr, 2008). During the research for alternatives, the gr...
In the early 1900s, “restrictive covenants” more specifically racially restrictive covenants were legally enforceable agreements that prohibited landowners from leasing or selling property to minority groups, at that time namely African Americans. The practice of the covenants, private, racially restrictive covenants, originated as a reaction to a court ruling in 1917 “which declared municipally mandated racial zoning unconstitutional . . . leaving the door open for private agreements, such as restrictive covenants, to continue to perpetuate residential segregation” (Boston, n.d.). It was more of a symbolic act than attacking the “discriminatory nature” (Schaefer, 2012, p. 184) of the restrictive covenants, when the Supreme Court found in the 1948 case of Shelley v Kraemer that racially restrictive covenants were unconstitutional. In this particular case, a white couple, the Kraemers lived in a neighborhood in Missouri that was governed by a restrictive covenant. When a black couple moved into their neighborhood, the Kraemers went to the court asking that the covenant be enforced. In a unanimous decision, it was decided, “state courts could not constitutionally prevent the sale of real property to blacks even if that property is covered by a racially restrictive covenant. Standing alone, racially restrictive covenants violate no rights. However, their enforcement by state court injunctions constitutes state action in violation of the 14th Amendment” (Shelley v. Kraemer, 1948). Even though the Supreme Court ruled that the covenants were unenforceable, it was not until 1968 when the Fair Housing Act was passed that it become illegal (Latshaw, 2010). Even though today it is illegal, it might appear that we still have an unspoken...
approach was to be utilized as a framework for financing (Kronenfeld, 2011). In 1972, benefits
The ACA and therefore the american Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) have raised funding to the NHSC loan compensation program, that provides health professionals with up to $60'000 in exchange for 2 years of service in an underserved community. The health reform law additionally modified the approach HRSA administers the program to offer higher awards and additional flexibility, as well as the chance for provid...
People have their own perspective of a government that they envision for their people. Thomas Jefferson has been the president of the United States and ruled under a monarch. Jefferson couldn’t tolerate the abuse from a monarch, so he rebelled against the British crown. In 1776, Thomas Jefferson wrote The Declaration of Independence, and declared the colonies were free from British rule. Before he became the author of The Declaration of Independence, Jefferson was established “ as an ardent republican and revolutionary” (Jacobus 77). Jacobus states Jefferson is, “one of the most versatile Americans of any generation” (Jacobus 78). In The Declaration of Independence, Jefferson and the founding fathers envisioned a government that would govern the people, and the people would be free. The people must be governed with rights, Jefferson implies it’s the government’s duty to guide and secure the people, therefore, he believes the government’s obligation to the individual is more important than the individuals obligation to the state.
On December 8, 2003, President Bush signed into law the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (Pub. L. 108-173). This landmark legislation provides seniors and individuals with disabilities with a prescription drug benefit, more choices, and better benefits under Medicare. It produced the largest overhaul of Medicare in the public health program's 38-year history. The MMA was signed by President George W. Bush on December 8, 2003, after passing in Congress by a close margin. One month later, the ten-year cost estimate was boosted to $534 billion, up more than $100 billion over the figure presented by the Bush administration during Congressional debate. The inaccurate figure helped secure support from fiscally conservative Republicans. It was reported that an administration official, Thomas A. Scully, had concealed the higher estimate and threatened to fire Medicare Chief Actuary Richard Foster if he revealed it. By early 2005, the White House Budget had increased the 10-year estimate to $1.2 trillion.
With his executive orders, Obama has put in restrictions and requirements of agencies that have been seen as excessive, says Nestle from New York University. These regulations include lowering emissions, preventing domestic violence, trying to create jobs for veterans, etc (Lyons, 223). Dan Epstein from Cause of Action says these orders have only served to create politicization of these federal agencies which are meant to be independent, especially of the executive branch. This has given the Obama administration more authority over the agencies and in turn, left the public’s say out of it (Lyons,
Managed care reimbursement models have contributed to risk avoidance by negotiating discounts, discouraging use, and denying payments for charges that appear to be false. Health care reform has increased awareness to the quality of care providers give, thus shifting the responsibility onto the provider to provide quality care or else be forced to receive reduced reimbursements (Buff & Terrell,
(Kidwell, 2005) The government typically hires private security contractors to provide services that formally belonged to military forces such as the protection of high profile dignitaries and the guarding of military installations overseas. The proliferation of private military companies jumped significantly after the events of 9/11. The Bush Administration enacted a three-phase plan to increase the number of private contractors hired. The first phase in the hiring process was to try to release the military to fight the war on terrorism; the second phase was to allow commanders to focus their efforts on winning the war by outsourcing supplementary functions; third, it would support the President’s Management Agenda.
Federal laws and regulations requiring specific action from state and local governments without providing federal funding to pay for it are called “ unfounded mandates.”
Former President Bill Clinton introduced a Health Security Proposal in 1993, which was his attempt for a fundamental reform of the American healthcare system (Longest, 2010). In January of 1993, Clinton announced that he would be putting together a team of experts to review the issue of health care cost and develop a plan to propose to congress (Bok, 1998). On September 22, 1993, Clinton then made a speech to Congress announcing this new health plan (Bok, 1993). In his speech, Clinton urged law makers to “Fix a health care system that is badly broken, giving every American health security-health care that is always there, health care that can never be taken away” (Bok, 1993). He also mentioned in his speech that health care was uncertain and too expensive, too wasteful and too bureaucratic- “It has too much fraud and too much greed” (Rample, 2009).
In “Constitutional Democracy and Bureaucratic Power,” Peter Woll states that our system of government, “. . in many ways supported bureaucratic organization and functions independent of the president,” (311). According to Woll, the Framers intended to establish an independent bureaucracy, as they gave Congress substantial power over the administrative “branch.” However, because of the bureaucracy’s independence, Woll asserts that, though he possesses the authority, the president often lacks the power to control the bureaucracy. Naturally, this can lead to the corruption and inefficiency of the administrative process. Also contributing to this inefficiency and corruption, is the very nature of the bureaucracy itself. By definition, a bureaucracy is a “large, complex organization of appointed officials,” (“American Government: Institutions and Politics”); this inherent complexity causes many of the issues of bureaucracy. In discussing bureaucratic agencies’ budgets, James Wilson claims that “. . since measuring the output of a bureau is often difficult. . .the bureau has a great deal of freedom within which to seek the largest possible budget,” (“The Rise of the Bureaucratic State”, Wilson). Essentially, the vastness of each bureaucratic agency makes close scrutiny a time consuming and futile effort. Additionally, Woll contends that “. . the three branches do not always use to the fullest extent their authority to regulate the bureaucracy,” (“Constitutional Democracy and Bureaucratic Power”, 314). This assertion suggests that perhaps the source of the bureaucracy’s problems lie, not within the institution itself, but within the reluctance of the other branches of government to regulate it. Wilson proffers another explanation for the bureaucracy’s inefficiency in his scrutiny of the USPS, arguing that
Such as the notion of being “over covered”, studies show that 30% or more of U.S health care spending is on unnecessary care, since over-coverage reduces the cost of risky behaviors, such as unhealthy eating and smoking, people who are over covered have less incentives to make healthy lifestyle choices. Approximately 70% of all health care costs are directly related to personal behavior, costs that could have been prevented. Another interesting thing I learned was the idea that in the market for healthcare supply drives demand. In principles, we learned that as supply increased prices would fall. Title five of Obamacare talks about subsidizing education for healthcare workers, creating scholarships and loan repayment programs for physicians and nurses as well other healthcare professions. The government also tried this back in the 70’s with the idea that if there are more doctors there will be an incentive to lower the costs to compete for patients. This did not work out as expected, in healthcare supply drives demand, so when the supply increased, so did demand and, unfortunately so did the prices. When supply is high, doctors may lower their criteria for certain procedures, increasing the number of procedures done, as well as prescribe more visits to patients so that doctors continuously have