David Thomas: “The idea that is far-sweeping and far-ranging is that this has been in place for all these years until now. OMB simply…”

“The idea that is far-sweeping and far-ranging is that this has been in place for all these years until now. OMB simply changed it. It puts it back where it was, before OMB changed this. So the idea that it is an unknown is simply not true. It is simply not the case. It simply says to OMB, you cannot enforce these new rules that you put out that have changed what we have been doing now forever. So that is really what it amounts to. I think it is very important that we move on these. We have had some other debates today about whether there have been hearings or whether there have not been hearings. It depends on which side you are on as to whether that is important. But the fact is, this is a relatively minor change and one that simply puts us back to where it is. If, in the hearings that subsequently occur, there is evidence that the OMB change is appropriate, then I urge the committee to authorize, in committee, them to do that. In the meantime, I think we ought not remove the requirements, the simple requirements that if you are going to offer a service to another agency--not services for yourself, offer them for another agency, which is a growing tendency within Government--that, first of all, you have to consider the outrageous notion of seeing if there is an alternative that is less expensive. That is really not very difficult. It is really not a new idea. Most people who do significant work contracting try to get more than one idea of what it costs.…”