Ernest Istook: “Mr. Chairman, I noticed the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) said that the intent is to make sure that, under the…”

“Mr. Chairman, I noticed the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) said that the intent is to make sure that, under the laws that we have passed, there is competition for jobs that are commercial in nature so that Federal employees have the right to compete against the private employees and they are not automatically outsourced. I think that is a very valid position. It is not, however, what the amendment advocates, because the amendment by its express terms prevents public-private competitions. Any time that you set a goal, if you say we are going to have one competition between the public and private sector, it is outlawed. If you say that 1 percent of the commercial jobs in the Federal sector is going to be competed, it is outlawed. The amendment does not do what many people claim it does. The amendment stops all efforts to have public-private competitions to see if we can save taxpayers' money which typically those competitions save the taxpayers 30 to 50 percent. The Department of Defense reports that during the Clinton administration years, they outsourced some 550 different initiatives that will be saving taxpayers about $1.5 billion each year. Those efforts could not be pursued by the administration under the language proposed by the gentleman from Virginia.”