Government needs to change its tech process

By Dana Blankenhorn | Jul 9, 2009 |

The last decade has featured a great subterranean struggle within the federal bureaucracy between advocates of making and buying IT resources.

It was not a fair fight.

The advocates of making IT, most of them Veterans Administration employees working on that agency’s VistA system, were always outgunned by contracting advocates within the Bush Administration.

Contractors promise to get it done quickly, and for a set price, so they still have the advantage. As evidence Recovery.gov, the Web site devoted to government transparency, will be managed under a proprietary $18 million contract given yesterday to Smartronix, a veteran contracting firm in Maryland.

It’s actually part of a larger award called GSA/Alliant, which the Smartronix Web site describes as a “indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) Government-Wide Acquisition Contract (GWAC) offering a broad range of information technology (IT) products and services to federal and Department of Defense (DoD) agencies.”

Betcha you can hide some fancy cars and toilet seats in that.

A smarter way to go is described in the Washington Monthly this month by author Phillip Longman. Code Red describes threats to the VistA process launched over the last years by proprietary vendors like Cerner, which has already carved the agency’s lab processes into its silo and now wants to carve up everything else.

This basic choice, between hiring someone to do something or building the tools necessary to do the job yourself, may be the hardest thing for the Obama Administration to get right.

Contractors have lobbyists, they make political contributions, they make big promises and offer “one throat to choke.” Until you try to get your hands around that throat, at which point you’re talking to a bunch of lawyers whose charges somehow wind up on your next contracting bill.

Hiring programmers to create an open source solution costs a lot less, however, and results in code that can interoperate with that of private vendors, because it’s visible, transparent, and accessible.

We’re not talking about “free” software here, as in free beer, but “free software” as in code that anyone else can use, modify, and enhance, in a spirit of cooperation.

This open source movement has been transforming how business is done for a decade. Giant companies like IBM have used the open source process to rationalize product lines, to work more closely with customers, and even to work alongside nominal competitors.

Isn’t it time for the government to capitalize on this movement, and gain its benefits? IBM is just one of many companies making big money off open source, so we’re not talking about a choice between capitalism and socialism.

We’re talking about getting more benefit from the public’s money. We’re talking about getting the code as well as the work. We’re talking about having the government join the 21st century.

 

Smartplanet TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

The following tags are supported in Smartplanet comments:
<b></b> <i></i> <u></u> <pre></pre>

Leave a Reply

  1. Name: You are currently: a Guest |
advertisement

Quick Poll

advertisement
Click Here
advertisement
Click Here
advertisement

John Dodge

John Dodge has answered the call of journalism for 33 years, most of the time covering technology, engineering and business. While he's run magazines, newsweeklies and web sites, reporting and writing always took up half his time. He has have plied his craft at the WSJ, Boston Globe, PC Week (now eWeek), EDN, Design News, Electronic Business, Bio-IT World, Health-IT World, the Lowell Sun, Haverhill Gazette and Newburyport Daily News. He would have like to have been around when Boston supported seven or more newspapers (1940s) and while steam locomotives still pulled trains, but that era was nearly over by the time he raced into the world. That said, he has been blogging and shooting and editing video, writing for web and other online contents tasks for years now.

He has won numerous journalism awards in the past two years, including two Eddie Golds, one Neal finalist and the IEEE Award for Distinguished Journalism all for his reporting and coverage of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner.

Besides his family and myriad hobbies, reporting and writing is why he gets up in the morning. His personal blog focuses on netbooks and is called The Dodge Retort.

John Dodge

John Dodge prides himself on completely independent journalism. His opinions, observations and reporting are not influenced by any financial holdings. He holds no shares in computer, electronics, software or Internet companies. He also has no business affiliations with organizations except with those for which he creates content as a freelancer.

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for nearly 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985. He founded the Interactive Age Daily for CMP Media, and has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age's "NetMarketing" supplement, and dozens of other publications over the years.

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a technology reporter since 1982, a business reporter since 1978, and a writer for as long as he can remember. His Schwab IRA has a few tech stocks in it, most notably some Intel and Applied Materials bought over 10 years ago. But the vast majority of his tiny fortune (emphasis on the word tiny) is invested in mutual funds. He presently writes for no one else but ZDNet, SmartPlanet and himself. But if you've got an opportunity let him know. If he takes the gig he"ll first add it to this disclosure page.
The Thinking Tech blog focuses on technologies such as virtualization, smart electric grids, enterprise 2.0, open source, data center management, green technology and the intersection between the innovation and application of these advancements.