Anonymous wrote:Probably the main reason they are doing this is to make it easier to funnel as much money to Elon as possible. Too bad, because it really did need a revision by adults.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is far too complex of a regulation. A LOT of vendors abuse it by launching protests that are frivolous. Plus there are all these incredibly stupid and arcane rules for source selection and publicizing requirements. What would take a private company a week to buy 500 laptops could take an agency up to 3 months. The FAR should be no more than 30 pages in length plus NO agency supplements should be allowed.

Streamline it asap!!!!

Publicizing requirements and having rules about how to select the source sounds crazy! Why would they want to do that? That would totally get in the way of just funneling money to their preferred vendors.

Anonymous wrote:The FAR is a huge pain for both the government and contractors, and complying drives acquisition costs and schedules. It does serve to make a level playing field among bidders, and very few Federal contract selections are overturned after the fact. My guess is that, once again, the Administration will take a decent idea (streamlining acquisitions) and screw it up by moving too fast. Coincidentally the main beneficiaries will somehow turn out to be Trump campaign donors. Just a hunch.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/23/us/politic...musk-doge-trump.html

Within the Trump administration’s Defense Department, Elon Musk’s SpaceX rocketry is being trumpeted as the nifty new way the Pentagon could move military cargo rapidly around the globe.

In the Commerce Department, SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet service will now be fully eligible for the federal government’s $42 billion rural broadband push, after being largely shut out during the Biden era.

At NASA, after repeated nudges by Mr. Musk, the agency is being squeezed to turn its focus to Mars, allowing SpaceX to pursue federal contracts to deliver the first humans to the distant planet.

And at the Federal Aviation Administration and the White House itself, Starlink satellite dishes have recently been installed, to expand federal government internet access.

Mr. Musk, as the architect of a group he called the Department of Government Efficiency, has taken a chain saw to the apparatus of governing, spurring chaos and dread by pushing out some 100,000 federal workers and shutting down various agencies, though the government has not been consistent in explaining the expanse of his power.

But in selected spots across the government, SpaceX is positioning itself to see billions of dollars in new federal contracts or other support, a dozen current and former federal officials said in interviews with The New York Times.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I worked with a federal government agency for a short relatively short amount of time—up until recently. I feel like I went to Catholic School and quickly learned to hate myself (Some Catholics might understand that reference).

I am proud of the work I was able to accomplish. Yet it was slow. I would estimate I accomplished half of what I was capable of accomplishing. Both people and institution stood in my —and others — way.

I have to admit I received plenty of expressions of “surprise,” when I did help get things done. It was a huge turn-off.

Of course, I had to deal with a ton of B.S and I am used to BS having working in large institutions. Yet it was an astoundingly tall heap of BS that seemed unnecessary— and it became very much part of the culture.

Things weren’t working well. It WAS culture. None of what I describe is an endorsement of what is happening now: changes that are without transparency and at a clip that is mind-boggling.

Beyond confounding, the current changes are rolled out with displays of “mockery” that makes me feel uneasy. Those statements seem short term, makes me question the motivation behind these changes. The daily public statements feel personal and uncivil.

All said, the judicial branch seems like a competent and functional branch right. It still recruits our our brightest and best. State Department, DoD and others have exemplary people working for them. Others indeed need to be cut.

I am concerned. But I’m not upset about overhauling the FAR and anything OP has outlined here.

The general idea of overhauling the FAR isn’t a bad one, as it is in dire need of a refresh. Problem is, people who have little to no govt experience are leading the charge. They are unaware of the various processes that may or may not work.

Here is the fundamental problem, no one who nows the FAR wants to change it because they benefit from it. So if you're ever going to fix it, it has to be done by an outsider.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I worked with a federal government agency for a short relatively short amount of time—up until recently. I feel like I went to Catholic School and quickly learned to hate myself (Some Catholics might understand that reference).

I am proud of the work I was able to accomplish. Yet it was slow. I would estimate I accomplished half of what I was capable of accomplishing. Both people and institution stood in my —and others — way.

I have to admit I received plenty of expressions of “surprise,” when I did help get things done. It was a huge turn-off.

Of course, I had to deal with a ton of B.S and I am used to BS having working in large institutions. Yet it was an astoundingly tall heap of BS that seemed unnecessary— and it became very much part of the culture.

Things weren’t working well. It WAS culture. None of what I describe is an endorsement of what is happening now: changes that are without transparency and at a clip that is mind-boggling.

Beyond confounding, the current changes are rolled out with displays of “mockery” that makes me feel uneasy. Those statements seem short term, makes me question the motivation behind these changes. The daily public statements feel personal and uncivil.

All said, the judicial branch seems like a competent and functional branch right. It still recruits our our brightest and best. State Department, DoD and others have exemplary people working for them. Others indeed need to be cut.

I am concerned. But I’m not upset about overhauling the FAR and anything OP has outlined here.

The general idea of overhauling the FAR isn’t a bad one, as it is in dire need of a refresh. Problem is, people who have little to no govt experience are leading the charge. They are unaware of the various processes that may or may not work.

Anonymous wrote:It is far too complex of a regulation. A LOT of vendors abuse it by launching protests that are frivolous. Plus there are all these incredibly stupid and arcane rules for source selection and publicizing requirements. What would take a private company a week to buy 500 laptops could take an agency up to 3 months. The FAR should be no more than 30 pages in length plus NO agency supplements should be allowed.

Streamline it asap!!!!

Anonymous wrote:I worked with a federal government agency for a short relatively short amount of time—up until recently. I feel like I went to Catholic School and quickly learned to hate myself (Some Catholics might understand that reference).

I am proud of the work I was able to accomplish. Yet it was slow. I would estimate I accomplished half of what I was capable of accomplishing. Both people and institution stood in my —and others — way.

I have to admit I received plenty of expressions of “surprise,” when I did help get things done. It was a huge turn-off.

Of course, I had to deal with a ton of B.S and I am used to BS having working in large institutions. Yet it was an astoundingly tall heap of BS that seemed unnecessary— and it became very much part of the culture.

Things weren’t working well. It WAS culture. None of what I describe is an endorsement of what is happening now: changes that are without transparency and at a clip that is mind-boggling.

Beyond confounding, the current changes are rolled out with displays of “mockery” that makes me feel uneasy. Those statements seem short term, makes me question the motivation behind these changes. The daily public statements feel personal and uncivil.

All said, the judicial branch seems like a competent and functional branch right. It still recruits our our brightest and best. State Department, DoD and others have exemplary people working for them. Others indeed need to be cut.

I am concerned. But I’m not upset about overhauling the FAR and anything OP has outlined here.