Too bad - as the article implies in several cases, this kind of stuff is all common knowledge in government contracting. The USG has tried to revamp the procur

Too bad - as the article implies in several cases, this kind of stuff is all common knowledge in government contracting. The USG has tried to revamp the procurement processes repeatedly - and not without some success - but the bottom line is that people in positions of power will often give money to whomever they want to give it to, and by imposing more restrictions you just force them to be more creative about how exactly they do this. The most common form is careful phrasing about what exact capabilities are required, such that only one contractor meets those criteria. There was a famous case a few years ago[0] over the Interior Department's email systems in which the contract required compatibility with Microsoft products - Google sued and ultimate won the contract. Senators can blow their tops off all day about this guy's statements but it won't change a thing about the opacity, nepotism, and sometimes complete arbitrariness of the USG procurement process. [0] http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704141104575588641430182832 http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240527487041411045755886...