> It would require a complete revamp of the entire DoD contracting process. Which may or may not be something that can or should be done, but with the understan

> It would require a complete revamp of the entire DoD contracting process. Which may or may not be something that can or should be done, but with the understanding that it IS the way it is, for a very good reason: to prevent fraud. Which was a painful learning experience going back to the very beginning of the Federal practice of providing national defense. The current system is NOT perfect, but you don't throw the whole system away in pursuit of "cost savings" or you'll attract every grifter and con artist out there into this business looking to scam every penny they can from taxpayers. The thing is, at least for software dev, DoD projects don't know their software requirements any more than private sector ones do. Plus, the current acquisition system is by no means more fair or less riddled with fraud. The WWII model of much easier acquisition regulations run by bureaus or offices with deep technical expertise and independent auditing did quite well. Just because we intend to reduce fraud with a given set of policies doesn't mean we should assume that the policy actually works, or that the other problems such policies introduce are to be ignored as a result.