One has a similar feeling today, and the over-the-top rhetoric during the hearings on Capitol Hill certainly feeds the theory — unproven by actual evidence, in my mind — that there is a systemic problem.
That being said, the Washington Post today has a story headlined, GSA under the microscope, about growing discussions about fundamentally changing the General Services Administration:
Congress may restructure the Public Buildings Service following the scandal over spending on conferences that brought down the agency’s commissioner, Robert A. Peck, and General Services Administration chief Martha N. Johnson. Some House Republicans, including Rep. Jeff Denham (R-Calif.), said they may consider trying to do away with GSA altogether. District Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) hasn’t gone that far, but she said the GSA’s dual missions of signing real estate deals and managing contracts are largely unrelated and might require separating.
- Does GSA need to be fundamentally changed? If so, why? If not, why not?
- How should the Obama administration and Congress handle the GSA situation?
- If you did decide to fundamentally change the was general services were administered across government, how should that be done?
I’m going to be doing some research… looking at governments around the world and among states… yes, even the private sector. If you have thoughts or ideas, I’d love to hear them…