Guest Post

By Chris Marschner

Some of our elected leaders would like people to believe that the 2+ million workers are doing yeoman’s work keeping our nation secure and running like a well-oiled machine.  They will suggest to you that only federal workers have access to sensitive data like your personal information.  That is misrepresenting who can get access to your data.

The government uses numerous private contractors to perform all types of specialized services.  Essential IT work such as systems engineering, data security, software development and other user support functions are handled by an array of prime contractors and their sub-contractors.  To do this work, the contractor must be able to access private data.   While some aspects do not require being able to sort through individual records others do.  Software engineers must have the ability to parse records to create templates and test and debug systems.  

Below are a few of these contractors whose employees are not federal employees.   The point I am making is not that these organizations should not be in a position to access private records. The point is that this access happens every day in agencies managed by the Executive branch, whichoversees the agencies that issue contracts to carry out mission-critical services.   

To hear Congress bemoan the fact that the DOGE team is somehow unlawful or illegitimate because they are not federal employees is laughable, and it is also misinformation.  The person responsible for ensuring that the agencies are carrying out the policies laid out by the President through his Cabinet Secretaries is ultimately the President.  As Harry Truman said, “The Buck Stops Here,” “here” being The White House.  

Examples of Prime Contractors:

From the web-site of Mitre Corporation comes the overview of the organization.

Total dollars obligated: $1,501,409,356

MITRE works in the public interest to address complex structural, technical, behavioral, and social challenges that affect health and healthcare delivery.  The goal? Better outcomes to empower patients and clinicians, ensure access to care, improve health equity, accelerate biomedical innovation, and ensure global health security.

We operate the Health FFRDC (Federally Funded Research & Development Center)on behalf of sponsors across the Department of Health and Human Services. Through multi-disciplinary teams, this federally funded research and development center serves all federal agencies with health and human services missions: the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Food and Drug Administration, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Health Resources and Services Administration, Administration for Children and Families, and more.

We advance evidence-based policy making, driving inventive approaches to effective and equitable federal health policies and programs. Our experts bring institutional and policy knowledge, applied science, and systems thinking to identify problems and create solutions.

With an eye to the future, we mobilize the right people, convene stakeholders, and lead public-private partnerships across health and human services sectors to foster advanced innovations.

Our objectivity and trusted access to public and confidential data enable us to create new insights. How? By applying deep systems thinking to spearhead transformative innovations, such as:

• Evaluating the federal government’s Operation Expanded Testing (OpEt) program, which provided COVID-19 testing that helped schools and other congregate settings in some of the hardest-hit areas of the country reopen and operate safely.
• Easing burden on stressed health systems during disease outbreaks, with secure, accessible remote health monitoring and reporting
• Partnering with CDC to create a data-driven approach to address childhood obesity research—now expanding to include adults
• Developing a playbook, at the request of FDA, to provide practical considerations for health delivery organizations to address medical device cybersecurity incidents.
• Analyzing value-based payment models to assure high-quality, lower-cost care
• Addressing equity throughout all aspects of the healthcare delivery system

Other contractors in the IT space with access to sensitive information:

Accenture Inc. : Total dollars obligated: $1,693,430,327. Total number of contract actions: 1,438

Although Accenture Inc. is a management consulting and professional services firm, the company boasts expertise across 40 industries. Its many divisions deal in consulting, strategy, operations, and technology. The company holds more than 6,000 patents or patents pending.

CACI International Inc.: Total dollars obligated: $2,437,108,363 Total number of contract actions: 3,927

CACI International Inc. is a multinational IT and professional services company that provides government services in the realms of intelligence, defense, national security, and government transformation. Its specialties include command and control, business systems, cybersecurity, communications, and surveillance and reconnaissance.

Triwest Healthcare Alliance Corp. Total dollars obligated: $2,444,105,842 Total number of contract actions: 2,761,836

Health benefits management corporation Triwest Healthcare Alliance Corp. holds more than two million government contract actions. One of its biggest clients is the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Centene Corporation: Total dollars obligated: $2,604,090,977 Total number of contract actions: 2,327,806

Centene is a healthcare group that operates several government-sponsored health care programs. Among its contracts are Medicare, Medicaid, correctional healthcare, military and veteran’s healthcare, and the health insurance marketplace.

CSRA Inc. Total dollars obligated: $2,944,849,009 Total number of contract actions: 4,135

CSRA was recently acquired by General Dynamics for $9.7 billion. The company, now a division of GD, provides IT services to the government in areas like national security, healthcare, and civil government.

Unitedhealth Group Incorporated Total dollars obligated: $3,049,750,791 Total number of contract actions: 451

UnitedHealth Group is one of the world’s largest for-profit managed healthcare companies. Aside from its many government-paid contracts, the company provides government employees with healthcare coverage.

Humana Inc. Total dollars obligated: $3,715,224,841 Total number of contract actions: 344

Health insurance giant Humana Inc. has millions of customers and billions of dollars in revenue, but it’s also one of the world’s 15 largest government contractors. In 2016, the company landed a Department of Defense contract that more than doubled the number of military members the company serves.

Leidos Holdings Inc. Total dollars obligated: $4,788,173,031 Total number of contract actions: 19,323

Scientific research company Leidos Holdings Inc. operates in 10 key markets, including intelligence, healthcare, homeland, energy, and space. Its contracts deal with products and services like systems engineering and integration, and data science and engineering.

If we examine the argument that the President is obligated to spend every dollar appropriated, we find the GAO’s Red Book states:

“Under the Constitution, Congress makes the laws and provides the money to implement them; the executive branch carries out the laws with the money Congress provides. Under this system, Congress has the “final word” as to how much money can be spent by a given agency or on a given program. Congress may give the executive branch considerable discretion concerning how to implement the laws and hence how to obligate and expend funds appropriated, but it is ultimately up to Congress to determine how much the executive branch can spend.“

GAO-06-382SP Appropriations Law—Vol. II   Page 6-5

It appears from my reading that the meaning of the words “can spend” is substantially different from “must spend”.

Congress appropriates funding to agencies to accomplish certain goals.  The agencies are staffed by federal employees who carry out some elements directly but much of the agencies work is creating RFP’s (request for proposals) to solicit contractors who can deliver a service the agency deems appropriate.  Contracting officers are allowed to bind the government to a contract.  They can also suspend or cancel a contract if the firm fails to meet its obligations.  In this case, the contracting officer can impound the funds allocated to that contractor.  It is here where the bureaucracy can willfully interfere with the choices made by the electorate.  The contracting officer can bind the new President to contracts that are in diametrical opposition to the preferred policies of the administration.  Or, the contracting officer charged with carrying out a directive he or she opposes can stymie the process or impound funds for what the contracting officer states are breaches, which then forces the actual contractor to appeal. This causes delays and costs for the contractor.  

There are prime contractors like those listed above and sub-primes who are typically small businesses that allow the prime and the agency to achieve the 23% small business procurement goal.   The important point is that Congress does not specifically allocate monies to specific primes or sub-primes, let alone the tasks that an agency may request.   For example: if Congress allocates money to promote legal services in underserved communities, that will not stop an agency from awarding a contract to an NGO that provides legal assistance to illegal aliens or even terrorist organizations.  

The next bureaucratic check on waste fraud and abuse is the Office of Inspector General

It is the job of Inspector Generals to minimize costs.  The IG reports to the Cabinet Secretary and Congress.  IG’s have a responsibility to make public the IG’s findings, and they do so at Oversight.gov.  What you do not find is the accountability when there is a finding of waste fraud or abuse. 

In one case a federal Amtrak worker defrauded the government of $42K+ dollars desiganated for pandemic relief. A quick perusal of the reports reaches a conclusion reading “pending management action,” meaning no criminal referral.   Apparently, the IG does not assess the merit of any given contract, such as grants for drag shows in Ireland, millions for sexual health in Gaza or comic books to promote transsexual persons.    We know waste fraud and abuse occurs, so if the IG(s) are failing to identify waste, fraud or abuse on a regular basis, those IG sshould be separated from employment.

From the Oversight.gov website:

“The role of an Inspector General involves conducting and supervising audits, investigations, and reviews to detect and prevent waste, fraud, and abuse and promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the administration of the establishment’s programs and operations. Other activities include: (1) reviewing existing and proposed legislation and regulations relating to the establishment’s programs and operations to make recommendations concerning the impact of such legislation or regulations on the economy and efficiency in the administration of those programs and operations or the prevention and detection of fraud and abuse in such programs and operations; and (2) keeping the head of the establishment and the Congress fully and currently informed concerning fraud and other serious problems, abuses, and deficiencies relating to the administration of programs and operations administered or financed by such establishment, to recommend corrective action concerning such problems, abuses, and deficiencies, and to report on the progress made in implementing such corrective action.”

Finally, we have the General Accountability Office or GAO which renders legal decisions on appropriations and contracts.  In my review of the available literature online, I have found little evidence of actual accountability for federal workers who violate standards. 

In a report February 11, 2025, The General Accountability Office stated to the House Oversight Committee on Ways and Means stated it could not render an opinion based on “ongoing limitations.” saying,

“We continued to encounter limitations that prevented us from expressing an opinion on the fiscal year 2022 Schedules of the General Fund or on Fiscal Service’s internal control over financial reporting relevant to the Schedules of the General Fund as of September 30, 2022. We have provided recommendations to Fiscal Service to address these limitations related to deficiencies in their financial reporting processes. Treasury agreed with our recommendations and has plans to address them. We will provide an update on their status in our fiscal year 2024 report.”

Where has the GAO been if they are continuing to encounter limitations preventing them from rendering an opinion on Fiscal Services’ internal controls?  It is Fiscal Services that determines who is paid and who is not.  This was a GAO report from 2 days ago dealing with FY22! We are in FY 25 now and from the above statement the GAO tells us we must wait until February 2027 to get a report for FY 2024 that will tells us whether Fiscal Services made the recommended changes. 

This means no accountability.

The same GAO ruled that Biden did not impound border wall funding because he made a policy proclamation that no new barriers shall be erected, that most of the money had been allocated, and because of environmental litigation the required plans could not be finalized.  The GAO failed to consider that the proclamation caused millions of dollars of materials to rot on the ground, be subject to pilferage, and ultimately auctioned off for pennies on the dollar after the Democrats lost both chambers of Congress and the Executive branch.   I consider that substantial waste.  Where is the accountability for the GAO?

Not spending moneys appropriated by Congress is not an alternate use.  It is neither, fraud, waste, nor abuse.  I would argue that pausing expenditures that Congress has appropriated is not an impoundment unless and until the President decides to use the funds for alternative use.    The Impoundment Act should be amended to allow those elected to be able to pause expenditures to allow sufficient time for an incoming administration to have the President’s Cabinet Secretaries confirmed by the Senate, so they can evaluate whether the contract needs to be modified to meet the policies and priorities of the new administration.