Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1955-12-19
Defense Buying
Without Bids
Draws Attack
By ROBERT X. WALSH

power headed today for a prob
able overhauling by Congress be-
cause of a House subcommittee
blast against bureaucratic Sc
crecy" surrounding contracts
made without competitive bid
ding.
Chairman Vinson of the House
Armed Services Committee de-
clared he was shocked by dis
closures that only 50 billion Of
$36.5 billion in Defense Depart
ment buying was done by adver-
tised competitive bidding. The
rest of the purchases we're by
negotiations under emergency"
or other exceptions allowed In
the Armed Services Procurement
Act.
II agree with the conclusions
and recommendations Of the sub
committee and I shall urge the
second session of this Congress
to do some first-class overhaul
ling to restore more competition
in purchasing for defense needs, 3"
he announced.
Hits bureaucratic Secrecy"
The subcommittee under the
Craftsmanship of Representative
Hebert, Democrat of Louisiana.
submitted an interim report
based on investigations and
hearings concerning department
buying during a 30-month
period.
ut seems imperative that
Congress review the authority
contained in the Armed Services
Procurement Act of l947 If a
system Of free. competitive-ad-
vertised competition for Amer
lean business is to be preserved, /"
the subcommittee said.
Neither Congress nor the
public can learn with any GER
tainty or speed whether it is get
ting the best price from the best
possible potential of American
industry. The whole operation is
shrouded in bureaucratic secrecy.
1T seems :. that the Depart
ment of Defense has taken adj
vantage of the American manu-
facturer who might and could
produce comparatively on a far
greater scale than they have been
allowed to do.
IF the public is to have some
assurance that defense costs are
to be critically examined, the
Government had better return to
competitive advertising on a
large scale and allow American
producers and labor, in free and
open competition, to determine
the true cost as matter Of ma
Itional policy instead of trans
Iferring that responsibility to the
secret files of a negotiator."
From January /, 1868, to June
80. 1855, the Army. Navy and Air
Force made contract commit
Iments totaling 500. 1867. 486, 900,
the report showed. Only SILL
1854. 900. or 5.8l per cent. was let
ION competitive bidding. The re-
naming 94.19 per cent was let
on negotiated REQUIREMENT.
Bidding Competitive
The report explained that
those totals do not include con-
tracts let by the Corps Of Engi-
neers or Bureau Of Yards and
Docks because a large percent
age Of their dollar volume con-
tracts relate to public construc-
ton programs.
In those instances, there was
more competitive bidding than
negotiated contracts. The En-
lgineers Corps total was $2,67l.-
$4,000 of which $2.2 billion was
advertised bidding. The Navy
bureaus total was $7l2,832. 900
of which $519,875,000 was ad-
Ivertised bidding.
The Nays overall total, how
ever. was $9,978.617, 600 but only
1881 ,623, 900 was on advertised
bidding. The Nays number of
such contracts was 45,035. of
which 1892 were advertised
bidding.
The Air Force total for its air
material command was $18,847.-
404. 900 of which $83, 1896 900 was
advertised bidding. The numeri-
cal total was 30,942 contracts, of
which 4.723 were advertised.
\ The Army's total for chemical,
medical. ordnance, quartermas-
tier, signal and transportation
sections was $7,541, 465, 900 OF
which 81. 446, 1850 was adver-
tised bidding. Its numerical total
was 1865, 1872 900 contracts OF
which 88.96l resulted from COM
IL