I read Jonathon S. Aronie’s commentary in the March 20, 2006 issue of Federal Computer Weekly:
Has anyone noticed that it has become more difficult to be a vendor on the General Services Administration schedule contracts lately? … [A] client recently completed its pre-award attestation review, during which the auditors concluded that the company was making too much money — in other words, its profit was too high — on the services it sells. Although it seems to me that it’s not any of GSA’s business how much profit a company makes as long as its prices are fair and reasonable, the auditors concluded that the prices were unreasonable because our profit was above some unwritten, double-secret threshold.
This reminded me of the sad situation I highlighted in a blog entry back in January. At that time, Steve Kelman wrote that DARPA’s payments to the Grand Challenge winners should be under question because they didn’t audit how much profit the recipient made. It was so far over the top, I still haven’t concluded if his entire article was suppose to be a parody or not.
In light of this recent article, it’s disconcerting that a parody of our government is so indistinguishable from the reality thereof! Does anybody find rational in the government’s invasive mandate of how productive a company can be?!