Booz Allen on Military Waste
Sure, when a GAO report shows that $295 billion went wasted last year on delayed Pentagon weapons systems, government watchdogs are going to raise a stink. But what do consultants for Booz Allen Hamilton think?
The Washington Post has satiated our curiosity with an editorial by Dov S. Lakheim and Ronald T. Kadish, two consultants for the multibillion dollar IT company that does most of its work for the government. In short, they think there should be more money for second-tier defense contractors like Booz Allen Hamilton.
Lakheim and Kadish say that during the weapons-making salad days of the 80’s the Pentagon had about 20 prime government contractors building the U.S. military arsenal. But when the Clinton administration floated the totally irrational idea that Cold War weapons systems aren’t necessary when there’s no Cold War, the contractors panicked and consolidated.
Not that Clinton ever got rid of these weapons systems. But Lakheim and Kadish argue that the threat he would has led to only six prime weapons contractors. So while a company like Booz Allen is growing, they don’t get the automatic billions of the elite six, which include corporations like Boeing and Lockheed Martin.
The desire for breaking up Boeing and Lockheed’s monopoly on some weapons systems makes sense. But their call for reform stops at more contractors and more contracts for new weapons technology. They don’t want oversight; nor do they want to "force competition on the global marketplace." They want the number of A-list contractors to go from six to 20. It’s not explained how this arrangement benefits the Pentagon or taxpayers. But it doesn’t need to be explained how it benefits Booz Allen.