The Art of the No-Bid

| Thu Oct. 6, 2005 6:46 PM EDT

Earlier this afternoon, FEMA chief David Paulison admitted that just a wee bit of waste, fraud, and abuse might have somehow insinuated themselves into the early rush to hand out post-Katrina reconstruction contracts:

Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of federal contracts for Hurricane Katrina recovery that were hurriedly awarded after little or no competition will be rebid, FEMA chief R. David Paulison told a Senate committee today.

Paulison, testifying before a Senate panel investigating the Federal Emergency Management Agency's response to the devastating hurricane, said he has never "been a fan of no-bid contracts."

Well, who is? Besides the companies winning them, of course. As Paulison goes on to say, no-bid contracts have some value; especially when the federal government needs to do something in a hurry, sometimes it's just plain easier—and far more helpful—to hand out contracts to large corporations that have experience rather than haggling over every last dollar. On the other hand, the fact that many of the post-Katrina contracts are now set to undergo a second bidding indicates that speed and efficiency weren't of primary concern here. Plus, there's no reason why FEMA couldn't have held biddings for many of these contracts beforehand—not unreasonable given that, you know, a hurricane striking New Orleans was one of its three major doomsday scenarios—and had these contracts "pre-positioned". Not that we want to play the blame game or anything.