Podcasts about general services administration gsa

Brian Friel, co-founder of BD Squared, joins Off the Shelf, for a wide-ranging discussion of the state of interagency contracting in the new federal market. Friel provides an update on the GWAC landscape, including updates on NASA SEWP, CIO-SP4, Alliant 3, and Polaris and he talks about the consolidation of procurement operations at the General Services Administration (GSA) including the update FAR Part 8 rewrite establishing a hierarchy of contract vehicles.Friel also addresses GSA's Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) program, giving his thoughts on the new ordering procedures, the role of Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs) and the prospects for accelerated growth in use of the program. Finally, Brian explains how companies can position themselves to compete in a rapidly changing federal market. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today I'm talking to economic historian Judge Glock, Director of Research at the Manhattan Institute. Judge works on a lot of topics: if you enjoy this episode, I'd encourage you to read some of his work on housing markets and the Environmental Protection Agency. But I cornered him today to talk about civil service reform.Since the 1990s, over 20 red and blue states have made radical changes to how they hire and fire government employees — changes that would be completely outside the Overton window at the federal level. A paper by Judge and Renu Mukherjee lists four reforms made by states like Texas, Florida, and Georgia: * At-will employment for state workers* The elimination of collective bargaining agreements* Giving managers much more discretion to hire* Giving managers much more discretion in how they pay employeesJudge finds decent evidence that the reforms have improved the effectiveness of state governments, and little evidence of the politicization that federal reformers fear. Meanwhile, in Washington, managers can't see applicants' resumes, keyword searches determine who gets hired, and firing a bad performer can take years. But almost none of these ideas are on the table in Washington.Thanks to Harry Fletcher-Wood for his judicious transcript edits and fact-checking, and to Katerina Barton for audio edits.Judge, you have a paper out about lessons for civil service reform from the states. Since the ‘90s, red and blue states have made big changes to how they hire and fire people. Walk through those changes for me.I was born and grew up in Washington DC, heard a lot about civil service throughout my childhood, and began to research it as an adult. But I knew almost nothing about the state civil service systems. When I began working in the states — mainly across the Sunbelt, including in Texas, Kansas, Arizona — I was surprised to learn that their civil service systems were reformed to an absolutely radical extent relative to anything proposed at the federal level, let alone implemented.Starting in the 1990s, several states went to complete at-will employment. That means there were no official civil service protections for any state employees. Some managers were authorized to hire people off the street, just like you could in the private sector. A manager meets someone in a coffee shop, they say, "I'm looking for exactly your role. Why don't you come on board?" At the federal level, with its stultified hiring process, it seemed absurd to even suggest something like that.You had states that got rid of any collective bargaining agreements with their public employee unions. You also had states that did a lot more broadbanding [creating wider pay bands] for employee pay: a lot more discretion for managers to reward or penalize their employees depending on their performance.These major reforms in these states were, from the perspective of DC, incredibly radical. Literally nobody at the federal level proposes anything approximating what has been in place for decades in the states. That should be more commonly known, and should infiltrate the debate on civil service reform in DC.Even though the evidence is not absolutely airtight, on the whole these reforms have been positive. A lot of the evidence is surveys asking managers and operators in these states how they think it works. They've generally been positive. We know these states operate pretty well: Places like Texas, Florida, and Arizona rank well on state capacity metrics in terms of cost of government, time for permitting, and other issues.Finally, to me the most surprising thing is the dog that didn't bark. The argument in the federal government against civil service reform is, “If you do this, we will open up the gates of hell and return to the 19th-century patronage system, where spoilsmen come and go depending on elected officials, and the government is overrun with political appointees who don't care about the civil service.” That has simply not happened. We have very few reports of any concrete examples of politicization at the state level. In surveys, state employees and managers can almost never remember any example of political preferences influencing hiring or firing.One of the surveys you cited asked, “Can you think of a time someone said that they thought that the political preferences were a factor in civil service hiring?” and it was something like 5%.It was in that 5-10% range. I don't think you'd find a dissimilar number of people who would say that even in an official civil service system. Politics is not completely excluded even from a formal civil service system.A few weeks ago, you and I talked to our mutual friend, Don Moynihan, who's a scholar of public administration. He's more skeptical about the evidence that civil service reform would be positive at the federal level.One of your points is, “We don't have strong negative evidence from the states. Productivity didn't crater in states that moved to an at-will employment system.” We do have strong evidence that collective bargaining in the public sector is bad for productivity.What I think you and Don would agree on is that we could use more evidence on the hiring and firing side than the surveys that we have. Is that a fair assessment?Yes, I think that's correct. As you mentioned, the evidence on collective bargaining is pretty close to universal: it raises costs, reduces the efficiency of government, and has few to no positive upsides.On hiring and firing, I mentioned a few studies. There's a 2013 study that looks at HR managers in six states and finds very little evidence of politicization, and managers generally prefer the new system. There was a dissertation that surveyed several employees and managers in civil service reform and non-reform states. Across the board, the at-will employment states said they had better hiring retention, productivity, and so forth. And there's a 2002 study that looked specifically at Texas, Florida, and Georgia after their reforms, and found almost universal approbation inside the civil service itself for these reforms.These are not randomized control trials. But I think that generally positive evidence should point us directionally where we should go on civil service reform. If we loosen restrictions on discipline and firing, decentralize hiring and so forth — we probably get some productivity benefits from it. We can also know, with some amount of confidence, that the sky is not going to fall, which I think is a very important baseline assumption. The civil service system will continue on and probably be fairly close to what it is today, in terms of its political influence, if you have decentralized hiring and at-will employment.As you point out, a lot of these reforms that have happened in 20-odd states since the ‘90s would be totally outside the Overton window at the federal level. Why is it so easy for Georgia to make a bipartisan move in the ‘90s to at-will employment, when you couldn't raise the topic at the federal level?It's a good question. I think in the 1990s, a lot of people thought a combination of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act — which was the Carter-era act that somewhat attempted to do what these states hoped to do in the 1990s — and the Clinton-era Reinventing Government Initiative, would accomplish the same ends. That didn't happen.That was an era when civil service reform was much more bipartisan. In Georgia, it was a Democratic governor, Zell Miller, who pushed it. In a lot of these other states, they got buy-in from both sides. The recent era of state reform took place after the 2010 Republican wave in the states. Since that wave, the reform impetus for civil service has been much more Republican. That has meant it's been a lot harder to get buy-in from both sides at the federal level, which will be necessary to overcome a filibuster.I think people know it has to be very bipartisan. We're just past the point, at least at the moment, where it can be bipartisan at the federal level. But there are areas where there's a fair amount of overlap between the two sides on what needs to happen, at least in the upper reaches of the civil service.It was interesting to me just how bipartisan civil service reform has been at various times. You talked about the Civil Service Reform Act, which passed Congress in 1978. President Carter tells Congress that the civil service system:“Has become a bureaucratic maze which neglects merit, tolerates poor performance, permits abuse of legitimate employee rights, and mires every personnel action in red tape, delay, and confusion.”That's a Democratic president saying that. It's striking to me that the civil service was not the polarized topic that it is today.Absolutely. Carter was a big civil service reformer in Georgia before those even larger 1990s reforms. He campaigned on civil service reform and thought it was essential to the success of his presidency. But I think you are seeing little sprouts of potential bipartisanship today, like the Chance to Compete Act at the end of 2024, and some of the reforms Obama did to the hiring process. There's options for bipartisanship at the federal level, even if it can't approach what the states have done.I want to walk through the federal hiring process. Let's say you're looking to hire in some federal agency — you pick the agency — and I graduated college recently, and I want to go into the civil service. Tell me about trying to hire somebody like me. What's your first step?It's interesting you bring up the college graduate, because that is one recent reform: President Trump put out an executive order trying to counsel agencies to remove the college degree requirement for job postings. This happened in a lot of states first, like Maryland, and that's also been bipartisan. This requirement for a college degree — which was used as a very unfortunate proxy for ability at a lot of these jobs — is now being removed. It's not across the whole federal government. There's still job postings that require higher education degrees, but that's something that's changed.To your question, let's say the Department of Transportation. That's one of the more bipartisan ones, when you look at surveys of federal civil servants. Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs, they tend to be a little more Republican. Health and Human Services and some other agencies tend to be pretty Democrat. Transportation is somewhere in the middle.As a manager, you try to craft a job description and posting to go up on the USA Jobs website, which is where all federal job postings go. When they created it back in 1996, that was supposedly a massive reform to federal hiring: this website where people could submit their resumes. Then, people submit their resumes and answer questions about their qualifications for the job.One of the slightly different aspects from the private sector is that those applications usually go to an HR specialist first. The specialist reviews everything and starts to rank people into different categories, based on a lot of weird things. It's supposed to be “knowledge, skills, and abilities” — your KSAs, or competencies. To some extent, this is a big step up from historical practice. You had, frankly, an absurd civil service exam, where people had to fill out questions about, say, General Grant or about US Code Title 42, or whatever it was, and then submit it. Someone rated the civil service exam, and then the top three test-takers were eligible for the job.We have this newer, better system, where we rank on knowledge, skills, and abilities, and HR puts put people into different categories. One of the awkward ways they do this is by merely scanning the resumes and applications for keywords. If it's a computer job, make sure you say the word “computer” somewhere in your resume. Make sure you say “manager” if it's a managerial job.Just to be clear, this is entirely literal. There's a keyword search, and folks who don't pass that search are dinged.Yes. I've always wondered, how common is this? It's sometimes hard to know what happens in the black box in these federal HR departments. I saw an HR official recently say, "If I'm not allowed to do keyword searches, I'm going to take 15 years to overlook all the applications, so I've got to do keyword searches." If they don't have the keywords, into the circular file it goes, as they used to say: into the garbage can.Then they start ranking people on their abilities into, often, three different categories. That is also very literal. If you put in the little word bubble, "I am an exceptional manager," you get pushed on into the next level of the competition. If you say, "I'm pretty good, but I'm not the best," into the circular file you go.I've gotten jaded about this, but it really is shocking. We ask candidates for a self-assessment, and if they just rank themselves 10/10 on everything, no matter how ludicrous, that improves their odds of being hired.That's going to immensely improve your odds. Similar to the keyword search, there's been pushback on this in recent years, and I'm definitely not going to say it's universal anymore. It's rarer than it used to be. But it's still a very common process.The historical civil service system used to operate on a rule of three. In places like New York, it still operates like that. The top three candidates on the evaluation system get presented to the manager, and the manager has to approve one of them for the position.Thanks partially to reforms by the Obama administration in 2010, they have this category rating system where the best qualified or the very qualified get put into a big bucket together [instead of only including the top three]. Those are the people that the person doing the hiring gets to see, evaluate, and decide who he wants to hire.There are some restrictions on that. If a veteran outranks everybody else, you've got to pick the veteran [typically known as Veterans' Preference]. That was an issue in some of the state civil service reforms, too. The states said, “We're just going to encourage a veterans' preference. We don't need a formalized system to say they get X number of points and have to be in Y category. We're just going to say, ‘Try to hire veterans.'” That's possible without the formal system, despite what some opponents of reform may claim.One of the particular problems here is just the nature of the people doing the hiring. Sometimes you just need good managers to encourage HR departments to look at a broader set of qualifications. But one of the bigger problems is that they keep the HR evaluation system divorced from the manager who is doing the hiring. David Shulkin, who was the head of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), wrote a great book, It Shouldn't Be This Hard to Serve Your Country. He was a healthcare exec, and the VA is mainly a healthcare agency. He would tell people, "You should work for me," they would send their applications into the HR void, and he'd never see them again. They would get blocked at some point in this HR evaluation process, and he'd be sent people with no healthcare experience, because for whatever reason they did well in the ranking.One of the very base-level reforms should be, “How can we more clearly integrate the hiring manager with the evaluation process?” To some extent, the bipartisan Chance to Compete Act tries to do this. They said, “You should have subject matter experts who are part of crafting the description of the job, are part of evaluating, and so forth.” But there's still a long road to go.Does that firewall — where the person who wants to hire doesn't get to look at the process until the end — exist originally because of concerns about cronyism?One of the interesting things about the civil service is its raison d'être — its reason for being — was supposedly a single, clear purpose: to prevent politicized hiring and patronage. That goes back to the Pendleton Civil Service Act of 1883. But it's always been a little strange that you have all of these very complex rules about every step of the process — from hiring to firing to promotion, and everything in between — to prevent political influence. We could just focus on preventing political influence, and not regulate every step of the process on the off-chance that without a clear regulation, political influence could creep in. This division [between hiring manager and applicants] is part of that general concern. There are areas where I've heard HR specialists say, "We declare that a manager is a subject matter expert, and we bring them into the process early on, we can do that." But still the division is pretty stark, and it's based on this excessive concern about patronage.One point you flag is that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which is the body that thinks about personnel in the federal government, has a 300-page regulatory document for agencies on how you have to hire. There's a remarkable amount of process.Yes, but even that is a big change from the Federal Personnel Manual, which was the 10,000-page document that we shredded in the 1990s. In the ‘90s, OPM gave the agencies what's called “delegated examining authorities.” This says, “You, agency, have power to decide who to hire, we're not going to do the central supervision anymore. But, but, but: here's the 300-page document that dictates exactly how you have to carry out that hiring.”So we have some decentralization, allowing managers more authority to control their own departments. But this two-level oversight — a local HR department that's ultimately being overseen by the OPM — also leads to a lot of slip ‘twixt cup and lip, in terms of how something gets implemented. If you're in the agency and you're concerned about the OPM overseeing your process, you're likely to be much more careful than you would like to be. “Yes, it's delegated to me, but ultimately, I know I have to answer to OPM about this process. I'm just going to color within the lines.”I often cite Texas, which has no central HR office. Each agency decides how it wants to hire. In a lot of these reform states, if there is a central personnel office, it's an information clearinghouse or reservoir of models. “You can use us, the central HR office, as a resource if you want us to help you post the job, evaluate it, or help manage your processes, but you don't have to.” That's the goal we should be striving for in a lot of the federal reforms. Just make OPM a resource for the managers in the individual departments to do their thing or go independent.Let's say I somehow get through the hiring process. You offer me a job at the Department of Transportation. What are you paying me?This is one of the more stultified aspects of the federal civil service system. OPM has another multi-hundred-page handbook called the Handbook of Occupational Groups and Families. Inside that, you've got 49 different “groups and families,” like “Clerical occupations.” Inside those 49 groups are a series of jobs, sometimes dozens, like “Computer Operator.” Inside those, they have independent documents — often themselves dozens of pages long — detailing classes of positions. Then you as a manager have to evaluate these nine factors, which can each give points to each position, which decides how you get slotted into this weird Government Schedule (GS) system [the federal payscale].Again, this is actually an improvement. Before, you used to have the Civil Service Commission, which went around staring very closely at someone over their typewriter and saying, "No, I think you should be a GS-12, not a GS-11, because someone over in the Department of Defense who does your same job is a GS-12." Now this is delegated to agencies, but again, the agencies have to listen to the OPM on how to classify and set their jobs into this 15-stage GS-classification system, each stage of which has 10 steps which determine your pay, and those steps are determined mainly by your seniority. It's a formalized step-by-step system, overwhelmingly based on just how long you've sat at your desk.Let's be optimistic about my performance as a civil servant. Say that over my first three years, I'm just hitting it out of the park. Can you give me a raise? What can you do to keep me in my role?Not too much. For most people, the within-step increases — those 10 steps inside each GS-level — is just set by seniority. Now there are all these quality step increases you can get, but they're very rare and they have to be documented. So you could hypothetically pay someone more, but it's going to be tough. In general, the managers just prefer to stick to seniority, because not sticking to it garners a lot of complaints. Like so much else, the goal is, "We don't want someone rewarding an official because they happen to share their political preferences." The result of that concern is basically nobody can get rewarded at all, which is very unfortunate.We do have examples in state and federal government of what's known as broadbanding, where you have very broad pay scales, and the manager can decide where to slot someone. Say you're a computer operator, which can mean someone who knows what an Excel spreadsheet is, or someone who's programming the most advanced AI systems. As a manager in South Carolina or Florida, you have a lot of discretion to say, "I can set you 50% above the market rate of what this job technically would go for, if I think you're doing a great job."That's very rare at the federal level. They've done broadbanding at the Government Accountability Office, the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The China Lake Experiment out in California gave managers a lot more discretion to reward scientists. But that's definitely the exception. In general, it's a step-wise, seniority-based system.What if you want to bring me into the Senior Executive Service (SES)? Theoretically, that sits at the top of the General Service scale. Can't you bump me up in there and pay me what you owe me?I could hypothetically bring you in as a senior executive servant. The SES was created in the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act. The idea was, “We're going to have this elite cadre of about 8,000 individuals at the top of the federal government, whose employment will be higher-risk and higher-reward. They might be fired, and we're going to give them higher pay to compensate for that.”Almost immediately, that did not work out. Congress was outraged at the higher pay given to the top officials and capped it. Ever since, how much the SES can get paid has been tightly controlled. As in most of the rest of the federal government, where they establish these performance pay incentives or bonuses — which do exist — they spread them like peanut butter over the whole service. To forestall complaints, everyone gets a little bit every two or three years.That's basically what happened to the SES. Their annual pay is capped at the vice president's salary, which is a cap for a lot of people in the federal government. For most of your GS and other executive scales, the cap is Congress's salary. [NB: This is no longer exactly true, since Congress froze its own salaries in 2009. The cap for GS (currently about $195k) is now above congressional salaries ($174k).]One of the big problems with pay in the federal government is pay compression. Across civil service systems, the highest-skilled people tend to be paid much less than the private sector, and the lowest-skilled people tend to get paid much more. The political science reason for that is pretty simple: the median voter in America still decides what seems reasonable. To the median voter, the average salary of a janitor looks low, and the average salary of a scientist looks way too high. Hence this tendency to pay compression. Your average federal employee is probably overpaid relative to the private sector, because the lowest-skilled employees are paid up to 40% higher than the private sector equivalent. The highest-paid employees, the post-graduate skilled professionals, are paid less. That makes it hard to recruit the top performers, but it also swells the wage budget in a way that makes it difficult to talk about reform.There's a lot of interest in this administration in making it easier to recruit talent and get rid of under-performers. There have been aggressive pushes to limit collective bargaining in the public sector. That should theoretically make it easier to recruit, but it also increases the precariousness of civil service roles. We've seen huge firings in the civil service over the last six months.Classically, the explicit trade-off of working in the federal government was, “Your pay is going to be capped, but you have this job for life. It's impossible to get rid of you.” You trade some lifetime earnings for stability. In a world where the stability is gone, but pay is still capped, isn't the net effect to drive talent away from the civil service?I think it's a concern now. On one level it should be ameliorated, because those who are most concerned with stability of employment do tend to be lower performers. If you have people who are leaving the federal service because all they want is stability, and they're not getting that anymore, that may not be a net loss. As someone who came out of academia and knows the wonder of effective lifetime annuities, there can be very high performers who like that stability who therefore take a lower salary. Without the ability to bump that pay up more, it's going to be an issue.I do know that, internally, the Trump administration has made some signs they're open to reforms in the top tiers of the SES and other parts of the federal government. They would be willing to have people get paid more at that level to compensate for the increased risks since the Trump administration came in. But when you look at the reductions in force (RIFs) that have happened under Trump, they are overwhelmingly among probationary employees, the lower-level employees.With some exceptions. If you've been promoted recently, you can get reclassified as probationary, so some high-performers got lumped in.Absolutely. The issue has been exacerbated precisely because the RIF regulations that are in place have made the firings particularly damaging. If you had a more streamlined RIF system — which they do have in many states, where seniority is not the main determinant of who gets laid off — these RIFs could be removing the lower-performing civil servants and keeping the higher-performing ones, and giving them some amount of confidence in their tenure.Unfortunately, the combination of large-scale removals with the existing RIF regs, which are very stringent, has demoralized some of the upper levels of the federal government. I share that concern. But I might add, it is interesting, if you look at the federal government's own figures on the total civil service workforce, they have gone down significantly since Trump came in office, but I think less than 100,000 still, in the most recent numbers that I've seen. I'm not sure how much to trust those, versus some of these other numbers where people have said 150,000, 200,000.Whether the Trump administration or a future administration can remove large numbers of people from the civil service should be somewhat divorced from the general conversation on civil service reform. The main debate about whether or not Trump can do this centers around how much power the appropriators in Congress have to determine the total amount of spending in particular agencies on their workforce. It does not depend necessarily on, "If we're going to remove people — whether for general layoffs, or reductions in force, or because of particular performance issues — how can we go about doing that?" My last-ditch hope to maintain a bipartisan possibility of civil service reform is to bracket, “How much power does the president have to remove or limit the workforce in general?” from “How can he go about hiring and firing, et cetera?”I think making it easier for the president to identify and remove poor performers is a tool that any future administration would like to have.We had this conversation sparked again with the firing of the Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner. But that was a position Congress set up to be appointed by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and removable by the President. It's a separate issue from civil service at large. Everyone said, “We want the president to be able to hire and fire the commissioner.” Maybe firing the commissioner was a bad decision, but that's the situation today.Attentive listeners to Statecraft know I'm pretty critical, like you are, of the regulations that say you have to go in order of seniority. In mass layoffs, you're required to fire a lot of the young, talented people.But let's talk about individual firings. I've been a terrible civil servant, a nightmarish employee from day one. You want to discipline, remove, suspend, or fire me. What are your options?Anybody who has worked in the civil service knows it's hard to fire bad performers. Whatever their political valence, whatever they feel about the civil service system, they have horror stories about a person who just couldn't be removed.In the early 2010s, a spate of stories came out about air traffic controllers sleeping on the job. Then-transportation secretary, Ray LaHood, made a big public announcement: "I'm going to fire these three guys." After these big announcements, it turned out he was only able to remove one of them. One retired, and another had their firing reduced to a suspension.You had another horrific story where a man was joking on the phone with friends when a plane crashed into a helicopter and killed nine people over the Hudson River. National outcry. They said, "We're going to fire this guy." In the end, after going through the process, he only got a suspension. Everyone agrees it's too hard.The basic story is, you have two ways to fire someone. Chapter 75, the old way, is often considered the realm of misconduct: You've stolen something from the office, punched your colleague in the face during a dispute about the coffee, something illegal or just straight-out wrong. We get you under Chapter 75.The 1978 Civil Service Reform Act added Chapter 43, which is supposed to be the performance-based system to remove someone. As with so much of that Civil Service Reform Act, the people who passed it thought this might be the beginning of an entirely different system.In the end, lots of federal managers say there's not a huge difference between the two. Some use 75, some use 43. If you use 43, you have to document very clearly what the person did wrong. You have to put them on a performance improvement plan. If they failed a performance improvement plan after a certain amount of time, they can respond to any claims about what they did wrong. Then, they can take that process up to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) and claim that they were incorrectly fired, or that the processes weren't carried out appropriately. Then, if they want to, they can say, “Nah, I don't like the order I got,” and take it up to federal courts and complain there. Right now, the MSPB doesn't have a full quorum, which is complicating some of the recent removal disputes.You have this incredibly difficult process, unlike the private sector, where your boss looks at you and says, "I don't like how you're giving me the stink-eye today. Out you go." One could say that's good or bad, but, on the whole, I think the model should be closer to the private sector. We should trust managers to do their job without excessive oversight and process. That's clearly about as far from the realm of possibility as the current system, under which the estimate is 6-12 months to fire a very bad performer. The number of people who win at the Merit Systems Protection Board is still 20-30%.This goes into another issue, which is unionization. If you're part of a collective bargaining agreement — most of the regular federal civil service is — first, you have to go with this independent, union-based arbitration and grievance procedure. You're about 50/50 to win on those if your boss tries to remove you.So if I'm in the union, we go through that arbitration grievance system. If you win and I'm fired, I can take it to the Merit Systems Protection Board. If you win again, I can still take it to the federal courts.You can file different sorts of claims at each part. On Chapter 43, the MSPB is supposed to be about the process, not the evidence, and you just have to show it was followed. On 75, the manager has to show by preponderance of the evidence that the employee is harming the agency. Then there are different standards for what you take to the courts, and different standards according to each collective bargaining agreement for the grievance procedure when someone is disciplined. It's a very complicated, abstruse, and procedure-heavy process that makes it very difficult to remove people, which is why the involuntary separation rate at the federal government and most state governments is many multiples lower than the private sector.So, you would love to get me off your team because I'm abysmal. But you have no stomach for going through this whole process and I'm going to fight it. I'm ornery and contrarian and will drag this fight out. In practice, what do managers in the federal government do with their poor performers?I always heard about this growing up. There's the windowless office in the basement without a phone, or now an internet connection. You place someone down there, hope they get the message, and sooner or later they leave. But for plenty of people in America, that's the dream job. You just get to sit and nobody bothers you for eight hours. You punch in at 9 and punch out at 5, and that's your day. "Great. I'll collect that salary for another 10 years." But generally you just try to make life unpleasant for that person.Public sector collective bargaining in the US is new. I tend to think of it as just how the civil service works. But until about 50 years ago, there was no collective bargaining in the public sector.At the state level, it started with Wisconsin at the end of the 1950s. There were famous local government reforms beginning with the Little Wagner Act [signed in 1958] in New York City. Senator Robert Wagner had created the National Labor Relations Board. His son Robert F. Wagner Jr., mayor of New York, created the first US collective bargaining system at the local level in the ‘60s. In ‘62, John F. Kennedy issued an executive order which said, "We're going to deal officially with public sector unions,” but it was all informal and non-statutory.It wasn't until Title VII of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act that unions had a formal, statutory role in our federal service system. This is shockingly new. To some extent, that was the great loss to many civil service reformers in ‘78. They wanted to get through a lot of these other big reforms about hiring and firing, but they gave up on the unions to try to get those. Some people think that exception swallowed the rest of the rules. The union power that was garnered in ‘78 overcame the other reforms people hoped to accomplish. Soon, you had the majority of the federal workforce subject to collective bargaining.But that's changing now too. Part of that Civil Service Reform Act said, “If your position is in a national security-related position, the president can determine it's not subject to collective bargaining.” Trump and the OPM have basically said, “Most positions in the federal government are national security-related, and therefore we're going to declare them off-limits to collective bargaining.” Some people say that sounds absurd. But 60% of the civilian civil service workforce is the Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs, and the Department of Homeland Security. I am not someone who tries to go too easy on this crowd. I think there's a heck of a lot that needs to be reformed. But it's also worth remembering that the majority of the civil service workforce are in these three agencies that Republicans tend to like a lot.Now, whether people like Veterans Affairs is more of an open question. We have some particular laws there about opening up processes after the scandals in the 2010s about waiting lists and hospitals. You had veterans hospitals saying, "We're meeting these standards for getting veterans in the door for these waiting lists." But they were straight-up lying about those standards. Many people who were on these lists waiting for months to see a doctor died in the interim, some from causes that could have been treated had they seen a VA doctor. That led to Congress doing big reforms in the VA in 2014 and 2017, precisely because everyone realized this is a problem.So, Trump has put out these executive orders stopping collective bargaining in all of these agencies that touch national security. Some of those, like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), seem like a tough sell. I guess that, if you want to dig a mine and the Chinese are trying to dig their own mine and we want the mine to go quickly without the EPA pettifogging it, maybe. But the core ones are pretty solid. So far the courts have upheld the executive order to go in place. So collective bargaining there could be reformed.But in the rest of the government, there are these very extreme, long collective bargaining agreements between agencies and their unions. I've hit on the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as one that's had pretty extensive bargaining with its union. When we created the TSA to supervise airport security, a lot of people said, "We need a crème de la crème to supervise airports after 9/11. We want to keep this out of union hands, because we know unions are going to make it difficult to move people around." The Obama administration said, "Nope, we're going to negotiate with the union." Now you have these huge negotiations with the unions about parking spots, hours of employment, uniforms, and everything under the sun. That makes it hard for managers in the TSA to decide when people should go where or what they should do.One thing we've talked about on Statecraft in past episodes — for instance, with John Kamensky, who was a pivotal figure in the Clinton-Gore reforms — was this relationship between government employees and “Beltway Bandits”: the contractors who do jobs you might think of as civil service jobs. One critique of that ‘90s Clinton-Gore push, “Reinventing Government,” was that although they shrank the size of the civil service on paper, the number of contractors employed by the federal government ballooned to fill that void. They did not meaningfully reduce the total number of people being paid by the federal government. Talk to me about the relationship between the civil service reform that you'd like to see and this army of folks who are not formally employees.Every government service is a combination of public employees and inputs, and private employees and inputs. There's never a single thing the government does — federal, state, or local — that doesn't involve inputs from the private sector. That could be as simple as the uniforms for the janitors. Even if you have a publicly employed janitor, who buys the mop? You're not manufacturing the mops.I understand the critique that the excessive focus on full-time employees in the 1990s led to contracting out some positions that could be done directly by the government. But I think that misses how much of the government can and should be contracted out. The basic Office of Management and Budget (OMB) statute [OMB Circular No. A-76] defining what is an essential government duty should still be the dividing line. What does the government have to do, because that is the public overseeing a process? Versus, what can the private sector just do itself?I always cite Stephen Goldsmith, the old mayor of Indianapolis. He proposed what he called the Yellow Pages test. If you open the Yellow Pages [phone directory] and three businesses do that business, the government should not be in that business. There's three garbage haulers out there. Instead of having a formal government garbage-hauling department, just contract out the garbage.With the internet, you should have a lot more opportunities to contract stuff out. I think that is generally good, and we should not have the federal government going about a lot of the day-to-day procedural things that don't require public input. What a lot of people didn't recognize is how much pressure that's going to put on government contracting officers at the federal level. Last time I checked there were 40,000 contracting officers. They have a lot of power. In the most recent year for which we have data, there were $750 billion in federal contracts. This is a substantial part of our economy. If you total state and local, we're talking almost 10% of our whole economy goes through government contracts. This is mind-boggling. In the public policy world, we should all be spending about 10% of our time thinking about contracting.One of the things I think everyone recognized is that contractors should have more authority. Some of the reform that happened with people like [Steven] Kelman — who was the Office of Federal Procurement Policy head in the ‘90s under Clinton — was, "We need to give these people more authority to just take a credit card and go buy a sheaf of paper if that's what they need. And we need more authority to get contract bids out appropriately.”The same message that animates civil service reform should animate these contracting discussions. The goal should be setting clear goals that you want — for either a civil servant or a contractor — and then giving that person the discretion to meet them. If you make the civil service more stultified, or make pay compression more extreme, you're going to have to contract more stuff out.People talk about the General Schedule [pay scale], but we haven't talked about the Federal Wage Schedule system at all, which is the blue-collar system that encompasses about 200,000 federal employees. Pay compression means those guys get paid really well. That means some managers rightfully think, "I'd like to have full-time supervision over some role, but I would rather contract it out, because I can get it a heck of a lot cheaper."There's a continuous relationship: If we make the civil service more stultified, we're going to push contracting out into more areas where maybe it wouldn't be appropriate. But a lot of things are always going to be appropriate to contract out. That means we need to give contracting officers and the people overseeing contracts a lot of discretion to carry out their missions, and not a lot of oversight from the Government Accountability Office or the courts about their bids, just like we shouldn't give OPM excess input into the civil service hiring process.This is a theme I keep harping on, on Statecraft. It's counterintuitive from a reformer's perspective, but it's true: if you want these processes to function better, you're going to have to stop nitpicking. You're going to have to ease up on the throttle and let people make their own decisions, even when sometimes you're not going to agree with them.This is a tension that's obviously happening in this administration. You've seen some clear interest in decentralization, and you've seen some centralization. In both the contract and the civil service sphere, the goal for the central agencies should be giving as many options as possible to the local managers, making sure they don't go extremely off the rails, but then giving those local managers and contracting officials the ability to make their own choices. The General Services Administration (GSA) under this administration is doing a lot of government-wide acquisition contracts. “We establish a contract for the whole government in the GSA. Usually you, the local manager, are not required to use that contract if you want computer services or whatever, but it's an option for you.”OPM should take a similar role. "Here's the system we have set up. You can take that and use it as you want. It's here for you, but it doesn't have to be used, because you might have some very particular hiring decisions to make.” Just like there shouldn't be one contracting decision that decides how we buy both a sheaf of computer paper and an aircraft carrier, there shouldn't be one hiring and firing process for a janitor and a nuclear physicist. That can't be a centralized process, because the very nature of human life is that there's an infinitude of possibilities that you need to allow for, and that means some amount of decentralization.I had an argument online recently about New York City's “buy local” requirement for certain procurement contracts. When they want to build these big public toilets in New York City, they have to source all the toilet parts from within the state, even if they're $200,000 cheaper in Portland, Oregon.I think it's crazy to ask procurement and contracting to solve all your policy problems. Procurement can't be about keeping a healthy local toilet parts industry. You just need to procure the toilet.This is another area where you see similar overlap in some of the civil service and contracting issues. A lot of cities have residency requirements for many of their positions. If you work for the city, you have to live inside the city. In New York, that means you've got a lot of police officers living on Staten Island, or right on the line of the north side of the Bronx, where they're inches away from Westchester. That drives up costs, and limits your population of potential employees.One of the most amazing things to me about the Biden Bipartisan Infrastructure Law was that it encouraged contracting officers to use residency requirements: “You should try to localize your hiring and contracting into certain areas.” On a national level, that cancels out. If both Wyoming and Wisconsin use residency requirements, the net effect is not more people hired from one of those states! So often, people expect the civil service and contracting to solve all of our ills and to point the way forward for the rest of the economy on discrimination, hiring, pay, et cetera. That just leads to, by definition, government being a lot more expensive than the private sector.Over the next three and a half years, what would you like to see the administration do on civil service reform that they haven't already taken up?I think some of the broad-scale layoffs, which seem to be slowing down, were counterproductive. I do think that their ability to achieve their ends was limited by the nature of the reduction-in-force regulations, which made them more counterproductive than they had to be. That's the situation they inherited. But that didn't mean you had to lay off a lot of people without considering the particular jobs they were doing now.And hiring quite a few of them back.Yeah. There are also debates obviously, within the administration, between DOGE and Russ Vought [director of the OMB] and some others on this. Some things, like the Schedule Policy/Career — which is the revival of Schedule F in the first Trump administration — are largely a step in the right direction. Counter to some of the critics, it says, “You can remove someone if they're in a policymaking position, just like if they were completely at-will. But you still have to hire from the typical civil service system.” So, for those concerned about politicization, that doesn't undermine that, because they can't just pick someone from the party system to put in there. I think that's good.They recently had a suitability requirement rule that I think moved in the right direction. That says, “If someone's not suitable for the workforce, there are other ways to remove them besides the typical procedures.” The ideal system is going to require some congressional input: it's to have a decentralization of hiring authority to individual managers. Which means the OPM — now under Scott Kupor, who has finally been confirmed — saying, "The OPM is here to assist you, federal managers. Make sure you stay within the broad lanes of what the administration's trying to accomplish. But once we give you your general goals, we're going to trust you to do that, including hiring.”I've mentioned it a few times, but part of the Chance to Compete Act — which was mentioned in one of Trump's Day One executive orders, people forget about this — was saying, “Implement the Chance to Compete Act to the maximum extent of the law.” Bring more subject-matter expertise into the hiring process, allow more discretion for managers and input into the hiring process. I think carrying that bipartisan reform out is going to be a big step, but it's going to take a lot more work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub

In this Big Ideas for Smaller Government episode of American Potential, host David From is joined by Jeremiah Mosteller, Policy Director at Americans for Prosperity, to expose the wasteful spending and inefficiencies at the General Services Administration (GSA)—the federal agency responsible for managing office buildings, procurement, and travel across the U.S. government. They revisit the infamous $800,000 Las Vegas conference scandal, complete with a $30,000 pool party and a 2,400 sq. ft. hotel suite—paid for by taxpayers. They also uncover the GSA's multi-billion-dollar mismanagement of a long-delayed Department of Homeland Security headquarters and reveal that the federal government is using just 25% of the office space it occupies. David and Jeremiah lay out a plan to save $1.88 billion over the next decade by selling underused federal buildings—many of which are sitting empty—and call on Congress to step up and demand accountability. This episode is a revealing look at how cutting GSA waste is one more step toward saving taxpayers trillions.

Employees at the General Services Administration appear poised to test Grok 3, the artificial intelligence tool built by Elon Musk's company xAI, according to a GitHub page referencing the agency's work. The GitHub page operated by GSA and its digital government group Technology Transformation Services references the Grok AI model as one it is testing and that the team is actively discussing as part of its 10x AI Sandbox. A GSA spokesperson told FedScoop in a response to an inquiry about the agency's work with Grok “GSA is evaluating the use of several top-tier AI solutions to empower agencies and our public servants to best achieve their goals. We welcome all American companies and models who abide by our terms and conditions.”A post from Tuesday shows what appears to be one GSA employee trying to access Grok 3 for testing, but struggling to do so. Several names of the people active on the GitHub page match those of workers affiliated with GSA. The 10x AI Sandbox project is described on GitHub as “a venture studio in collaboration with the General Services Administration (GSA). Its primary goal is to enable federal agencies to experiment with artificial intelligence (AI) in a secure, FedRAMP-compliant environment.” It continues: “By providing access to base models from leading AI companies and offering advanced UI features, the sandbox empowers agencies to test and validate new AI use cases efficiently.” The public version of the 10x AI Sandbox project page on GitHub was taken down after the publication of this story, redirecting now to a 404 error page. Interest in testing Grok comes as GSA continues to work on GSAi, an artificial intelligence tool built by the agency and meant to help employees access multiple AI models. At launch, the GSAi tool included access to several systems, including tools from Anthropic and Meta. Notably, Grok came under fire last week after promoting various antisemitic statements on the Musk-owned social media platform X. A top digital rights group is pushing back on the IRS's data-sharing agreement with the Department of Homeland Security, writing in a new court filing that the pact violates federal tax code and fails to take into account the real-world consequences of bulk data disclosure. In an amicus brief filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, the Electronic Frontier Foundation argued that the “historical context” of the tax code section that ensures confidentiality of returns and return information “favors a narrow interpretation of disclosure provisions.” EFF also made the case for why the bulk disclosure of taxpayer information — in this case to Immigration and Customs Enforcement — is especially harmful due to “record linkage errors” that set the stage for “an increase in mistaken and dangerous ICE enforcement actions against taxpayers.” Nonprofit groups sued the Trump administration in March, shortly after the data-sharing deal between the IRS and ICE was announced. Soon after, the tax agency's then-acting commissioner resigned, reportedly in protest. In May, a Trump-appointed federal judge refused to block the agreement, allowing the IRS to continue delivering taxpayer data to ICE. The ruling, DHS said in a statement, was “a victory for the American people and for common sense.” As the D.C. Circuit Court considers the appeal, the Electronic Frontier Foundation wants to make sure that the “historical context” of tax and privacy law is taken into account. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every Monday-Friday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast  on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify and YouTube.

Send us a textIn this episode of FedBiz'5, Bobby Testa breaks down Executive Order 14240—"Eliminating Waste and Saving Taxpayer Dollars by Consolidating Government Procurement"—and why it's shaking up the entire landscape of federal contracting.If you're a current or aspiring government contractor, this EO isn't background noise—it's your new playbook.Uncle Sam is cleaning house. The goal? Streamline procurement, eliminate duplication, and centralize control under the General Services Administration (GSA). Agencies are being asked to submit lists of their most commonly purchased goods and services—and GSA will take it from there. That means fewer contract vehicles, more centralized buying, and a big shift in how agencies shop for solutions.This isn't a budget cut. It's a procurement evolution.And the biggest shake-up? IT. The GSA is taking a stronger lead on tech procurement, from SaaS to cybersecurity. Programs like SEWP and CIO-SP are now under a microscope. If you're in tech and not already tied into GSA contracts, it's time to get moving.Bobby's five-step FedBiz'5 Survival Guide outlines exactly how to prepare:Audit Your Contracts: Know which vehicles are vulnerable to consolidation.Get GSA Ready: If you're not on a GSA Schedule, now's the time.Refocus Your Capability Statement: Emphasize cost-effectiveness and performance, not just qualifications.Engage Early: Don't wait for the RFP—respond to RFIs and attend Industry Days.Team Strategically: Partnering with a GSA-savvy prime could be your fast track forward.EO 14240 is not the end of opportunity—it's a redefinition of it. Contractors who move quickly and align with GSA's centralized priorities can come out ahead. The ones who wait? They risk becoming invisible.The bottom line: Adaptability wins. Visibility is key. And staying passive is not an option.

AI has the potential to transform the way citizens interact with the government and the way agencies deliver services to citizens. In previous episodes in this series we have heard from a number of Executive Branch leaders on the promises and potential risks of AI and how it's starting to transform government -- internal processes, service delivery, cybersecurity, and so on. The General Services Administration (GSA) will be in the forefront of this transformation as both a lighthouse account in the application of AI and also as the lead arm for government to acquire AI technologies. Today we will be joined by Larry Allen, a seasoned veteran in the world of government procurement and contracting, who was recently appointed Associate Administrator for Governmentwide Policy and Chief Acquisition Officer at the General Services Administration.

The Trump administration will request federal agencies to cut off their contracts with Harvard University in response to what it says is the school's handling of anti-Semitism and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. There are 30 federal contracts worth about $100 million, according to the General Services Administration (GSA). A letter to the agencies is scheduled to be sent on May 27, a GSA spokesperson told The Epoch Times.Four people were "very, very ill in hospital" after sustaining injuries when a car ploughed into a crowd of Liverpool fans during a Premier League title parade, the city's mayor said on Tuesday, adding he hoped they would "pull through."FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino said the bureau is looking at launching investigations into possible public corruption cases. Bongino says he and FBI Director Kash Patel made the decision to either reopen or allocate additional resources to the cases shortly after swearing in.

AI has the potential to transform the way citizens interact with the government and the way agencies deliver services to citizens.  In previous episodes we have heard from a number of Executive Branch leaders on the promises and potential risks of AI and how it's starting to transform government -- internal processes, service delivery, cybersecurity, and so on. The General Services Administration (GSA) will be in the forefront of this transformation as both a lighthouse account in the application of AI and also as the lead arm for government to acquire AI technologies.Today we will be joined by Larry Allen, a seasoned veteran in the world of government procurement and contracting, who was recently appointed Associate Administrator for Governmentwide Policy and Chief Acquisition Officer at the General Services Administration. 

A sweeping executive order is shaking up how the U.S. government procures common goods and services, shifting authority to the General Services Administration (GSA) and aiming to cut inefficiencies in federal buying.In this episode inspired by the artcile titled: Federal contract cutbacks: How firms can deal with DOGE upheaval, we examine:What the March 2025 executive order really mandatesHow consulting giants like Deloitte, Booz Allen, and Accenture could lose hundreds of millions in federal revenueWhat “DOGE upheaval” means for federal contractorsFour actionable ways firms can pivot to stay competitive in a rapidly centralizing procurement environmentWhether you're in government services or watching adjacent sectors, this change could have far-reaching effects—and presents an opportunity to rethink how value is delivered in federal contracts.What You'll Learn in This Episode:

"The enormity of the challenges we have in front of us right now, in terms of the deficit of housing, just requires all of us to work together." This episode revisits the National Housing Supply Summit in March 2025! In this conversation, Devon Tilly and co-host Dennis Steigerwalt chats with Matt Hoffman and Stephen O'Conner about affordable housing, the new administration, and the White Paper: Federal Policy Opportunities to Expand Housing Supply. Request a copy of the White Paper here: https://housingsupply.us/ Our co-host Dennis is active in all things real estate with a specific focus on innovation in the residential development and homebuilding ecosystems. He is a ULI Residential Neighborhood Product Council member, a Professional Builder 40 under 40 recipient, and an active member of Geek Estate. In his spare time he enjoys big adventures with his wife and sons on the water and in the mountains. Dennis is the president of the Housing Innovation Alliance, a future oriented community for production homebuilding. The Housing Innovation Summit is the best place to get engaged + connected where you'll gather insights + have a voice at each turn. The 2025 Summit is co-hosted by the Mascaro Center for Sustainable Innovation at the University of Pittsburgh. We'll be at Phipps Conservatory in the Oakland neighborhood and hosting Innovation in Action tours around Pittsburgh. Matt Hoffman has spent his career applying his strategy, business development, and innovation skills to solving problems that create growth and opportunity in the public, private, and non-profit sectors. With over 20 years' experience building businesses in the housing and technology sectors, in February 2024 he completed a two-year assignment as the Senior Advisor to the Commissioner of the Public Buildings Service at the General Services Administration (GSA), which oversees the U.S. government's civilian real estate portfolio of more than 365 million square feet. His core focus was the implications of “the future of work” on the office portfolio and transitioning federal buildings to net zero emissions. He helped launch the federal government's Workplace Innovation Lab (WIL) and federal coworking offering (think WeWork just for federal employees). He represented GSA on the White House's housing supply interagency policy council. Based in the Washington, DC area, Matt has a passion for finding housing solutions for the Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (I/DD) community and currently chairs the real estate finance committee of Benedictine Programs & Services, which helps I/DD children and adults achieve their greatest potential. He is a graduate of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government (MPP) and Brown University (BA). Throughout his distinguished career, Dr. O'Connor has been deeply involved in addressing the multifaceted challenges surrounding the crisis in affordable housing. His long and effective history of advocacy focuses on the promotion of equitable housing opportunities through the development of inclusive communities to enhance the quality of life for diverse populations. With a Ph.D. in Planning and Public Policy, Dr. O'Connor's expertise extends across various sectors within the housing spectrum, including affordable housing finance, housing policy analysis, and land use planning. He is often called upon by governmental agencies, political campaigns, and non-profit organizations to help develop effective policy frameworks and practical interventions to address housing disparities. As an educator, Dr. O'Connor is committed to developing the next generation of housing advocates, developers, and policymakers. He serves as a mentor and a teacher, inspiring students to explore the intersection of housing, social equity, and public policy. His dynamic teaching style and hands-on approach are informed by more than thirty years of housing industry experience. Personally, Dr. O'Connor and his wife, Sandy, have served long tenures with several medical mission charities. In addition, they have founded two 501(c)(3) organizations to raise money for cure-focused medical research. They have two children and two beautiful grandsons.   Read James Rouse's book: https://a.co/d/4cVwaKN Read the "Abundance" book:  https://a.co/d/1N0kr4e Keep up with the Art of Construction (AOC) podcast on Instagram, Facebook, and LinkedIn! Subscribe to us and leave us a review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify!

In today's episode of The Daily Windup, we have our guest who shares valuable insights for small businesses looking to secure government contracts. We talk about the importance of understanding the target company and its procurement needs. Advising small businesses to research the company's upcoming bids and analyze the scope of work in previous or draft requests for proposals (RFPs). By identifying areas where your company excels and can offer better value, small businesses can approach the larger company and propose a partnership. We also provide you resources for conducting research, such as the Federal Procurement Data System (fpds.gov), where small businesses can look up contracts won by a company. Additionally, you can explore the General Services Administration (GSA) schedules and search for labor categories or products that align with your own offerings. By conducting thorough research beyond the surface-level information on a company's website, small businesses can identify potential opportunities and increase their chances of partnering with larger companies for government contracts.

Alan Thomas, founder of Alpha Tango Strategies, and BillGormley, president of the Gormley Group, join host Roger Waldron on this week's Off the Shelf for an engrossing discussion of the evolving federal procurement market.  The discussion highlights the consolidation of procurement functions at the General Services Administration (GSA) pursuant to the president's executive order.  Thomas and Gormley, both former senior executives at GSA, share their insights on the role of GSA, the management opportunities, and considerations of consolidating federalprocurement for common products and services with GSA's Federal AcquisitionServices (FAS).  They also provide historical context to GSA's role in federal procurement and how the consolidation will reshape the federal market.  As part of that discussion, Thomas and Gormley share their thoughts regarding consolidation opportunities and implementation strategies for GSA and FAS.  Other topics covered include right-sizing GSA's Multiple Award Schedule program, the impending rewrite of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, and thestate of the IT GWACs.     Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Alan Thomas, founder of Alpha Tango Strategies, and Bill Gormley, president of the Gormley Group, join host Roger Waldron on this week's Off the Shelf for an engrossing discussion of the evolving federal procurement market.  The discussion highlights the consolidation of procurement functions at the General Services Administration (GSA) pursuant to the president's executive order.  Thomas and Gormley, both former senior executives at GSA, share their insights on the role of GSA, the management opportunities, and considerations of consolidating federal procurement for common products and services with GSA's Federal Acquisition Services (FAS).  They also provide historical context to GSA's role in federal procurement and how the consolidation will reshape the federal market.  As part of that discussion, Thomas and Gormley share their thoughts regarding consolidation opportunities and implementation strategies for GSA and FAS.  Other topics covered include right-sizing GSA's Multiple Award Schedule program, the impending rewrite of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, and the state of the IT GWACs.     Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Michael Duffy, President Donald Trump's nominee for Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, has committed to reviewing the Pentagon's Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) 2.0 if confirmed. This revamped program, effective since December, mandates that defense contractors handling controlled, unclassified information comply with specific cybersecurity standards to qualify for Department of Defense contracts. Concerns have been raised about the burden these regulations may impose on smaller firms, with a report indicating that over 50% of respondents felt unprepared for the program's requirements. Duffy aims to balance security needs with regulatory burdens, recognizing the vulnerability of small and medium-sized businesses in the face of cyber threats.In addition to the CMMC developments, the General Services Administration (GSA) is set to unveil significant changes to the Federal Risk Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP). The new plan for 2025 focuses on establishing standards and policies rather than approving cloud authorization packages, which previously extended the process for up to 11 months. The GSA intends to automate at least 80% of current requirements, allowing cloud service providers to demonstrate compliance more efficiently, while reducing reliance on external support services.Across the Atlantic, the UK government has announced a comprehensive cybersecurity and resilience bill aimed at strengthening defenses against cyber threats. This legislation will bring more firms under regulatory oversight, specifically targeting managed service providers (MSPs) that provide core IT services and have extensive access to client systems. The proposed regulations will enhance incident reporting requirements and empower the Information Commissioner's Office to proactively identify and mitigate cyber risks, setting higher expectations for cybersecurity practices among MSPs.The episode also discusses the implications of recent developments in AI and cybersecurity. With companies like SolarWinds, CloudFlare, and Red Hat enhancing their offerings, the integration of AI into business operations raises concerns about security and compliance. The ease of generating fake documents using AI tools poses a significant risk to industries reliant on document verification. As the landscape evolves, IT service providers must adapt by advising clients on updated compliance practices and strengthening their cybersecurity measures to address these emerging threats. Four things to know today 00:00 New Regulatory Shifts for MSPs: CMMC 2.0, FedRAMP Overhaul, and UK Cyber Security Bill05:21 CISA Cuts and Signal on Gov Devices: What Could Go Wrong?08:15 AI Solutions Everywhere! SolarWinds, Cloudflare, and Red Hat Go All In11:37 OpenAI's Image Generation Capabilities Raise Fraud Worries: How Businesses Should Respond  Supported by:  https://www.huntress.com/mspradio/https://cometbackup.com/?utm_source=mspradio&utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=sponsorship  Join Dave April 22nd to learn about Marketing in the AI Era.  Signup here:  https://hubs.la/Q03dwWqg0 All our Sponsors: https://businessof.tech/sponsors/ Do you want the show on your podcast app or the written versions of the stories? Subscribe to the Business of Tech: https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe/Looking for a link from the stories? The entire script of the show, with links to articles, are posted in each story on https://www.businessof.tech/ Support the show on Patreon: https://patreon.com/mspradio/ Want to be a guest on Business of Tech: Daily 10-Minute IT Services Insights? Send Dave Sobel a message on PodMatch, here: https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech Want our stuff? Cool Merch? Wear “Why Do We Care?” - Visit https://mspradio.myspreadshop.com Follow us on:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079/YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio/TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftechBluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech

SUBSCRIBE TO WATCH THE VIDEOS FIRST https://www.youtube.com/@govclose/?sub_confirmation=1Get the GovClose Certification: https://www.govclose.com/sales-certification Our Book is FREE, But Only Here: https://www.dodcontract.com/Watch How to Find Gov Contract LeadsThis is a video about Trump's New Executive Order: Will You Need a GSA Schedule to Sell to the Government?This video discusses a significant executive order signed by President Trump that affects how businesses sell to U.S. federal agencies. The executive order, signed on March 20th, 2025, aims to centralize federal procurement through the General Services Administration (GSA). The video details what this means for businesses, particularly those without a GSA schedule, and the implications for selling common goods and services to the government. It explains the role of the GSA, the potential impact on small businesses, and the timeline for implementation. Practical advice is given for businesses considering applying for a GSA schedule, and additional resources are offered for navigating these changes.00:00 Introduction to GSA Schedule and Executive Order00:29 Understanding GSA and Its Role01:45 Impact of the Executive Order on Businesses02:31 What is GSA and Contract Vehicles?04:22 Personal Success Stories in Government Contracting05:51 Navigating the GSA Schedule Process08:42 Conclusion and Future InsightsThis is a video about Trump's New Executive Order: Will You Need a GSA Schedule to Sell to the Government?#Trump #GSA #govclose

Former Trump administration cybersecurity official Sean Planky has been nominated to lead the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). His nomination comes amid significant layoffs at the agency, where over 100 employees were let go, including key members of the Red Team responsible for simulating cyberattacks. These cuts raise concerns about CISA's ability to maintain cybersecurity amid ongoing federal budget constraints, potentially leading to increased threats in the private sector as federal infrastructure and intelligence sharing weaken.In the realm of artificial intelligence, the General Services Administration (GSA) has introduced a custom chatbot named GSAI to automate various government tasks, coinciding with significant job cuts within the agency. While the chatbot aims to enhance efficiency, internal memos have warned employees against inputting sensitive information. This trend reflects a broader movement in the federal government towards tech-driven workforce reductions, raising questions about data privacy and the reliability of AI tools in government operations.Utah has made headlines by passing legislation requiring App Store operators to verify the ages of users and obtain parental consent for minors downloading apps. This law, aimed at enhancing online safety for children, has garnered support from major tech companies but has also faced criticism regarding potential infringements on privacy rights. The Supreme Court is expected to examine age verification issues, particularly concerning adult content websites, highlighting the ongoing debate over online safety regulations.The podcast also discusses the competitive landscape of AI, with Google reporting continued growth in search queries despite the rise of ChatGPT. New benchmarks have been developed to measure the honesty of AI models, revealing that larger models do not necessarily correlate with higher honesty rates. As companies like Microsoft and Amazon introduce advanced AI tools, the implications for businesses are significant, emphasizing the need for oversight and governance in AI deployment to mitigate risks associated with inaccuracies and compliance issues. Three things to know today00:00 Cybersecurity Jobs Cut, AI Hired, and Kids Get ID'd—Welcome to the Future of Tech Policy05:45 ChatGPT Isn't Killing Google Search—And AI Lies More Than You'd Think08:27 Microsoft and OpenAI: A Rocky Relationship, While AI Prices Tumble Supported by:  https://getflexpoint.com/msp-radio/  Event: https://www.nerdiocon.com/ All our Sponsors: https://businessof.tech/sponsors/ Do you want the show on your podcast app or the written versions of the stories? Subscribe to the Business of Tech: https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe/Looking for a link from the stories? The entire script of the show, with links to articles, are posted in each story on https://www.businessof.tech/ Support the show on Patreon: https://patreon.com/mspradio/ Want to be a guest on Business of Tech: Daily 10-Minute IT Services Insights? Send Dave Sobel a message on PodMatch, here: https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech Want our stuff? Cool Merch? Wear “Why Do We Care?” - Visit https://mspradio.myspreadshop.com Follow us on:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079/YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio/TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftechBluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech

In this episode of AI, Government, and the Future, we are joined by Nathan Manzotti, Director of Data Analytics and AI Centers of Excellence at the General Services Administration (GSA), to discuss the current state and future potential of AI in the federal government. They explore GSA's role in enabling AI adoption across agencies, key initiatives like AI training and communities of practice, and the challenges of attracting AI talent in government. Nathan also shares his insights on the need for collaboration between government, industry, academia, and nonprofits to drive responsible AI innovation.

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found Click On Picture To See Larger Picture The old Federal Reserve system is imploding. The [CB] are in trouble. Trump is now putting all the pieces in place and he is dismantling the Federal Reserve System. Trump is continually added more pieces to the puzzle to remove the people from the system and create a new system that will fund the government. The [DS] is in a panic today, Pam Bondi continually threatened the [DS] with the Epstein client list and she was able to expose the sleepers in NY Fed office. Kash and Pam are now investigating. We are in an information war and this was a test to see what ammunition the [DS] has. Phase I complete of Epstein release, moving to the next phase.   (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Economy Initial Unemployment Claims Spike by 22,000 Not DOGE Related Unemployment claims jumped but it's not Federal in nature.   In the week ending February 22, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 242,000, an increase of 22,000 from the previous week's revised level. The previous week's level was revised up by 1,000 from 219,000 to 220,000. The 4-week moving average was 224,000, an increase of 8,500 from the previous week's revised average. The previous week's average was revised up by 250 from 215,250 to 215,500. Initial Claims and 4-Week Average DOGE, Random, or Something Else? The Department of Labor data rules out DOGE. Source: mishtalk.com US Pending Home Sales Collapse To Record Lows Pending home sales tumbled 4.6% MoM in January (after dropping 4.2% MoM in December), dramatically worse than the 0.9% MoM decline expected and dragging YoY sales down 5.2%... Source: Bloomberg This drop pushed pending home sales index to its all-time lows...   Contract signings tumbled 9.2% in the South - the biggest home-selling region in the country - parts of which experienced historic snowfall. That marked the biggest drop since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic. Worse still, home prices continue to rise and squeeze would-be buyers. c Source: zerohedge.com Eli Lilly Announces Plan To Invest $27 Billion In America Amid Trump Tariff Threats Eli Lilly announced that it plans to more than double its U.S. manufacturing investment this year to $50 billion as President Trump threatens to place tariffs on pharmaceutical imports. The drug giant plans to begin building four domestic manufacturing locations in 2025 and add 13,000 high-wage manufacturing and construction jobs, according to a press release. The company claimed the plans account for the largest pharmaceutical manufacturing investment in U.S. history. 

This is a crossover episode of the Business Government HourJoin host Michael Keegan for a Special Edition of The Business of Government Hour – The National Academy of Public Administration FALL MEETING SERIES. This fifth in a series of conversations exploring the key challenges facing public management today with a focus on technology innovation and procurement. Michael welcomes NAPA Fellow Laura Stanton, Assistant Commissioner, Federal Acquisition Service's Office of Information Technology Category (ITC), U.S. General Services Administration (GSA).Links:Visit The Business Government Hour homepageMusic Credits: Sea Breeze by Vlad Gluschenko | https://soundcloud.com/vgl9Music promoted by https://www.free-stock-music.comCreative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en_

This is the final conversations exploring the key challenges facing public management today with a focus on technology innovation and procurement strategies. Michael welcomes NAPA Fellow Laura Stanton, Assistant Commissioner, Federal Acquisition Service's Office of Information Technology Category (ITC), U.S. General Services Administration (GSA). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is the final conversations exploring the key challenges facing publicmanagement today with a focus on technology innovation and procurementstrategies. Michael welcomes NAPA Fellow Laura Stanton, Assistant Commissioner,Federal Acquisition Service's Office of Information Technology Category (ITC),U.S. General Services Administration (GSA). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode, we break down the Draft ASCEND BPA Pool 1 opportunity, a monumental $5B contract from the General Services Administration (GSA). With the anticipated RFP release in the 2nd quarter of FY25, this BPA is poised to reshape the cloud and IT solutions landscape. Learn about the key contract details, strategic preparation tips, and what businesses need to know to compete for one of the 10 awards.Stay informed and ahead of the competition! Listen to our podcast for expert insights into the ASCEND BPA opportunity and how your business can seize this game-changing contract.Contact ProposalHelper at sales@proposalhelper.com to find similar opportunities and help you build a realistic and winning pipeline.

In this episode, we discuss the General Services Administration (GSA) order to address the risk of Legionella and other waterborne pathogens in the water systems of GSA-controlled buildings. The GSA, which owns 1,600 federal buildings and leases space in over 6,500 buildings nationwide, was spurred to action after detecting elevated levels of Legionella bacteria at six GSA-controlled buildings in different regions since 2023. Our guest Dr. Abraham Cullom, a microbiologist with expertise in plumbing systems, talks about the GSA order and the urgent need to stay on top of emerging best water quality practices for plumbing systems to protect building occupants.Related links: https://www.gsa.gov/blog/2024/01/31/gsa-strengthens-water-quality-efforts-in-federal-buildings 

On this episode, host Dave Wennergren and his guests discuss customer experience, technology leadership, the Imagine Nation ELC Conference and our CX Summit. Guests:Danielle Metz, director, Information Management and Technology & CIO, Office of the Secretary of Defense, executive vice president for the American Council for Technology and Government Chair for Imagine Nation ELC 2023. https://www.linkedin.com/in/danielle-metz-135b0019/Martha Dorris, founder of Dorris Consulting International, former deputy associate administrator for Citizen Services at the General Services Administration (GSA), A member of the Industry Advisory Council Executive Committee, a former president of the American Council for Technology and former Industry Chair of the ACT-IAC CX COI. https://www.linkedin.com/in/martha-dorris-798b3b7/ Additional Resources:To learn more about ACT-IAC, please visit our website: https://www.actiac.org/To register for the ACT-IAC Imagine Nation ELC conference: https://web.cvent.com/event/c05d8d9e-ce3a-419f-ac97-f8041fc3b401/summaryTo register for the ACT-IAC CX Summit: https://web.cvent.com/event/620f506b-db90-40c9-8930-c5dc20fcf904/summaryLearn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

On this episode, host Dave Wennergren and his guests discuss customer experience, technology leadership, the Imagine Nation ELC Conference and our CX Summit.  Guests: Danielle Metz, director, Information Management and Technology & CIO, Office of the Secretary of Defense, executive vice president for the American Council for Technology and Government Chair for Imagine Nation ELC 2023. https://www.linkedin.com/in/danielle-metz-135b0019/ Martha Dorris, founder of Dorris Consulting International, former deputy associate administrator for Citizen Services at the General Services Administration (GSA), A member of the Industry Advisory Council Executive Committee, a former president of the American Council for Technology and former Industry Chair of the ACT-IAC CX COI. https://www.linkedin.com/in/martha-dorris-798b3b7/   Additional Resources: To learn more about ACT-IAC, please visit our website: https://www.actiac.org/ To register for the ACT-IAC Imagine Nation ELC conference: https://web.cvent.com/event/c05d8d9e-ce3a-419f-ac97-f8041fc3b401/summary To register for the ACT-IAC CX Summit: https://web.cvent.com/event/620f506b-db90-40c9-8930-c5dc20fcf904/summary Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Jeff Koses, senior procurement executive at the General Services Administration (GSA) joins Off the Shelf for a focused discussion on GSA's current procurement policy priorities.Koses talks about the implementation and expansion of Transactional Data Reporting (TDR) across the Federal Supply Schedules (FSS) program. He highlights the positive impact on small businesses, customer agencies, and GSA through the management, evaluation, and use of the data to enhance competition, value, and security.Koses also discusses GSA's efforts in supporting the acquisition workforce both within GSA and across government.Finallly Koses shares his thoughts on the potential role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in federal procurement. He discusses the potential uses of AI in procurement operations and the key considerations in the procurement of AI. The opportunities and challenges of AI will be the focus of a new GSA advisory committee on AI. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Jeff Koses, senior procurement executive at the General Services Administration (GSA) joins Off the Shelf for a focused discussion on GSA's current procurement policy priorities. Koses talks about the implementation and expansion of Transactional Data Reporting (TDR) across the Federal Supply Schedules (FSS) program. He highlights the positive impact on small businesses, customer agencies, and GSA through the management, evaluation, and use of the data to enhance competition, value, and security. Koses also discusses GSA's efforts in supporting the acquisition workforce both within GSA and across government. Finallly Koses shares his thoughts on the potential role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in federal procurement. He discusses the potential uses of AI in procurement operations and the key considerations in the procurement of AI. The opportunities and challenges of AI will be the focus of a new GSA advisory committee on AI.

The White House will issue final FedRAMP modernization guidance on Friday, addressing changes in the cloud market and agency needs for diverse mission delivery. The guidance aims to reform the cloud security authorization program by focusing on strategic goals, including rigorous reviews and swift mitigation of security weaknesses by cloud service providers. The memo emphasizes an automated process for security assessments to reduce participant burden and speed up cloud solution implementation. Agencies and the General Services Administration (GSA) have deadlines ranging from 180 days to two years to align with the new requirements, ensuring continuous monitoring and the use of Open Secure Control Assessment Language (OSCAL). In other news, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced a major reorganization of its technology policy functions. The chief technology, data, and AI officer roles will move from the Assistant Secretary for Administration to the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC), now also titled Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy (ASTP/ONC). The 405(d) Program will transfer to the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response. HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra stated the reorganization aims to clarify and consolidate critical functions, preparing the department for future challenges. The new ASTP/ONC office will also seek to fill permanent roles for chief technology, AI, and data officers. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every Monday-Friday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast on on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify and YouTube.

This Day in Legal History: Narcotic Control Act Becomes LawOn July 18, 1956, the Narcotic Control Act became law, significantly transforming the landscape of narcotics regulation in the United States. The Act was introduced to combat the growing concerns about drug abuse and trafficking. It imposed harsher penalties for violations of existing drug laws, including mandatory minimum sentences and the death penalty for certain repeat offenders. The Act expanded federal control over the use, possession, and sale of narcotic drugs and marijuana, aiming to curb the rising tide of addiction and illegal drug activities. This legislation marked a pivotal shift towards more stringent drug policies, reflecting the era's intensifying war on drugs. Enforcement was also bolstered, granting law enforcement agencies greater authority to tackle drug-related crimes. For better or worse, the Narcotic Control Act laid the groundwork for future drug legislation and enforcement strategies, significantly influencing the country's approach to drug control for decades to come.U.S. prosecutors have appealed a federal judge's decision to dismiss the criminal case against Donald Trump regarding the retention of classified documents post-presidency. Special Counsel Jack Smith, appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland, was deemed unlawfully appointed by Judge Aileen Cannon. Cannon, a Trump appointee, ruled that Garland did not have Congressional authorization to appoint Smith with such extensive powers. This ruling has favored Trump, who is the Republican candidate for the upcoming presidential election. Trump's campaign called for the dismissal of all four criminal cases against him following this decision. Cannon's ruling dismissed charges against Trump and his co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, who were accused of obstructing the investigation. Trump had been indicted in other cases, including a New York conviction related to hush money payments and charges in Georgia over election interference. The appeal is directed to the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where many judges were appointed by Trump.Prosecutors appeal Trump classified documents case dismissal | ReutersThe espionage trial of Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich resumed yesterday July 17, 2024, in Yekaterinburg, Russia, with witness testimonies heard behind closed doors. Gershkovich, accused of spying for the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, faces up to 20 years in prison. Arrested in March 2023, he has been held in Moscow's Lefortovo prison since then. Both Gershkovich and his employer, as well as the U.S. government, deny the allegations, asserting that he was simply performing his duties as an accredited journalist. The Wall Street Journal has criticized the trial as a sham and continues to advocate for his release. Russian authorities claim to have irrefutable evidence of his espionage activities, though specifics have not been disclosed. The trial is closed to the press, a standard procedure in Russia for cases involving treason or espionage. U.S. officials view Gershkovich and another detained American, Paul Whelan, as bargaining chips for a potential prisoner exchange, with President Putin indicating openness to such negotiations. The trial will continue on Friday with arguments from the respective lawyers.Russian trial of detained US reporter Gershkovich hears witness testimony in secret | ReutersThe Biden administration announced the testing of 17 new climate technologies in federal buildings, part of a $9.6 million initiative aimed at advancing near-commercial climate tech. The General Services Administration (GSA), which oversees federal properties, will facilitate these real-world trials. The effort aligns with the administration's broader goal to reduce carbon emissions across federal facilities. The GSA will select testing sites by the end of the year, with evaluations concluding in 2026.Technologies include Armstrong World Industries' ceiling tiles that manage heat, Brightcore Energy's compact geothermal drilling rigs, and Gridscape's modular microgrid systems. Other innovations involve Nostromo Energy's ice storage cooling systems, SafeTraces' air quality mapping using DNA-tagged particles, Moxion Power's portable battery systems, and Lamarr.AI's drones for building audits.Successful technologies will be connected with energy service companies (ESCOs) through a unique matchmaking session to drive scalability. GSA administrator Robin Carnahan emphasized that the program supports market demand rather than picking winners, suggesting that the adoption of these technologies will persist regardless of potential administrative changes. The initiative aims to demonstrate the practical benefits and cost savings of these advanced climate technologies.US Taps Federal Buildings to Test Next-Generation Climate TechThe Biden administration's effort to strengthen protections for gay and transgender students under Title IX remains blocked in ten states following rulings from the Fifth and Sixth Circuit Courts of Appeals. The rulings represent a significant setback for President Biden's transgender rights initiatives, as the appeals courts indicated the rule might be unconstitutional.In the Sixth Circuit, Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton upheld a district court's injunction against the rule in Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, and West Virginia. The court argued that the rule's definition of sex discrimination likely exceeded the Education Department's authority. This decision prevents these states from implementing the rule, which includes provisions like using preferred pronouns and allowing students to participate in sports consistent with their gender identity.Meanwhile, the Fifth Circuit upheld a separate injunction for Louisiana, Mississippi, Idaho, and Montana. This ruling came after the Department of Education failed to convince the court that delaying the rule would cause irreparable harm. The court noted that enforcing the rule could impose significant administrative costs and legal uncertainties on these states.The rulings underscore the ongoing legal battles over expanding Title IX protections to include sexual orientation and gender identity, with conservative states challenging the federal government's authority in this domain. These setbacks come after a similar injunction was upheld by the Sixth Circuit in June, affecting federal guidance documents related to LGBTQ+ student rights.The Biden administration's rule, set to take effect on August 1, 2024, is now blocked in multiple states, with ongoing litigation likely to continue influencing the rule's future. The cases in question are Tennessee v. Cardona and Louisiana v. US Department of Education.Block on Biden Trans Rights Rule Upheld by 2 Appeals Courts (1) This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is pushing forward with its artificial intelligence initiatives by awarding sole-source contracts to Abridge AI, Inc. and Nuance Communications, Inc. These contracts aim to develop AI-driven healthcare dictation tools. The pilot program will employ ambient AI technology to transcribe clinical encounters and seamlessly generate medical notes. This initiative is part of the VA's broader strategy to enhance healthcare delivery by integrating these tools with its electronic health record system, thereby improving efficiency and reducing manual data entry. Additionally, the Social Security Administration (SSA) is transitioning its long-time online account users to Login.gov, a centralized identity verification service managed by the General Services Administration (GSA). This transition affects users who created accounts before September 2021. SSA Commissioner Martin O'Malley emphasized that this move aims to enhance security and streamline access to SSA services. Over five million users have already made the switch, reflecting a broader federal effort to standardize authentication processes across agencies. Hear more on today's episode of The Daily Scoop Podcast.

The Department of Commerce's Tech Hubs program, a key initiative supported by the CHIPS and Science Act, aims to bolster federal research and innovation in emerging technologies, especially in areas outside major cities. Senior Biden administration officials discussed the program's impact during a call announcing 12 new initiatives that will receive funding. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo emphasized the need to decentralize the tech ecosystem, noting that 90% of new tech jobs have been concentrated in just five cities over the past two decades. Key focus areas for these Tech Hubs include uncrewed aerial systems, IT, semiconductors, high-performance materials, and grid resilience systems. Among the recent grant recipients are the Elevate Quantum TechFund in Colorado and the Wisconsin Biohealth TechHub. In other news, the General Services Administration (GSA) has announced a request for proposals for the Alliant 3 Governmentwide Acquisition Contract, notable for its unprecedented no-ceiling dollar amount. This contract seeks to cover a broad range of IT services, including AI, biometrics, quantum computing, and more, with a focus on emerging technologies. Greg Godbout and Noah Kunin, former leaders of the GSA's 18F digital team, join The Daily Scoop Podcast host Billy Mitchell to discuss their new initiative, info2insight. This open-source community aims to foster data-driven decision-making in government and accelerate the adoption of data analytics. They highlight the progress in government digital services and the need to pivot towards data analytics to manage the increasing information from AI and ML technologies. They share their vision for info2insight as a collaborative platform for civil servants, private-sector technologists, and academics to drive better governance through data insights.

The General Services Administration (GSA) has launched a new initiative to prioritize generative AI technologies in the FedRAMP cloud authorization process, aligning with a 2023 executive order. This effort focuses on accelerating the approval of AI capabilities such as chat interfaces, code generation, and image generators to enhance their integration into government systems. Additionally, the Chief Data Officers (CDO) Council is facing significant challenges due to the absence of essential Phase Two guidance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which is necessary for implementing effective data governance practices. Despite these hurdles, the CDO Council continues to support federal agencies in managing and disseminating data effectively, underscoring ongoing efforts to incorporate advanced technologies and robust data management within the federal government.

The General Services Administration (GSA) deals with many governmentwide concerns, including real estate and office space. For more than 20 years, auditors at the Government Accountability Office (GAO) have considered federal real property management a high-risk issue. GAO recently reiterated a list of recommendations for the GSA on real estate. For more, Federal Drive Host Tom Temin talked with GAO's director of physical infrastructure issues, Heather Krause. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The General Services Administration (GSA) deals with many governmentwide concerns, including real estate and office space. For more than 20 years, auditors at the Government Accountability Office (GAO) have considered federal real property management a high-risk issue. GAO recently reiterated a list of recommendations for the GSA on real estate. For more, Federal Drive Host Tom Temin talked with GAO's director of physical infrastructure issues, Heather Krause. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode of the Govcon Giants Podcast, Randie Ward sits down with Shauna Weatherly, President and Founder of Federal Subcontract Solutions LLC, to delve into Weatherly's extensive experience in Federal acquisition. With over 35 years of hands-on experience and a career spanning various crucial roles within the General Services Administration (GSA), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and more, Weatherly brings a wealth of knowledge to the table. Throughout the discussion, Weatherly shares insights gleaned from her tenure as a Senior Procurement Analyst at GSA, where she served as an advisor to the Civilian Agency Acquisition Council, analyzing the impacts of new laws, executive orders, and Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) rules on SAM.gov. Her roles as Lead Business Management Specialist and Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) on the governmentwide GSA SmartPay 3 contracts provided her with invaluable experience in navigating complex procurement processes. Weatherly's leadership positions, including Director of the National Airspace System, Logistics, and Facilities O&M Contract Branch at FAA, and Contracting Chief at USACE's Tulsa District, showcase her expertise in developing acquisition strategies, evaluating sources, and negotiating contracts across various industries. Additionally, her deployment to the Afghanistan Engineer District highlighted her commitment to overseeing compliance processes for construction contracts in challenging environments. As a seasoned instructor and sought-after speaker on Federal acquisition topics, Weatherly brings a unique perspective to the conversation, offering practical advice for small businesses looking to navigate the intricacies of Federal acquisition policies and processes. Her dedication to supporting the Department of Defense (DoD), FAA, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), GSA, and civilian agencies underscores her passion for ensuring mission success. Join us as we explore Weatherly's journey from Federal Civilian Service to entrepreneurship, and gain valuable insights into the world of Federal acquisition from one of the industry's most respected experts.   Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/shauna-weatherly/  Website: https://www.fedsubk.com/about  Contact: https://www.fedsubk.com/contact-us  Email: info@mysite.com 

In this episode of AI, Government, and the Future, we are joined by Nathan Manzotti, Director of Data Analytics and AI Centers of Excellence at the General Services Administration (GSA), to discuss the current state and future potential of AI in the federal government. They explore GSA's role in enabling AI adoption across agencies, key initiatives like AI training and communities of practice, and the challenges of attracting AI talent in government. Nathan also shares his insights on the need for collaboration between government, industry, academia, and nonprofits to drive responsible AI innovation.

Two leading House Republicans have initiated an investigation into the contentious methodology employed for determining the location of the FBI's future headquarters, as shared by The Washington Post. The investigation was announced by Republican Representatives James Comer and Jim Jordan through a statement delivered on a Friday, according to the Post. This action was sparked when a high-ranking official at the General Services Administration (GSA), responsible for selecting a new spot to replace the deteriorating J. Edgar Hoover building, dismissed a unanimous site recommendation presented by the government panel. It was observed that the said panel's pick, a parcel of land owned by the GSA official's previous employer, was completely disregarded. 'It is the duty of the Committees to delve into potential conflicts of interest, as well as any misapplication of American taxpayers' funds,' Jordan shared with the Post. He mentioned that the House is in desperate pursuit of significant information concerning the scandal surrounding the GSA's choice to dismiss the panel-recommended location in Springfield, Virginia, instead opting for Greenbelt, Maryland, for the FBI's new headquarters. The panel involved in this critical decision included two GSA representatives and one from the FBI. Nina Albert, a former senior official at the GSA, was the figure who decided to overturn their site recommendation. The decision-making process was chastised by FBI Director Christopher Wray in an internal communication.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode, we talk with Barbara Morton and Martha Dorris about customer experience efforts in the federal government.   Guests:Barbara Morton, deputy chief Veterans Experience Officer, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and government advisor to the ACT-IAC CX COI. https://www.linkedin.com/in/barbara-c-morton-77b28085/Martha Dorris, founder of Dorris Consulting International, former deputy associate administrator for Citizen Services at the General Services Administration (GSA), former president of the American Council for Technology and former Industry Chair of the ACT-IAC CX COI. https://www.linkedin.com/in/martha-dorris-798b3b7/ Additional Resources:To Register for the CX Summit 2023, please visit: https://web.cvent.com/event/d3312c9d-eaa6-4f52-b8a4-f5b04401fde6/summaryTo learn more about ACT-IAC, please visit our website: https://www.actiac.org/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

On this episode, we talk with Barbara Morton and Martha Dorris about customer experience efforts in the federal government.    Guests: Barbara Morton, deputy chief Veterans Experience Officer, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and government advisor to the ACT-IAC CX COI. https://www.linkedin.com/in/barbara-c-morton-77b28085/ Martha Dorris, founder of Dorris Consulting International, former deputy associate administrator for Citizen Services at the General Services Administration (GSA), former president of the American Council for Technology and former Industry Chair of the ACT-IAC CX COI. https://www.linkedin.com/in/martha-dorris-798b3b7/   Additional Resources: To Register for the CX Summit 2023, please visit: https://web.cvent.com/event/d3312c9d-eaa6-4f52-b8a4-f5b04401fde6/summary To learn more about ACT-IAC, please visit our website: https://www.actiac.org/

In this conversation, we had the privilege of interviewing Shaun Hartman, an accomplished professional with an impressive career in the United States Air Force spanning 12 years. Shaun began his journey as a firefighter and later transitioned into acquisitions, eventually becoming a Defense Industry Consultant and Regional Program Manager until 2016. Currently, Shaun holds the esteemed positions of Combat Rescue or Medical Logistics Contract Manager in the US Air Force Reserves and Region 4 Customer Service Director of the General Services Administration, stationed at Patrick Air Force Base. He plays a crucial role in purchasing and ensuring seamless coordination between customers and vendors, effectively providing solutions and support in his capacity as a liaison. During our engaging conversation, Shaun delved into key topics that shed light on the functioning of the General Services Administration (GSA). He elucidated on the significant responsibilities undertaken by the GSA and how they play a pivotal role in facilitating government procurement. Shaun provided valuable insights into GSA's solicitation process, offering a comprehensive understanding of the steps involved and tips for navigating it successfully. Furthermore, he shared invaluable advice for leveraging GSA's eBuy platform effectively, imparting practical guidance for businesses looking to engage with the GSA. This episode offers a wealth of knowledge for anyone involved in government contracting, offering a glimpse into the intricate workings of GSA and valuable tips for a successful procurement journey. Tune in and gain invaluable insights from our conversation with Shaun Hartman.

It's not so easy picking out cars and light trucks for your federal fleet. No more garages full of Chevy Luminas. Now the General Services Administration (GSA), which oversees these things, has issued an online tool to help fleet managers pick out electric vehicles. For more details, Federal Drive host Tom Temin talked with GSA's Executive Director for GSA fleet management, Christina Kingsland, and the Assistant Commissioner for Travel, Transportation and Logistics, Crystal Philcox. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

It's not so easy picking out cars and light trucks for your federal fleet. No more garages full of Chevy Luminas. Now the General Services Administration (GSA), which oversees these things, has issued an online tool to help fleet managers pick out electric vehicles. For more details, Federal Drive host Tom Temin talked with GSA's Executive Director for GSA fleet management, Christina Kingsland, and the Assistant Commissioner for Travel, Transportation and Logistics, Crystal Philcox. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The General Services Administration (GSA) recently announced the Presidential Innovation Fellows (PIF) cohort for 2023. That means 20 private-sector technology and innovation leaders will start pitching-in at 13 federal agencies. To learn more about this year's fellows, as well as some of the unique aspects of the program itself, Federal Drive Executive Producer Eric White spoke with Ann Lewis, Director of Technology Transformation Services at GSA. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The General Services Administration (GSA) recently announced the Presidential Innovation Fellows (PIF) cohort for 2023. That means 20 private-sector technology and innovation leaders will start pitching-in at 13 federal agencies. To learn more about this year's fellows, as well as some of the unique aspects of the program itself, Federal Drive Executive Producer Eric White spoke with Ann Lewis, Director of Technology Transformation Services at GSA. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the Season Six premiere episode of Pave It Black, NAPA's Richard Willis and Brett Williams return to discuss the standards the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) has developed for Environmentally Preferable Asphalt. Richard and Brett talk with Pat Weaver, former president of Solterra Materials, LLC, about how his company learned about the new GSA requirements and how they ended up being one of the first companies to complete a paving project with these new project standards for asphalt materials. Listen to learn how published EPDs using the Emarald Eco Label tool allow companies to learn about new project opportunities as well as provide material selection options to customers.

How is the GAO's Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) leveraging technology to transform how it operates? What is the Federal Marketplace Strategy? How does FAS play a role in managing the federal supply chain. Join host Michael Keegan as he explores this question and more with Sonny Hashmi, Commissioner, Federal Acquisition Service within the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA). 

How is the GSA's Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) leveraging technology to transform how it operates? What is the Federal Marketplace Strategy? How does FAS play a role in managing the federal supply chain. Join host Michael Keegan as he explores this question and more with Sonny Hashmi, Commissioner, Federal Acquisition Service within the U.S. General […]

Today - The Douglas City Council unanimously agreed to move forward with its donation of 80 acres of land west of Douglas and certain utilities to the General Services Administration (GSA) that will be used for the new proposed commercial port of entry.Support the show: https://www.myheraldreview.com/site/forms/subscription_services/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Daily News Brief for Wednesday May 25th, 2022 Wednesday Ads DNB: Dropwave Do you have a podcast, or thinking about starting one? Does your church have a podcast feed for sermons? The Dropwave.io is for you. Cancel culture is like walking on a thin glass bridge over the Grand Canyon. Every step you take could get you killed, I mean canceled. Since the beginning CrossPolitic has been working on being antifragile, so no matter what happens, our content can still be delivered to your tv and to your podcast. This past year, the Waterboy and his friend Jeremi, have been working on building a podcast hosting solution for rowdy platforms like CrossPolitic, so that you can be confident your podcast will never fall through that glass bridge. Dropwave offers seamless onboarding for shows that have been around for years to easy to use solutions for starting your own podcast. Dropwave will track all your show’s downloads by city, state, and country, and it offers network and enterprise packages for solutions like the Fight Laugh Feast Network. Free to speak, Free to podcast, free to start your journey now at www.Dropwave.io. Mass shooting at Texas elementary school, 14 children and one teacher dead, multiple injuries https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-mass-shooting-at-texas-elementary-school-two-children-dead-multiple-injuries?utm_campaign=64487 18 students are dead and two teacher following the shooting, and the shooter's grandma was also killed prior to the school shooting. This according to Governor Greg Abbott, who said the shooter "shot and killed horrifically, 14 students, and killed a teacher." According to Ali Bradley, the suspect was wanted for murder and was being pursued by police when he exited his vehicle and ran into the grade school, where he began shooting. "The shooter was Salvador Ramos, an 18-year-old male who resided in Uvalde, it is believed that he abandoned his vehicle and entered the Robb Elementary school with a handgun and he may have also had a rifle, but that is not yet confirmed... He shot and killed, horrifically, incomprehensibly, 14 students and killed a teacher. Mr. Romas... he himself is deceased and it is believed that responding officers killed him," said Gov. Abbott on Tuesday. Mike Rowe Says Feds Revoked His Filming Permit, Received Call Claiming It Was Pulled For His ‘Personal Politics’ https://www.dailywire.com/news/mike-rowe-says-feds-revoked-his-filming-permit-received-call-claiming-it-was-pulled-for-his-personal-politics “Television host Mike Rowe said that the General Services Administration (GSA) recently revoked his permit to shoot a new episode of “Dirty Jobs” and wondered whether it was done for “political reasons” or as an attempt to “yank my chain,” which he said the move failed to do. In a lengthy message posted Monday on Facebook, Rowe explained why he didn’t appear at the job site this week as scheduled to shoot an episode highlighting a woman-owned company in the boilermaker trade. Rowe said that to his both surprise and disappointment the shoot was canceled “at the last minute” when the GSA “suddenly revoked our permit.” “I just wanted to assure you guys that this decision had nothing to do with me, Discovery, or my production team,” Rowe wrote. “This decision was made solely by the GSA, who oversees the location where you are currently working, and required us to apply for a permit months ago. Obviously, we did. The necessary permits were quickly issued, and we were assured several times over the last few months that everything was still good to go.” “Then, just two days before I was scheduled to arrive, we received a phone call from a woman at the GSA who informed us that our permits were being revoked,” he added. “When we asked for an explanation, she said, ‘security concerns.’ When we asked her what kind of security concerns, she said she didn’t know. She only told us that the decision had come down from ‘the very highest levels within the GSA.'” The TV host did not specify the location of the scheduled shoot but posted pictures of what appeared to be M&M Welding and Fabricators, the company his show had planned to feature in the episode. Rowe went on to reference other places where the show “has filmed in many sensitive environments under government control,” citing previous permits obtained from the Army, Navy, Air Force, and NASA, adding, “We even got a permit to film inside the National Security Agency!” “What’s really going on here?” Rowe asked in his post. Rowe said his crew later received a call from someone he said “sounded credible” who claimed the permit was revoked because of Rowe’s viewpoints. “According to this caller, someone at the highest levels of the GSA, ‘doesn’t like Mike Rowe’s personal politics,’ and used their power to deliberately string us along until the last possible second, for the express purpose of ‘yanking my chain,'” Rowe wrote. Rowe admitted he can’t say for sure if what the caller told him was accurate.” Supreme Court to weigh Christian web designer’s free speech argument against anti-discrimination law https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/may/18/supreme-court-weigh-christian-web-designers-free-s/ “Lorie Smith, a Colorado web designer who will have her case heard during the court’s 2022 term, argues that the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act forces her to create websites that celebrate same-sex marriages, which violates her faith. Her case comes four years after a Christian baker from Colorado also took his First Amendment fight to the high court after refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding. Ms. Smith said she observed Mr. Phillips’ more-than-a-decade-long legal battle, but knew she couldn’t live in fear of the government punishing her for her faith. Like Mr. Phillips, she’s also faced threats for challenging the law. “I knew I couldn’t live in fear,” she told reporters in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday. “I am simply asking for the freedom for all of us to speak consistently with our beliefs.” The same state regulation is at issue in Ms. Smith’s challenge. Her 303 Creative is based in Denver and is subject to Colorado’s public accommodations law that is designed to protect certain groups from discrimination in business settings. One such group is LGBTQ people. At least 29 states have added protection for LGBTQ individuals into their public accommodation laws — but some have protected speech from government interference, according to Ms. Smith’s legal team. Under the Colorado law, Ms. Smith claims she is unable to make a statement on her website about her view that marriage is only between a man and a woman. A federal appeals court ruled against Ms. Smith, saying the state of Colorado can regulate a business’s speech because it has an interest in ensuring equal access. Ms. Smith said she loves using her talents to shape messages for her clients — so long as the messages do not violate her values. “I do believe God has chosen me to represent him,” she said. “Everything I do is consistent with my faith and running my business is a part of that.” Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, though, insists companies cannot discriminate. “The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that anti-discrimination laws, like Colorado’s, apply to all businesses selling goods and services. Companies cannot turn away LGBTQ customers just because of who they are. We will vigorously defend Colorado’s laws, which protect all Coloradans by preventing discrimination and upholding free speech,” he said earlier this year when the high court took the case. A date for oral arguments in the legal battle has not yet been scheduled, but Kristen Waggoner, an attorney with Alliance Defending Freedom representing Ms. Smith, said they expect the justices to hear the case in October.” Lies, Propaganda, Story Telling, and the Serrated Edge: This year our national conference is in Knoxville, TN October 6th-8th. The theme of this year’s conference is Lies, Propaganda, Storytelling and the Serrated Edge. Satan is the father of lies, and the mother of those lies is a government who has rejected God. We have especially been lied to these last two years, and the COVIDpanic has been one of the central mechanisms that our government has used to lie to us and to grab more power. Because Christians have not been reading their bibles, we are susceptible to lies and weak in our ability to fight these lies. God has given us His word to fight Satan and his lies, and we need to recover all of God’s word, its serrated edge and all. Mark your calendars for October 6th-8th, as we fight, laugh and feast with fellowship, beer and Psalms, our amazing lineup of speakers, hanging with our awesome vendors, meeting new friends, and more. Early bird tickets sale now!. File this under conservatives are cowards, and not at the same time: BOOM! Indiana's Legislature Just Overrode Their "Conservative" Governor's Veto Of Bill That Kept Men Out Of Women's Sports https://notthebee.com/article/boom-indianas-legislature-just-overrode-their-conservative-governors-veto-of-bill-that-kept-men-out-of-womens-sports Indiana is one of the many red states that have governors who are unwilling to actually stand up for conservative principles and unflinchingly state the reality that boys are boys and girls are girls. With the opportunity to do just that a few weeks ago, Indiana's governor, Eric Holcomb, vetoed a bill that kept men out of women's sports. Holcomb tried to compromise Indiana girls, but the legislature was not about to have it. According to ABC News: “The Indiana Legislature voted Tuesday to override the governor's veto of the anti-trans bill that bans transgender girls from participating in girls' sports in K-12 schools. Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb vetoed the bill in March. He said the bill fell short in clarifying or creating policy to ensure "fairness" in school sports. In his veto letter, he said he echoed the Indiana High School Athletic Association's concerns that the bill does not address inconsistencies about enforcement across different counties and school districts and will cause confusion and litigation against schools. He also pointed to pending litigation seen in other states that have passed similar laws, where courts have enjoined or prohibited the laws from taking effect. "Any bill brought forward should address the issues raised in these lawsuits," Holcomb's March letter read. He also said there was no evidence of an issue of fairness in girls' sports and trans participation.” Just grateful for checks and balances. The National Pulse Announces World Economic Forum Investigative Priority and Dedicated Site. https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/05/23/new-the-national-pulse-announces-world-economic-forum-investigative-priority-and-dedicated-site/ According to the National Pulse: “The National Pulse is announcing a new investigative priority surrounding the work of the World Economic Forum, as well as launching a new public information website: TakeDownTheWEF.com. Founded in 1971 by German economist Klaus Schwab, the World Economic Forum (WEF) is an unaccountable, non-governmental organization which convenes meetings of world leaders in Davos, Switzerland, with a view to impacting policy decisions on behalf of its members: predominantly multi-national corporations and politicians. The group has been criticized for its stated aims of transforming or “resetting” global society for the benefit of private corporations rather than the public. Schwab himself has argued governments are no longer “the overwhelmingly dominant actors on the world stage” and “the time has come for a new stakeholder paradigm of international governance.” As a result, The National Pulse is announcing a new commitment to exposing the work of the World Economic Forum, and is calling on ordinary members of the public to help support this effort through our crowdfunding site: FundRealNews.com Speaking on the subject, The National Pulse Editor-in-Chief Raheem Kassam said: “We’re not just setting up a resource for members of the public to learn more about the World Economic Forum, we’re also crowdsourcing information on the group. The World Economic Forum is the throbbing, blackened heart of globalism, and we intend to drive a stake in it. For those interested in taking the fight to this group journalistically, as well as politically, think about urgently supporting this initiative.”” This is Gabriel Rench with Crosspolitic News. Support Rowdy Christian media by joining our club at fightlaughfeast.com, downloading our App, and head to our annual Fight Laugh Feast Events. If this content is helpful to you, would you please consider becoming a Fight Laugh Feast Club Member? We are trying to build a cancel-proof media platform, and we need your help. Join today and get a discount at the Fight Laugh Feast conference in Knoxville, TN and have a great day. Have a great day. Lord bless

Daily News Brief for Wednesday May 25th, 2022 Wednesday Ads DNB: Dropwave Do you have a podcast, or thinking about starting one? Does your church have a podcast feed for sermons? The Dropwave.io is for you. Cancel culture is like walking on a thin glass bridge over the Grand Canyon. Every step you take could get you killed, I mean canceled. Since the beginning CrossPolitic has been working on being antifragile, so no matter what happens, our content can still be delivered to your tv and to your podcast. This past year, the Waterboy and his friend Jeremi, have been working on building a podcast hosting solution for rowdy platforms like CrossPolitic, so that you can be confident your podcast will never fall through that glass bridge. Dropwave offers seamless onboarding for shows that have been around for years to easy to use solutions for starting your own podcast. Dropwave will track all your show’s downloads by city, state, and country, and it offers network and enterprise packages for solutions like the Fight Laugh Feast Network. Free to speak, Free to podcast, free to start your journey now at www.Dropwave.io. Mass shooting at Texas elementary school, 14 children and one teacher dead, multiple injuries https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-mass-shooting-at-texas-elementary-school-two-children-dead-multiple-injuries?utm_campaign=64487 18 students are dead and two teacher following the shooting, and the shooter's grandma was also killed prior to the school shooting. This according to Governor Greg Abbott, who said the shooter "shot and killed horrifically, 14 students, and killed a teacher." According to Ali Bradley, the suspect was wanted for murder and was being pursued by police when he exited his vehicle and ran into the grade school, where he began shooting. "The shooter was Salvador Ramos, an 18-year-old male who resided in Uvalde, it is believed that he abandoned his vehicle and entered the Robb Elementary school with a handgun and he may have also had a rifle, but that is not yet confirmed... He shot and killed, horrifically, incomprehensibly, 14 students and killed a teacher. Mr. Romas... he himself is deceased and it is believed that responding officers killed him," said Gov. Abbott on Tuesday. Mike Rowe Says Feds Revoked His Filming Permit, Received Call Claiming It Was Pulled For His ‘Personal Politics’ https://www.dailywire.com/news/mike-rowe-says-feds-revoked-his-filming-permit-received-call-claiming-it-was-pulled-for-his-personal-politics “Television host Mike Rowe said that the General Services Administration (GSA) recently revoked his permit to shoot a new episode of “Dirty Jobs” and wondered whether it was done for “political reasons” or as an attempt to “yank my chain,” which he said the move failed to do. In a lengthy message posted Monday on Facebook, Rowe explained why he didn’t appear at the job site this week as scheduled to shoot an episode highlighting a woman-owned company in the boilermaker trade. Rowe said that to his both surprise and disappointment the shoot was canceled “at the last minute” when the GSA “suddenly revoked our permit.” “I just wanted to assure you guys that this decision had nothing to do with me, Discovery, or my production team,” Rowe wrote. “This decision was made solely by the GSA, who oversees the location where you are currently working, and required us to apply for a permit months ago. Obviously, we did. The necessary permits were quickly issued, and we were assured several times over the last few months that everything was still good to go.” “Then, just two days before I was scheduled to arrive, we received a phone call from a woman at the GSA who informed us that our permits were being revoked,” he added. “When we asked for an explanation, she said, ‘security concerns.’ When we asked her what kind of security concerns, she said she didn’t know. She only told us that the decision had come down from ‘the very highest levels within the GSA.'” The TV host did not specify the location of the scheduled shoot but posted pictures of what appeared to be M&M Welding and Fabricators, the company his show had planned to feature in the episode. Rowe went on to reference other places where the show “has filmed in many sensitive environments under government control,” citing previous permits obtained from the Army, Navy, Air Force, and NASA, adding, “We even got a permit to film inside the National Security Agency!” “What’s really going on here?” Rowe asked in his post. Rowe said his crew later received a call from someone he said “sounded credible” who claimed the permit was revoked because of Rowe’s viewpoints. “According to this caller, someone at the highest levels of the GSA, ‘doesn’t like Mike Rowe’s personal politics,’ and used their power to deliberately string us along until the last possible second, for the express purpose of ‘yanking my chain,'” Rowe wrote. Rowe admitted he can’t say for sure if what the caller told him was accurate.” Supreme Court to weigh Christian web designer’s free speech argument against anti-discrimination law https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/may/18/supreme-court-weigh-christian-web-designers-free-s/ “Lorie Smith, a Colorado web designer who will have her case heard during the court’s 2022 term, argues that the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act forces her to create websites that celebrate same-sex marriages, which violates her faith. Her case comes four years after a Christian baker from Colorado also took his First Amendment fight to the high court after refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding. Ms. Smith said she observed Mr. Phillips’ more-than-a-decade-long legal battle, but knew she couldn’t live in fear of the government punishing her for her faith. Like Mr. Phillips, she’s also faced threats for challenging the law. “I knew I couldn’t live in fear,” she told reporters in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday. “I am simply asking for the freedom for all of us to speak consistently with our beliefs.” The same state regulation is at issue in Ms. Smith’s challenge. Her 303 Creative is based in Denver and is subject to Colorado’s public accommodations law that is designed to protect certain groups from discrimination in business settings. One such group is LGBTQ people. At least 29 states have added protection for LGBTQ individuals into their public accommodation laws — but some have protected speech from government interference, according to Ms. Smith’s legal team. Under the Colorado law, Ms. Smith claims she is unable to make a statement on her website about her view that marriage is only between a man and a woman. A federal appeals court ruled against Ms. Smith, saying the state of Colorado can regulate a business’s speech because it has an interest in ensuring equal access. Ms. Smith said she loves using her talents to shape messages for her clients — so long as the messages do not violate her values. “I do believe God has chosen me to represent him,” she said. “Everything I do is consistent with my faith and running my business is a part of that.” Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, though, insists companies cannot discriminate. “The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that anti-discrimination laws, like Colorado’s, apply to all businesses selling goods and services. Companies cannot turn away LGBTQ customers just because of who they are. We will vigorously defend Colorado’s laws, which protect all Coloradans by preventing discrimination and upholding free speech,” he said earlier this year when the high court took the case. A date for oral arguments in the legal battle has not yet been scheduled, but Kristen Waggoner, an attorney with Alliance Defending Freedom representing Ms. Smith, said they expect the justices to hear the case in October.” Lies, Propaganda, Story Telling, and the Serrated Edge: This year our national conference is in Knoxville, TN October 6th-8th. The theme of this year’s conference is Lies, Propaganda, Storytelling and the Serrated Edge. Satan is the father of lies, and the mother of those lies is a government who has rejected God. We have especially been lied to these last two years, and the COVIDpanic has been one of the central mechanisms that our government has used to lie to us and to grab more power. Because Christians have not been reading their bibles, we are susceptible to lies and weak in our ability to fight these lies. God has given us His word to fight Satan and his lies, and we need to recover all of God’s word, its serrated edge and all. Mark your calendars for October 6th-8th, as we fight, laugh and feast with fellowship, beer and Psalms, our amazing lineup of speakers, hanging with our awesome vendors, meeting new friends, and more. Early bird tickets sale now!. File this under conservatives are cowards, and not at the same time: BOOM! Indiana's Legislature Just Overrode Their "Conservative" Governor's Veto Of Bill That Kept Men Out Of Women's Sports https://notthebee.com/article/boom-indianas-legislature-just-overrode-their-conservative-governors-veto-of-bill-that-kept-men-out-of-womens-sports Indiana is one of the many red states that have governors who are unwilling to actually stand up for conservative principles and unflinchingly state the reality that boys are boys and girls are girls. With the opportunity to do just that a few weeks ago, Indiana's governor, Eric Holcomb, vetoed a bill that kept men out of women's sports. Holcomb tried to compromise Indiana girls, but the legislature was not about to have it. According to ABC News: “The Indiana Legislature voted Tuesday to override the governor's veto of the anti-trans bill that bans transgender girls from participating in girls' sports in K-12 schools. Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb vetoed the bill in March. He said the bill fell short in clarifying or creating policy to ensure "fairness" in school sports. In his veto letter, he said he echoed the Indiana High School Athletic Association's concerns that the bill does not address inconsistencies about enforcement across different counties and school districts and will cause confusion and litigation against schools. He also pointed to pending litigation seen in other states that have passed similar laws, where courts have enjoined or prohibited the laws from taking effect. "Any bill brought forward should address the issues raised in these lawsuits," Holcomb's March letter read. He also said there was no evidence of an issue of fairness in girls' sports and trans participation.” Just grateful for checks and balances. The National Pulse Announces World Economic Forum Investigative Priority and Dedicated Site. https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/05/23/new-the-national-pulse-announces-world-economic-forum-investigative-priority-and-dedicated-site/ According to the National Pulse: “The National Pulse is announcing a new investigative priority surrounding the work of the World Economic Forum, as well as launching a new public information website: TakeDownTheWEF.com. Founded in 1971 by German economist Klaus Schwab, the World Economic Forum (WEF) is an unaccountable, non-governmental organization which convenes meetings of world leaders in Davos, Switzerland, with a view to impacting policy decisions on behalf of its members: predominantly multi-national corporations and politicians. The group has been criticized for its stated aims of transforming or “resetting” global society for the benefit of private corporations rather than the public. Schwab himself has argued governments are no longer “the overwhelmingly dominant actors on the world stage” and “the time has come for a new stakeholder paradigm of international governance.” As a result, The National Pulse is announcing a new commitment to exposing the work of the World Economic Forum, and is calling on ordinary members of the public to help support this effort through our crowdfunding site: FundRealNews.com Speaking on the subject, The National Pulse Editor-in-Chief Raheem Kassam said: “We’re not just setting up a resource for members of the public to learn more about the World Economic Forum, we’re also crowdsourcing information on the group. The World Economic Forum is the throbbing, blackened heart of globalism, and we intend to drive a stake in it. For those interested in taking the fight to this group journalistically, as well as politically, think about urgently supporting this initiative.”” This is Gabriel Rench with Crosspolitic News. Support Rowdy Christian media by joining our club at fightlaughfeast.com, downloading our App, and head to our annual Fight Laugh Feast Events. If this content is helpful to you, would you please consider becoming a Fight Laugh Feast Club Member? We are trying to build a cancel-proof media platform, and we need your help. Join today and get a discount at the Fight Laugh Feast conference in Knoxville, TN and have a great day. Have a great day. Lord bless