|
|
The Alchemist
The Alchemist blog is a forum to help companies with innovative technologies obtain federal government funding. Its focus is on the DoD Rapid Innovation Program,defense appropriations and other DoD SBIR Phase III funding opportunities. We encourage you to join in the conversation with your comments and insights. For timely updates on the new DoD Rapid Innovation Program, subscribe to our blog.
The Alchemist
The Alchemist blog is a forum to help companies with innovative technologies obtain federal government funding. Its focus is on the DoD Rapid Innovation Program,defense appropriations and other DoD SBIR Phase III funding opportunities. We encourage you to join in the conversation with your comments and insights. For timely updates on the new DoD Rapid Innovation Program, subscribe to our blog.
Location: Blogs > |
 |
| Posted by: Alan Dillingham |
Monday, March 22, 2010 2:17 PM |
According to Roll Call (subscription required), Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.) said that military earmarks are critically important because it takes the Pentagon years to develop a purchase request in the budget, meaning the technology requested in the president’s budget is always out of date by the time Congress approves the purchase. “If you always want the Chinese and Russians to be a year or two ahead of us in technologies, then don’t do any earmarks in defense,” Bartlett said. Bartlett also noted that the earmark ban might simply have the effect of converting earmark requests by individual Members into committee requests. “If they are really important — and in defense they are really important — they are going to show up as committee adds. And there is no prohibition against committee adds. Just don’t put a guy’s name on it,” Bartlett said.
|
|
| Permalink |
Trackback |
Search the Alchemist Blog
Search the Alchemist Blog
© 2011 Alchemy Government Solutions, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
© 2011 Alchemy Government Solutions, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
|
|
|