Below is a quick summary of the Coburn amendments to the Defense authorization bill.  To the entire background of each amendment, as well as supporting materials, click here.

Amendment to prohibit continued funding of Defense Travel System

The Defense Travel System (DTS) is an end-to-end electronic travel system intended to integrate all travel functions, from authorization through ticket purchase to accounting for the Department of Defense.  The system was initiated in 1998 and it was supposed to be fully deployed by 2002.  DTS is currently in the final phase of a six-year contract that expires September 30, 2006.  In its entire history, the system has never met a deadline, never stayed within cost estimates, and never performed adequately. 

To date, DTS has cost the taxpayers $474 million – more than $200 million more than it was originally projected to cost.  It is still not fully deployed.  It is grossly underutilized.  And tests have repeatedly shown that it does not consistently find the lowest applicable airfare – so even where it is deployed and used, it does not really achieve the savings proposed. 

This amendment prohibits continued funding of DTS and instead requires DOD to shift to a fixed price per transaction e-travel system used by government agencies in the civilian sector, as set up under General Services Administration (GSA) contracts.

Amendment to require Defense Department to report and "grade" earmarks in appropriations bills

This amendment would require the Department of Defense to report annually:

1. The total annual cost of earmarking in Defense appropriations bills.  Currently, we can determine the total number of earmarks and the actual price tag of those, but we do not know the hidden cost, which includes staff time and administration.  This annual report will provide Congress and the public a more complete understanding of the total cost of “pork” to the Department of Defense.
2. The purpose and location of each earmark. 
3. An analysis of the usefulness of each earmark in advancing the goals of the Department of Defense.  This will provide members of Congress a more complete view of the cost effectiveness of each project and if such projects warranted continued funding.

The term “earmark” in the amendment means a provision of law or a directive contained within a joint explanatory statement or report accompanying a bill that specifies the identity of an entity, program, project or service, including a defense system, to receive assistance not requested by the President and the amount of the assistance.

Amendment regarding performance bonuses on Defense Department contracts

Defense Department contracting authority allows for certain award fees and incentive fees to be attached to the “base” amount of a contract.  The premise is that the possibility of being awarded these fees will motivate contractors to deliver on-time, on-budget, with excellent customer service. 

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) found the Department of Defense has been improperly paying awards and incentives attached to contracts.  These are supposed to only be paid out for outstanding performances on contracts but are routinely paid out without regard to performance.

If a contractor does not live up to the agreed upon contract – they shouldn’t receive an award bonus (if one is agreed upon in the contract).  No private business would possibly agree to a contract that would pay MULTIPLE award bonuses when a contractor failed to meet the basic requirements of the contract.

• The Coburn amendment tightens up the bill language in Section 843(4), which currently reads:

“ensure that no award fee may be paid for contractor performance that is judged to be poor;”

• Instead, this amendment would state that no award bonuses should be given for contractor performance that is judged to be:

“below-satisfactory performance or performance that does not meet the basic requirements of the contract;”

Coburn amendment regarding reporting requirements on improper payments at the Department of Defense for travel payments made at DOD in fiscal year 2005

The Improper Payment Information Act was enacted in November 2002 for the purpose of finding and eliminating payments that should not have been made, or were made for incorrect amounts, by government agencies.  The Department of Defense is reporting improper payment information for only three programs:  Military Retirement Fund, Military Heath Benefits, and for the first time this year, DoD began reporting improper payments for Military Pay.  However, it is very likely that many other activities and programs with large outlays at the Department are at risk of making “significant” improper payments.

The Coburn amendment would hold the Department of Defense accountable for payments they made in the area of travel for fiscal year 2005 and require the department to fix their methodology this year.

Specifically, it does three things:

1. It requires DOD to provide the Congressional Defense Committees and the Government Affairs Committees with risk assessments for fiscal year 2005 that determine whether or not travel payments at DOD are at significant risk for making improper payments.
2. It requires DOD to use a statistically valid estimate for determining whether or not travel payments are at risk for making significant improper payments;
3. Finally, it requires DOD to provide a justification for their methodology as being statistically valid and accurately representing the full universe of travel payments made at DOD.