More on the Bailout Bill(s?)

From GovExec.com:

Bailout bill would have given Treasury chief unfettered authority
By Robert Brodsky and Elizabeth Newell rbrodsky@govexec.com
September 29, 2008
The House on Monday rejected a $700 billion plan for federal intervention in financial markets, with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle questioning whether the measure would be effective in addressing the country's economic crisis.

What attracted far less notice in the bill was a set of provisions that would have given Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson virtually unfettered authority to set up and run the new organization designed to stabilize the financial system -- bypassing federal acquisition rules and competitive hiring procedures in the process.

The 2008 Emergency Economic Stabilization Act would have allowed Paulson and his eventual successor to waive provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation "upon a determination that urgent and compelling circumstances make compliance with such provisions contrary to the public interest."

"It's unprecedented in American history and American government," said Donald F. Kettl, a political analyst and professor at the University of Pennsylvania. "The blank check is blanker still given that we don't know who will be signing dollar bills on Jan. 21."

The department would have had to notify the House Financial Services and Oversight and Government Reform committees, as well as the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs committees of any waiver within seven days. But the bill would not have granted the panels explicit power to block any such contract.

Bailout-related contracts would have been administered by the Treasury Department's new Office of Financial Stability through the Troubled Asset Relief Program and could have been used to hire "asset managers, servicers, property managers, and other service providers or expert consultants," the bill stated.

If rules related to minority contracting were waived, then Paulson would have been required to develop "to the maximum extent practicable" alternative procedures to ensure the inclusion and utilization of minority- and women-owned businesses.

Treasury also would have been required to issue regulations to prohibit potential conflicts of interest with contractors.

While few other details emerged about the contracting provision, it appears the language would have given Treasury the ability to award contracts of nearly any value without any competition. The prospect of a government agency with unlimited and unregulated purchasing power concerned some government observers.

"The government has not shown much competence in emergency contracting," said Danielle Brian, president of the Project on Government Oversight, a nonprofit watchdog group in Washington. "This is really worrying and does not inspire a lot of confidence.

...

Emphasis mine. This is part of the reason I was glad the bill failed. (More at the link.)