In Dayton: GOP plan comes up $1.2B short, Star Tribune staff writer Baird Helgeson reports:
Republicans say that administration analysts -- many of whom served in the previous Republican administration -- are so deeply tied to traditional assessments that they cannot accurately calculate savings on innovative programs. Instead, Republicans are relying on analysis from companies that say they have helped other states save money.
"We believe there are significant savings to be found in the reforms that we are proposing, and we think they are good reforms," said Senate Majority Leader Amy Koch, R-Buffalo.
The Strib article doesn't tell who those folks Koch's caucus contacted for "companies that say they have helped other states save money" but PIM's Weekly Report named some names last week:
The catch? Even those with fiscal notes predict savings much smaller than Republicans contend -- some even cost more money. Where are the GOP numbers coming from? Recently, details have begun to emerge: State Government Innovation Chair Mike Parry confirmed Thursday that he's worked with the consulting giant Accenture (as Weekly Report noted last Friday) as well as IBM and Deloitte in crafting some of his cost-saving proposals. The firms approached the Senate caucus, Parry added, and though they are using public data for their work, they have no formal contracts with the state [emphasis added](although some contracts would become available if the proposals they worked on were implemented) [emphasis added].
So by what means did these companies use to approach the caucus? And what statutes and lobbying regulations govern this sort of informal behavior? Those companies are working on "spec"--would those contracts be publicly bid, or does this give them an inside track? Is there an informal means to pay them in the absence of a formal contract?
Photo: Senator Mike Parry, friend of the generous private contractors who work (?) for free in hopes of contracts becoming available.
Comments