Enforcing termination clauses in government contracts is…difficult. Not only does there have to be thorough documentation of material breaches, there has to be a communications trail that amounts to “we caught you, now fix it, or we’ll send a few more angry letters giving you a couple more chances to fix it before we start terminating the contract.” Often, by the time you get all that in order, the contract is very close to expiring, anyway, so you recourse is rejecting the bad contractor’s bid on the next contract letting.
FSM help you if you have to call in a bond. If you get to that point, there will be depositions. You don’t want sit through depositions.
No, not a lawyer. Yes, I’ve been on the clean-up end of contract breaches. And I’ve been deposed. I can not stress this enough, you do not want depositions.
The same people who think someone who has run a for-profit business (or run it/them into the ground) would be the best choice for running a government (instead of recognizing that they are very different – almost mutually exclusive – skill sets).
I’m not following. What I meant to say is that I’m glad I knew the source of the change, and that it was due to good, old-school journalism. Also, it’s a VERY long article, so I’m glad I had already gotten through it. It’s good to have ‘proof’ that I’m staying on top of important current issues, you know?
I always read @Mindysan33’s posts, and one of the main reasons, as you say, is that she brings a lot of historical expertise to anything she writes.
Not in the US myself, but I think this just convinced me that I need to digitally subscribe to one or two newspapers over here in Sweden. They really need the support.
