Newsday's five-part series "Erasing the Rules" continues today with a look at defense contractors and their influence in the Pentagon. Surely even national security is beyond outsourcing? Close ties between the Pentagon and defense contractors have existed in many previous administrations, Republican and Democrat. But under the Bush administration contractors themselves increasingly are administering defense programs, including selecting subcontractors, and are venturing into areas that traditionally have been military functions -- from guarding military bases to interrogating war prisoners to analyzing battlefield intelligence. . . . [P]utting private contractors in charge of Pentagon management, critics say, has the potential of creating conflicts of interest and limiting competition, damaging to both the taxpayers and to the men in uniform. Air Force Secretary James Roche last year criticized the growing dependence on defense contractors when he warned, "What you have to resist is the temptation, which will be very strong, especially over time, for government officials to rely too heavily on the judgment of the [contract-manager]." His concern, reflected in several speeches, is that putting industry in charge of contract management can drive up costs by dampening competition and further eroding the defense industrial base. Among the benefits of outsourcing to military contractors is a "new generation of tanks and personnel carriers" that, in order to be "sufficiently light and mobile," must "sacrifice troop-protecting armoring." The result is that they can't withstand attack from World War II era weapons. Check out the article before the link expires! Knut Royce, "Close ties at the Pentagon: The power, influence and bottomline of defense contractors has grown during the Bush presidency," Newsday, Oct. 13, 2004.