Regular readers of this blog may recall a time when I really didn't like GAO chief David M. Walker. He has a strange understanding of the long-term fiscal challenge. His speeches on the matter caused me to call him a nutcase. Well, the world isn't always as simple as one would like it to be. On Tuesday, Walker gave eminently sane testimony on top problems in federal contracting and called for a re-examination of the proper role of contractors in providing government services. In general, I believe there is a need to focus greater attention on what type of functions and activities should be contracted out and which ones should not, to review and reconsider the current independence and conflict-of-interest rules relating to contractors, and to identify the factors that prompt the government to use contractors in circumstances where the proper choice might be the use of civil servants or military personnel. Indeed. Under what circumstances are government workers more efficient than contractors, and vice-versa? What kinds of decisions should only government workers make? What institutions do we need to ensure that the public gets the best deal possible? I don't know if any one person has the answers, but experience and experimenting in government contracting at the local and federal level makes it possible to have a robust conversation. That needs to happen soon, and as far as I know, it hasn't. Via Stephen Barr's Federal Diary.