[publius1]

Actually, I favor the false claims act qui tam provisions--if they're drafted right. There is too much abuse on the other side, and gov't can't get to it. Citizen intervention works.

[middie]

Qui Tam works very well and nnot only should be preserved, it should be encouraged. Them have been many qui tam actions that have saved taxpayers' money, saved lives of consumers of what were--and would have been, faulty products purchased by governmental agencies and dissuaded would-be government contract cheaters from following their nefarious instincts. The process is fair and claims are vetted carefully before being pursued in federal court.

As usual, the Wash. Legal foundation is full of crap and would write an article insisting that the moon is made of green cheese if one of their contributors made it worth their financial effort to do so. A firm in the same office building as my firm has done a few of these cases. In each one, the government was being cheated severely and the bad guys in the company got caught. In one case, the contract was to overhaul military truck engines and transmissions and certify their readiness for combat duty. Like the cheating mechanic down the street, they did a cosmetic job and ran the trucks out the door, collected on the contract and the trucks failed after a few miles. Fortunately, these guys went to prison and the company was barred from ever doing government bidding again. Yes, the whistleblower received a bounty for turning them in; and it was totally proper that he did.

I'd suggest that the article be given the weight it deserves; ZERO!