Agreed. Nevertheless, as vast as the federal government is, at the local and state levels the astonishing rate of growth of government has also amplified and compounded the temptations and rewards of corruption. Moreover, at the state and local levels, public scrutiny and understanding are often weak and the specialized investigative and prosecution resources needed in public corruption cases tend to be inadequate or lacking. For antelope and crooks alike, avoiding a large herd can be a better strategy in that it also avoids the largest concentration of hunters.
Moreover, at the state and local levels, public scrutiny and understanding are often weak and the specialized investigative and prosecution resources needed in public corruption cases tend to be inadequate or lacking.
At the federal level, adequate resources are there for the proper scrutiny and/or prosecution of contracting “irregularities” but these enforcement capabilities are rarely used to crack down on unscrupulous behavior. Sure, every now and then there’s a high profile case exposing corruption, but for every one of those cases there is a multitude of other ones that escape attention and/or corrective actions.
Contracting offices in the federal government are often hesitant to confront contractors. They just don’t want to open the can of worms or get political blow back. The project offices often turn a blind eye toward questionable things because they just want the work done quietly, even if they contractor is ripping them off or not fully adhering to the terms of the contract. The project offices also fear having their own dirty laundry aired out.
Its interesting that problems exist at both the federal and state/local levels and go unaddressed, but for different reasons.