[dkhenry]

I worked for the USDS in the early days and I am very familiar with 18F, and I don't think your comment tracks. There were lots of issues with agencies using 18F, and not much of the federal IT spend migrated to 18F during its 10 year history, even though most of the products they launched were good.

Even USDS teams didn't always take up 18F on its products, and instead would utilize outside contracts for a majority of their projects. Realistically the government needs to do better then 18F was doing and there are many reforms needed to actually have a paved road agencies can drive on.

[ethbr1]

Appreciate the comment! If you had a magic wand, what are the main problems you would unblock to create better/cheaper/faster government IT outcomes, based on your experience?

[dkhenry]

The way funding was allocated is entirely broken, and it was the biggest problem with doing anything in the government. Our budget process at the federal level is entirely broken. Congress tries to micro-manage the budget to get their cut of funds to their sponsors, and their is no political appetite to have a more reasonable budget process ( like Congress approve top line budget, and lets the agency choose how to spend the money ). The Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) doesn't work for inter agency procurement, and IMO is not a good system for any kind of procurement. The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) should be thrown out, as it has proven its self to be worse then having literally no rules at all. All the rules about Veteran Owned, and Small Disadvantaged Businesses are just mechanisms for fraud. Companies would "dissolve" and then new companies would form that could win those bids, and then they would hire everyone from the large company that just dissolved.

[roguecoder]

We are seeing right now why a high-level budget process like that wouldn't work: there is no guarantee of ongoing alignment in the executive branch, and it creates enormous opportunities for procurement capture.

Bringing things in house with things like 18F is the most promising solution we've seen to those procurement problems, but has been fought tooth & nail by the same people currently dismantling the roadblocks between them & taking taxpayer money without even delivering results.

[Spooky23]

I’ve never worked in the federal space, but I have extensive experience in state and local.

One the fundamental issues with government vs. private sector is accounting. Governments are often exempted from following GAAP, and the rules are inverse - the government’s cost to borrow is cheap and the government doesn’t pay taxes, so capex is usually smarter than opex. Capex is locked in, while opex is subject to the whims of the legislature.

The other core issue with government is separation of powers. You cannot have an efficient process to make decisions because fundamentally the system is designed to do what’s right from a legal perspective, which is often in opposition to what is efficient.

Setting expectations is important too. The government at all levels is excellent at operations. When I setup a housing authority system, that authority delivered 50,000 rent checks on the 1st of the month, every month. You know what I want the treasury to do? Pay bond coupons every month and audit clean.

Moving fast isn’t necessarily what you want. In fact, the system of government was designed to be slow. For people who attest to idol worship of the Constitution, they sure missed the boat there.

[js2]

FWIW, the head of USDS under Obama (Jennifer Pahlka) wrote a whole book about it:

https://www.recodingamerica.us

Interview with the author:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/06/opinion/ezra-klein-podcas...

Recent opinion piece by the author:

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/07/opinion/democrats-elon-mu...

(Those may be paywalled and I'm out of gift links.)

[omnivore]

The model of 18F changed a lot, none of those products including Login.gov or Cloud.gov were part of 18F, they're all spinfoffs that live within TTS.