Citizens Against Government Waste: Massachusetts Not So Open For Business

Massachusetts Not So Open For Business
Wednesday, October 29, 2003
By: Tom Finnigan

CAGW recently caused a firestorm after criticizing an apparent move by Gov. Mitt Romney's administration to transition all government computers to open source operating systems. The "Freeware Initiative" would have required all IT expenditures in fiscal 2004 and 2005 to be made on an open source/Linux format. Proprietary vendors would have been effectively barred from competing for state contracts, thereby limiting competition and raising costs.

Linux is an open source operating system, meaning it is freely distributed along with its source code so that anyone can make changes and redistribute it. There is no need to wait for patches or software upgrades as in the case of proprietary software. Yet while the software itself is free, the cost to maintain and upgrade it can become very expensive. Acquisition costs commonly represent only a small percentage of the total cost of ownership. Maintenance, training and support are often more expensive with open source than proprietary software.

Imagine the state DMV being responsible for programming the software that runs its computers. Every little problem would require an outside consultant, racking up fees and slowing down services.

Like all procurement decisions, the best policy on software is to place all products on equal footing with no preferential treatment.

CAGW has called the proposed Freeware Initiative unfair for imposing a barrier to competition for the state's operating systems. Open source advocates disagreed, making three basic arguments: 1) open source formats are competitive because consulting jobs can be competitively awarded, 2) open source software is just plain better, and 3) Massachusetts is not instituting a universal policy, but rather it is simply moving toward open standards.

The last argument was countered with a statement made by Chief Information Officer Peter Quinn at "Doing IT Business with Massachusetts State and Local Government," an American Electronics Association forum in Cambridge, Mass. Quinn told the conference, "Massachusetts will spend millions on open architecture systems. Everything will be open source. It will take years to implement, but if you are a parochial vendor, you will not be able to do business in Massachusetts." Quinn clearly indicated there would be no exceptions to the rule permitting only open-source/Linux software.

As for the argument that open source is better and cheaper, such software has its advantages and should be considered an option. That being said, all but the most die hard Linux fans will admit that some functions are better performed with proprietary software. There is simply no reason to slam the door on proprietary vendors at any level of government. If Massachusetts chose one proprietary vendor as the state's only software provider and excluded open source, CAGW would also object to that.

The heat brought by CAGW prompted the Romney administration to partially retreat from its position. Budget Chief Eric Kriss said, "There are many areas where there is no open source solution. And we (will be) very happy to adopt proprietary software (in those cases)...But there is nothing against Microsoft. This isn't anti- anybody."

CAGW and its more than 11,500 members in the Bay State who want fairness in government contracting are still waiting for an official statement from the governor's office. Government should choose software based on it's merits, not on the way it is developed or licensed. This will allow open source software and commercial developers to compete, taxpayers to save money, and customers to benefit from better products.

All active news articles