An alternative view for anyone interested to consider the fallacies and risks of the political push to the A-76 Game and partial privatization of the United States federal government. A game where politicians use global corporate appointees to influence the U.S. government under the premise that injecting corporate background and practices into the working level of the federal government is going to eliminate inefficiency. Inefficiencies, however, are classically driven at the top leadership levels. They are due to inherent change in our government system, the appointed leaders pushing new agendas, and political relationships between legislative & executive branches. Considering recent runaway budgets, its hard to conclude that the leadership infiltration of corporate Six Sigma experts made the federal government efficient? It did provide leadership more ammunition to sell outsourcing. Making it look like federal workers had no idea what efficiency or 6 sigma/quality initiatives were. We knew, but were not heavily trained in this since the federal government (Executive, Legislative, Judicial) was not created to operate as a for-profit corporation. The founders warned this country about the dangers of corporate power running the federal government. Unless the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches became one monolithic entity, injecting the politicized corporate or Six Sigma management will not solve basic inefficiencies. The constant private driven political experimentation these last 17 years played a big part in the run up of federal spending recently. Reasonable man theory recognizes dialogue on the right government workforce size makes sense butoutsourcing is not real privatization when the taxpayer is still spending money for different people. Sovereignty is at stake when the global oriented corporate world (and influence on laws) is going to be the driver for U.S. federal government operations. A last step in pulling us from the constitutional ideals the country was founded under.