Even as open source thrives in the downturn, with many open-source vendors reporting significantly increased interest in open solutions as budgets get slashed, the U.S. federal government has decided to put U.S. taxpayer dollars into play to fund a study of just how much money can be saved by moving to open source.
Rather than a broad-based study, however, Congress approved a measure that will study the viability and financial effects of open-source health IT providers, as noted in the stimulus bill [PDF - see page 488] and reported on Slashdot:
STUDY AND REPORT ON AVAILABILITY OF OPEN SOURCE HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS. --
(A) IN GENERAL.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall...conduct a study on--
(i) the current availability of open source health information technology systems to Federal safety net providers (including small, rural providers);
(ii) the total cost of ownership of such systems in comparison to the cost of proprietary commercial products available;
(iii) the ability of such systems to respond to the needs of, and be applied to, various populations (including children and disabled individuals); and
(iv) the capacity of such systems to facilitate interoperability.
The Secretary of Health and Human Services is then to report back by October 1, 2010, with a report detailing its findings and conclusions.
Assuming the report is favorable, I suspect that part of that report will offer a hint as to the role open source could play beyond the healthcare industry. As reported by CNET earlier, President Obama has already asked Sun chairman Scott McNealy. Between this and the Health and Human Services report, it's very possible that the U.S. federal government will have established IT policies that favor open source.
I've long been a critic of government mandates for open source, in part becausein the absence of mandates, but as a way to lower costs and vendor lock-in strikes me as appropriate and a good use of taxpayer funds.
Follow me on Twitter at mjasay.