Everyone wants secure, reliable supply chains.  There are Executive Orders on this topic, countless DOD reports, and Congressional action in nearly every defense authorization bill, including the recently passed FY’24 law.  While the government comes in for some responsibility to ensure secure supply chains, most of the responsibility ultimately flows down to contractors.  It shouldn’t.  While contractors certainly have a role to play, ultimately ensuring secure and resilient supply chains is everyone’s business.  Contractors can take steps to ensure that they don’t buy counterfeit components or take unnecessary risks that could delay the implementation of critical systems.  They can diversify their supplier base, albeit within government sourcing restrictions.  Contractors can’t, however, ensure safe shipping lanes, set tariff rates, or make national policy decisions that impact the daily lives of all citizens during a pandemic or other crisis.  The government also controls tax incentives, labor requirements, and other factors that can either make US-based manufacturing economically feasible, or not.  On a smaller, but no less important scale, contractors also cannot single-handedly combat the “I just got a bargain” mentality among some government buyers who prioritize low prices over ensuring the acquisition of appropriate products from legitimate supply sources.  Contractors must be more active in educating their government clients on the responsibilities of all parties.  Too often, companies embrace their position at the bottom of the priority ladder and allow themselves to be subject to fines or other enforcement mechanisms.  Providing secure supply chains is a shared responsibility. Government leaders must acknowledge the roles they play in securing the common goal of secure and timely delivery of needed solutions.  Rather than dunning companies that may fall short due to factors outside of their control, perhaps feds can readjust their approach and work in partnership with their supplier base.