http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/9377
Halliburton Hangover Chellie Pingree, President of Common Cause and former majority leader of the Maine Senate, is the author of Maine Rx, a landmark program to reduce prescription drug costs in that state. In terms of sheer size, the $87 billion Iraq spending bill recently approved by Congress is the nation's largest ever for war, bigger than the budgets of the Homeland Security and Education Departments combined. With so much at stake, you would think that Congress would have done all it could to ensure that these tens of billions of dollars are scrupulously monitored and wisely spent, with no opportunity for waste, fraud or abuse. But you would be wrong. While the Iraq spending bill makes some modest progress on accountability, House and Senate leaders who negotiated the final bill eliminated or weakened more stringent reform measures passed by their colleagues in both chambers. And given the influence of the White House on the final bill, one could reasonably conclude that the Bush administration was wary of many of the accountability measures that Congress originally intended to require. This spending plan has too little accountability and too few financial controls. Stripped From The Bill Consider the reform measures that never made it into the final bill: GAO audits. The Senate originally voted 97 to 0 to have the General Accounting Office (GAO)- Congress' investigative arm-conduct audits of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Iraq. The CPA oversees the entire rebuilding effort in Iraq, and is in charge of dispensing billions of dollars in reconstruction contracts. That audit provision was stripped in the conference committee on a party line vote. Another provision that would have required the GAO to look at the profits made by U.S. contractors in Iraq was accepted by the Senate, but also never made it into the final bill. Competitive bidding on oil contracts. Responding to the uproar about non-competitive bidding in Iraq, the House passed an amendment requiring competitive bidding on all oil contracts. The provision eliminated exceptions for emergencies and other extenuating circumstances, such as national security, that might make competitive bidding prohibitive. Every Democrat, plus 47 Republicans, supported it. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), who sponsored the amendment, said that it was necessary because "Democrats and many Republicans do not trust the administration to use the government contracting exceptions rarely and fairly." Still, the Sherman provision was removed during a conference committee vote. Penalties for war profiteers. Perhaps most astounding, Congress in its final Iraq spending bill did not even include language to penalize war profiteers for defrauding American taxpayers. The Senate Appropriations Committee unanimously approved the provision, sponsored by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), to ensure that contractors who cheated the American taxpayer would face fines of up to $1 million and jail time of up to 20 years. Senators of both parties supported it, but Republican House negotiators refused to include it in the final bill. "Congress is about to send billions and billions of dollars to a place where there is no functioning government, under a plan with too little accountability and too few financial controls," Sen. Leahy said after his provision was stripped from the final bill. "That's a formula for mischief. We need strong disincentives for those who would defraud taxpayers. It baffles me why House members would not want to provide this protection to taxpayers." The inspector general would be appointed by the secretary of defense and would not have to be confirmed by the Senate. Lax Oversight And even when House and Senate negotiators did see their way clear to approving reform provisions, what they approved was often flawed. For example, the final bill provides for a much needed inspector general to monitor the Coalition Provisional Authority. But that inspector general would be appointed by the secretary of defense and would not have to be confirmed by the Senate-which has historically used the confirmation process to assure the American public of a nominee's integrity and credentials. "I am dismayed that this individual is not subject to Senate confirmation," Sen. Robert Byrd said. Byrd also noted that the bill's congressional negotiators rejected his amendment that would have required the inspector general to testify before Congress when requested. "Could it be that the president's supporters in Congress are afraid to hear what the inspector general might tell them?" Byrd asked. And while the inspector general would be required to submit periodic reports to Congress, the President would have the right to waive those reporting requirements for certain reasons, such as national security. Why the White House and key Republican leaders would be opposed to more accountability for this huge spending bill is hard to understand. But we at Common Cause will continue to monitor the spending in Iraq, to work in coalition with other groups to press the government to report what it is doing fully and completely. We will watch to see if the inspector general named to monitor spending in Iraq is well qualified for the job, and we will keep track of how well or poorly government officials report on the progress of Iraq reconstruction to Congress and the American people. Too much is at stake for us to do any less. Published: Nov 12 2003 ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511 http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/index.php?list=biofuel Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
