Bush Administration: An Example of Croynism

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

So, if you donate to Bush you can get a war waged to help your business. Hmmm, I bet a few more dollars and re-election could help get rid of all those pesky clean-air rules here in this country

Think that was inflamatory enough to get me flamed?

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=540&u=/ap/20031030/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_contracts_2&printer=1

Report Links Iraq Deals to Bush Donations
Thu Oct 30,10:51 AM ET

By LARRY MARGASAK, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Companies awarded $8 billion in contracts to rebuild Iraq (news - web sites) and Afghanistan (news - web sites) have been major campaign donors to President Bush (news - web sites), and their executives have had important political and military connections, according to a study released Thursday.

The study of more than 70 U.S. companies and individual contractors turned up more than $500,000 in donations to the president's 2000 campaign, more than they gave collectively to any other politician over the past dozen years.

The report was released by the Center for Public Integrity, a Washington-based research organization that produces investigative articles on special interests and ethics in government. Its staff includes journalists and researchers.

The Center concluded that most of the 10 largest contracts went to companies that employed former high-ranking government officials, or executives with close ties to members of Congress and even the agencies awarding their contracts.

Major contracts for Iraq and Afghanistan were awarded by the Bush administration without competitive bids, because agencies said competition would have taken too much time to meet urgent needs in both countries.

"No single agency supervised the contracting process for the government," Center executive director Charles Lewis said. "This situation alone shows how susceptible the contracting system is to waste, fraud and cronyism."

J. Edward Fox, an assistant administrator at the U.S. Agency for International Development, took issue with Lewis' statement and aspects of the report.

"It would ... be incorrect to suggest that there is no overall oversight of this process," he wrote the Center. "The USAID inspector general's review of all Iraq contracts which was requested by USAID Administrator Andrew S. Natsios on April 14th has shown that all Iraq contracts to date have been done in compliance" with federal regulations.

The top contract recipient was the Halliburton subsidiary KBR, with more than $2.3 billion awarded to support the U.S. military and restore Iraq's oil industry.

Halliburton was headed by Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites) before he resigned to run with Bush in 2000.

Halliburton's top executive, Dave Lesar, said Wednesday he was offended by criticism of the company's Iraq work but believed it was "less about Halliburton and more about external political issues."

"As a company uniquely qualified to take on this difficult assignment, we will continue to bring all of our global resources to bear at this critical time in the Middle East. We have served the military for over 50 years and have no intention of backing down at this point," he said.

Bechtel was second with a $1 billion capital construction contract involving Iraq's utilities, telecommunications, railroads, ports, schools, health care facilities, bridges, roads and airports.

The company's Internet site says, "We do engage in the political process, as do most companies in the United States. We have legitimate policy interests and positions on matters before Congress, and we express them in many ways, including support for elected officials who support those positions.

"We do not expect or receive political favors or government contracts as a result of those contributions."

The Center's analysis of contractor political donations showed:

_The top 10 contractors contributed $11 million to national political parties, candidates and political action committees since 1990.

_Fourteen of the companies won contracts in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Those companies, combined, have given more than $23 million in political contributions since 1990.

_Most contractors, their political action committees and their employees have contributed just under $49 million to national political campaigns and parties since that year.

_In the same time period, contractor donations to Republican Party committees outpaced contributions to the Democrats, $12.7 million to $7.1 million.

Many of the companies with large contracts have important political connections.

Former Secretary of State George Shultz is a member of Bechtel's board of directors, although he has no management role, according to the company's Web site.

Riley Bechtel, the chairman and chief executive officer, was named early this year to the President's Export Council, which advises the president on programs to improve U.S. trade.

Jack Sheehan, senior vice president in Bechtel's petroleum and chemicals business, served on the Defense Policy Board, which advises the defense secretary on a variety of issues.

Other contractors also had connections. Among those cited by the Center:

David Kay, head of the Bush administration's search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, is a former vice president of Science Applications International Corp. He left the company in October 2002.

Christopher "Ryan" Henry left the same company as a vice president in February 2003 to become principal deputy undersecretary of defense for policy.

Scott Spangler, principal owner of Chemonics International, was a senior U.S. Agency for International Development official during the first Bush administration. The company receives 90 percent of its business from USAID.

Sullivan Haave Associates Inc. was founded by Carol Haave, currently the deputy assistant secretary of defense for security and information operations.

The Center's findings are based, in part, on 73 Freedom of Information Act requests and an analysis of a federal contractor database.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[TheAnvil 0]

- Halliburton has contributed $$ to democratic campaigns

- union contributions to democrats dwarf those you mentioned in your post - even the monetary ones alone

- Halliburton has a history of gov't contracts pre-Cheney; it will post-Cheney as well

- I don't like the awarding of non-competition contracts in any circumstance, but sometimes it's necessary

- The average donation to the Republican party is a less than US$500 gift from private individuals; I think it might even be less than $250. To my knowledge, the Dem's won't release theirs.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[dterrick 0]

Quote

So, if you donate to Bush you can get a war waged to help your business

Well Duhhh

And were there to have been a Deomcrat in office that war might never have happened. But THEN, you'd have had the DEMOCRAT friends administering all the social projects that would have occupied the budget bills. Maybe not so blatant as oil and defence contractors but somebody has to run the programs - and programs come with budget allotments - and somebody gets to decide how to spend them... and those chosen ones promote THEIR agendae.

It's all the same, but different, everywhere. The only answer... rampant Comminusm! ... (try THAT one on for a flame fan)

Oh, waittaminute... party faithful over THERE got nice houses and cars and vacations and never stood in in line for anything - geez I guess it really it IS the same everywhere. Absolute power corrupts absolutely

Dave

PS: We're no beter in Canada. We have one party, effectively unchallenged in the next election because our 'Right Wing' Progressive Conservatives self-destructed after Brian Mulroney's patronage and kowtowing to Reagan in the 80's (yes, we're stubborn and fickle as a nation it seems).

Now, PM Jean Cretien is in the final days of his PM'ship and finishing off HIS agenda. Paul Martin, the party's replacement PM-elect is making noise that he's going to un-handout many of the things uncle Jean is now handing out to HIS past supporters. Sheesh. Shoot em all!

Life is very short and there's no time for fussing and fighting my friend (Lennon/McCartney)

[meltdown 0]

Cronyism? Gee whiz. So I guess we should just let the place sit there in flames because we don't want Bush's buddies to make any money? Talk about cronysim, slick willie was the king, and right from the very first. Remember travelgate, where the travel office staff was fired and replaced by Clinton cronies? But that wasn't enough. Then they had to sic the IRS on the poor guy that ran the place and ruin his fuckin' life, all to try to create a false justification for the whole damn thing. Then of course there's the Roger Clinton and Hugh Rodham pardon for sale scandals, and the infamous pardon of Marc Rich. And by the way, wasn't it Clintonista Bob Rubin that tried by get the feds to bail out Enron in the 11th hour? In fact, it was! To be sure, Enron never had a better friend than Clinton. It's well documented that he did many favors for Lay and co, including helping win approval for power plants. Of course you will never hear about that in the media, who worship the slime trail that Clinton leaves when he slithers.

[billvon 3,092]

>Cronyism? Gee whiz. So I guess we should just let the place sit there
>in flames because we don't want Bush's buddies to make any money?

No, just go out to bid as you would for any other goverment contract, rather than guaranteeing certain companies competition-free work.

>Remember travelgate . . .

Cronyism isn't new at all. Doesn't make it right.

[meltdown 0]

Cronyism isn't new at all. Doesn't make it right.
_____________________________________________
No it doesn't. But I seriously doubt you or the other lefties on this site were up in arms over the numerous examples of Clinton cronyism. I guess it's not okay to use GOP donors to rebuild Iraq, but it's okay to trade missile technology to China for campaign donations. Please.

[billvon 3,092]

>No it doesn't. But I seriously doubt you or the other lefties on this
>site were up in arms over the numerous examples of Clinton cronyism.

They bothered me back then as well. Your lack of attention about what bothers me does not further your argument.

[meltdown 0]

>They bothered me back then as well. Your lack of >attention about what bothers me does not further >your argument.

Cronyism is wrong. Period. I haven't seen sufficient evidence that this falls into that category. Given the urgent nature of the work and the fact that very few companies qualify to even do the work don't seem to be factored in by the hordes of Bush haters. I don't know all the facts, but I'm not sure not buying the political spin of the so called "center for public integrity", or whatever the hell self righteous name they gave themselves.

[TheAnvil 0]

I agree dude. Good comments. The left is desparate these days and is looking for any attack ammo. The 'naive nine' and their attack machines are doing more to harm that party in the long run than they realize. hehehehehehehehehe.

BTW - Bill isn't a total left-winger at all. Though he does lean left, he's not totally out there by any stretch of the imaginaton. He even likes Nuke Power.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[billvon 3,092]

>Cronyism is wrong. Period. I haven't seen sufficient evidence that
> this falls into that category. Given the urgent nature of the work and
> the fact that very few companies qualify to even do the work don't
> seem to be factored in by the hordes of Bush haters.

I agree that very few companies are qualified; this would make the bid and selection process that much easier, had that process occurred. The problem is not that Halliburton got the work; the problem is that every other company capable of doing it was excluded. Heck, in a fair bidding process, Halliburton might have won anyway, and then there would be no basis for calling foul.