Overall, "U.S. government contracts for work in Iraq and Afghanistan have grown more than 50 percent annually, from $11 billion in 2004 to almost $17 billion in 2005 and more than $25 billion in 2006," says the Center for Public Integrity.
KBR, Inc., the global engineering and construction giant, won more than $16 billion in U.S. government contracts for work in Iraq and Afghanistan from 2004 to 2006—far more than any other company, according to a new analysis by the Center for Public Integrity. In fact, the total dollar value of contracts that went to KBR—which used to be known as Kellogg, Brown, and Root and until April 2007 was a subsidiary of Halliburton—was nearly nine times greater than those awarded to DynCorp International, a private security firm that is No. 2 on the Center's list of the Top 100 recipients of Iraq and Afghanistan reconstruction funds.
Another private security company, Blackwater USA, whose employees recently killed as many as 17 Iraqi civilians in what the Iraqi government alleges was an unprovoked attack, is 12th on the list of companies and joint ventures, with $485 million in contracts. (On November 14, the New York Times reported that FBI investigators have concluded that 14 of the 17 shootings were unjustified and violated deadly-force rules in effect for security contractors in Iraq. Justice Department prosecutors are weighing whether to seek indictments.)
First Kuwaiti General Trading & Contracting, which immediately precedes Blackwater on the Top 100, came under fire in July after a pair of whistleblowers told a House committee that the company essentially "kidnapped" low-paid foreign laborers brought in to help build the new U.S. embassy in Baghdad. First Kuwaiti and the U.S. State Department denied the charges.
The outsourcing of government has escalated across the board over the past five years, although, oversight has demonstrably diminished during the same time period, according to Controller General of the United States David Walker.
In a CPI interview, Walker described some of the problems associated with military contracting.
""We have identified about 15 systemic, longstanding acquisition and contracting problems that exist within the Defense Department—which is the single biggest contractor within the U.S. government—that we are still not making enough progress on," said Walker, who heads the Government Accountability Office (GAO). "I mean, this stuff isn't rocket science."
Among individual companies and subsidiaries, KBR’s $16 billion worth of contracts is surpassed by $20.4 billion in contracts going to a shadowy collection of companies identified by the U.S. government only as "foreign contractors." Subsequently, CPI has filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the 50 largest contracts, conjointly worth $19.6 billion, awarded to the unnamed companies. The biggest of these contracts is worth $6 billion, which would propel the unidentified beneficiary to the number 2 spot in the Top 100.
In October 2003, when the Center published "Windfalls of War," Halliburton's Kellogg, Brown, and Root was also the top recipient of U.S. government contracts for the postwar effort, with more than $2.3 billion in awards over two years (see the story here). By contrast, Bechtel, the only other company on that 2003 roster to have received more than $1 billion in awards, won a second large contract in January 2004—this one for $1.8 billion—but left Iraq after completing its work in March 2007. Since this Top 100 represents contracts newly awarded in fiscal years 2004 to 2006, Bechtel is not on the list.
When the 2003 study was published, federal agencies did not comprehensively distinguish war contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan from other government contracts; therefore, Center researchers had to flush out these contracts one by one. Since then, however, most such contracts list Iraq or Afghanistan as their "place of performance," making the contracting process more transparent and the search for data—available from the General Service Administration's Federal Procurement Data System—more methodical.
As typical with the Bush regime’s business dealings, all contracts awarded for work in Iraq and Afghanistan are not reported using this federal data system. Instead, awards originating at one particular contracting agency in Baghdad, only reports some aggregate totals for inclusion in the central database. CPI is now seeking copies of the agency’s records of the missing contracts, once again, through Freedom of Information Act requests.
When contacted by CPI, officials in the Baghdad office say these "foreign contracts" are unlikely to alter the rankings of the list of the largest contractors in the top 100, although, some companies at the bottom of the list may change. According to the commander of the Baghdad contracting office, Major General Darryl A. Scott, these contracts are inaccessible not through willful omission but because of the computer resources and human labor required to integrate them into the main federal procurement database.
There’s no doubt that Iraq remains at the top of the U.S. government’s priority list. CPI’s research shows that:
• more than seven times as many contracting dollars designated for spending in Iraq as for Afghanistan.
• minority-owned companies received less than one-tenth of one-percent of the total awards as primary contractors. (The GSA's data does not provide subcontracting information.)
• 12 out of the 32 foreign contractors on the Top 100 list are based in Turkey – exponentially more than any other nation.
During the early months of the fighting, U.S. government officials were criticized for awarding contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan without competition. But since that time, much of the criticism has centered on "cost-plus" contracts that guarantee a vender will earn either a fixed amount of profit or a set percentage of profit above all costs.
Of the $13 billion awarded through cost-plus contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan for 2004 to 2006, 30 percent was awarded through simple cost-plus, fixed-fee arrangements that offer no incentives for performance or cost savings. The largest amount awarded to one vendor through cost-plus contracts, more than $8 billion, went to KBR. Much of that was the result of a contract to provide logistical support for U.S. Army combat operations.
Well, that explains why these contractors are paid whether they successfully perform their duties or not. So, apparently, they just show up at the jobsite and get paid. It doesn’t matter if contractors serve our troops contaminated food and water. It’s no big deal if their shoddy workmanship causes indefinite deadlines on critical infrastructure and building projects -- or, if they take better than four years repairing the flow gauges on Iraqi oil lines -- even when the continued result of their procrastination ends in the daily losses of thousands of barrels of oil. OR if they happen to murder innocent Iraqis who were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The height and breadth of this criminal corruption is breathtaking, and by the time the troops finally come home, the Democrats in Congress could probably about double their recent estimation (1.6-trillion) of the total cost of the occupation.
The worst part is, the Iraqi misadventure is just one slimy, suckered tentacle of corruption protruding from a hideous hydra-beast with a vulturous eye for profit and an insatiable bloodlust for death and destruction. And, it continues.
Impede, impeach and imprison. (the time is well-nigh)
Peace
Comments are closed on this story.