Rense.com




Halliburton Contract Questions
Dog White House

By Stephen J. Hedges
Chicago Tribune
1-31-4



WASHINGTON -- On paper, the Houston-based Halliburton oil services company didn't fare well as 2003 ended. Fourth-quarter results issued last week showed a $947 million loss due to liabilities from asbestos-related cases.
 
And yet Halliburton's stock price rose with those financial results. Part of the increase may have been because Halliburton reported a 63 percent jump in revenues for the period, a jump the company said was due to "government related activities in the Middle East."
 
In short, Halliburton has reaped the benefits of becoming the premier U.S. company operating within the new Iraq, undertaking at least $7 billion in Pentagon-related work before, during and after the U.S. invasion last spring.
 
But lucrative as it may be, that work has also put Halliburton in the middle of a political controversy.
 
Over the last year, Halliburton has been accused of multimillion dollar overcharges and kickbacks linked to its ever-expanding Pentagon portfolio, one that some Bush administration critics suggest the company has built through White House connections.
 
Vice President Dick Cheney served as Halliburton's chief executive officer before he was elected and still is due more than $400,000 in Halliburton stock options. Under a company plan, Cheney receives deferred compensation - $162,392 in 2002, according to government disclosures - while he is vice president.
 
Whether the charges of cronyism have merit, they promise to resonate throughout this election year, especially because Halliburton's Iraq contracts are the subject of investigations by the Pentagon's inspector general and Congress' General Accounting Office.
 
Halliburton denies any wrongdoing, and an Army Corps of Engineers audit has found that the company was not responsible for overcharging the government $61 million for gasoline that was bought in Kuwait and delivered to Iraq.
 
A separate, Pentagon investigation is under way in that matter.
 
A Cheney spokesman said that the vice president has no ties to the company, that he has donated outstanding stock options to charity and that his deferred compensation is calibrated, through an insurance policy, to remain constant, whether the company prospers or struggles.
 
"Nor is he involved in any way, shape or form in the contracting issue," said Kevin Kellems, who added that the Halliburton contracts have been awarded and managed by the Corps of Engineers and career civilian employees in the Pentagon.
 
"No one has ever provided a shred of evidence ... that the vice president was involved in the contracting or in any wrongdoing. This is just an election season issue, one that's going away," Kellems said.
 
Republican House and Senate leaders have so far blocked Democratic demands for congressional hearings. But political experts say Halliburton will be a hot issue this year.
 
"I think it already has become an issue, I suspect it will continue to be one," said Howard Opinsky, who was a media adviser to Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., during his 2000 presidential campaign. "It's up to the Democrats to run against the Bush-Halliburton ticket, not the Bush-Cheney ticket. And the challenge for the Republicans is that it's difficult to explain."
 
Halliburton has recently taken matters into its own hands. In newspaper and television ads, including one taken out just before last week's New Hampshire primary, the company argues that it is uniquely qualified for the difficult work it is doing in Iraq.
 
In one ad, Halliburton President David Lesar wrote, "Halliburton is one of the few companies in the world capable of contracting to assist in rebuilding Iraq. Critics imply this contract was somehow related to special interests. Nothing is further from the truth."
 
Those critics include the Democratic presidential candidates.
 
Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, after winning the Iowa caucuses, told voters there that, "This president has an open hand for his friends at Halliburton, but he has turned his back on our friends and neighbors."
 
Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., has used his post as ranking member of the Senate's Government Affairs Committee to prod the Halliburton issue in Washington and on the campaign trail, promising to "cut out any gifts to Halliburton" in future Iraq funding.
 
A number of Democrats in Congress, including Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., have called for a freeze on future Halliburton contracts until the ongoing business is fully examined.
 
The administration and Pentagon, however, have argued that the existing contracts were properly rewarded, and that the questions raised so far don't warrant a suspension of Halliburton's involvement in Iraq.
 
"We have our own internal audit process," said Army Corps of Engineers spokesman Scott Saunders. "We haven't turned up any serious wrongdoing or major problems."
 
Beginning in 2001, Halliburton bid for and won a multimillion-dollar contract to provide logistical support to U.S. forces posted in the Middle East. The work involved providing everything from food service to the delivery of goods.
 
As the likelihood of war in Iraq grew, Pentagon officials say, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld asked the Corps of Engineers to prepare for emergencies that a war might bring.
 
The chief concern, Saunders said, was that retreating Iraqi forces would set fire to oil wells, as they did in Kuwait during the 1991 Persian Gulf war.
 
The Corps chose to give a no-bid contract to the Halliburton engineering subsidiary KBR (formerly Kellogg Brown & Root) to extinguish any oil well fires.
 
"There was intelligence indicating that there would be oil well fires, and KBR was the only large firm to have people and equipment that could go in immediately," Saunders said. "If we had competitively bid this, it would have taken 45, 60, 90 days, during which time the fires would be burning."
 
It turned out that there were only about a half-dozen fires in the Iraqi oil fields, compared with more than 700 in Kuwait in 1991. But once in Iraq, the Corps of Engineers gave KBR more work. Saunders said that included contracts to repair Iraqi refineries and other oil-related infrastructure, and to deliver gasoline to Iraq.
 
Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., has questioned the Halliburton contracts in a series of letters to the Pentagon beginning last March. By August, even Halliburton competitors, including engineering giant Bechtel, were complaining that the company seemed to have an inside track on the Iraqi oil work.
 
In December, Pentagon auditors reported that Halliburton might have overcharged the government millions of dollars for gasoline it bought in Kuwait for delivery to Iraq.
 
Though the matter is under investigation, the Corps concluded in its own review that Halliburton simply paid the price for gasoline that it was charged by a supplier.
 
Late last month, Halliburton fired one employee for involvement in a $6 million kickback scheme with its supplier in Kuwait. It also paid the Army $6.3 million "to cover potential over billing charges by a subcontractor."
 
But the company has steadfastly denied wrongdoing.
 
(c) 2004, Chicago Tribune.
 
http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story.asp?StoryId=CqbS2ueicsefmteLcvvjut04

Disclaimer





MainPage
http://www.rense.com


This Site Served by TheHostPros