Soon after the American people booted the GOP from Congress in the midterm elections, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) spoke at his alma mater, Georgetown Law School, and talked about, amongst many other pressing issues to come before his Senate Judiciary Committee, war profiteers.
And because prosecuting criminal cases against war profiteering is difficult under current law and has to overcome jurisdictional legal defenses, we also will renew our efforts to enact the War Profiteering Prevention Act. I have repeatedly offered this bill, and it has passed the Senate, only to die in a Republican-controlled conference committee.
On January 4, the first day of the new Democratic Congress, Senator Leahy made good on those words when he introduced the War Profiteering Prevention Act of 2007. The legislation group of bills includes the Effective Corruptions Prosecutions Act of 2007. (Read his remarks on war profiteering prevention and on effective prosecutions.)
From the senator's press release:
“Americans want the culture of corruption to end. From war profiteers and corrupt officials in Iraq, to convicted Administration officials, to influence-peddling lobbyists and, regrettably, even members of Congress, too many supposed public servants have been serving their own interests, rather than the public interest,” said Leahy.
Senator Leahy said that the American people "staged an intervention" in November, alluding to the corporations binging on the U.S. Federal Treasury like addicts.
“The American people staged an intervention during the November elections and made it clear that they would not stand for it any longer. They expect the Congress to take action, and these bills are a good first step toward meeting that call,” Leahy said. “We need to restore the people’s trust by acting to clean up the people’s government.”
Here's what it will do:
War Profiteering Prevention Act of 2007§ Criminalizes war profiteering, which is defined as materially overvaluing any good or service with the specific intent to excessively profit from the war and relief or reconstruction activities
§ Statute would strengthen the tools available to federal prosecutors to combat war profiteering by providing clear authority for the Government to seek criminal penalties and to recover excessive profits for war profiteering overseas.
§ Prohibits any fraud against the United States, Iraq, or any other foreign country involving a contract for the provision of any goods or services in connection with a war, military action, or relief or reconstruction activities.
§ Subjects violators to up to 20 years imprisonment and a fine not to exceed the greater of $1,000,000 or twice the amount of any illegal gross profits, or both.
§ Prohibits making a false statement in any matter involving a contract for the provision of any goods or services in connection with a war, military action, or relief or reconstruction activities.
§ Subjects violators of this provision to up to 10 years imprisonment and a fine not to exceed the greater of $1,000,000, or twice the amount of any illegal gross profits, or both.
§ Creates extraterritorial jurisdiction over offenses committed overseas, and covers any person in the United States or abroad who violates its provisions.
If the legislation passes, and I'm sure it will, the 110th Congress will have exceeded the GOP-controlled Congress, in cracking down on profiteers, by leaps and bounds.
Dave Johnson, writing at Seeing the Forest, says that President Bush will "certainly veto this one" because it would "ruin the retirement plans of so many of his buddies."
I say, "bring it on." Pass the legislation and dare President Bush to veto it.
The Nation's Chuck Collins answers Rep. Henry Waxman's dilemma of what to tackle first. War profiteering ranks second.
And CBS News asks the the absurd question: "Is U.S. Wasting Money on Iraq Contracts?" The article should be one word: "YES!!!"
The U.S. has currently spent at least $437 billion on the Iraq war, according to the Congressional Research Service. An estimated $100 billion will be spent in 2007. Much of that money is going to 60,000 civilian contractors involved in reconstruction and providing services to the troops.
It's actually 100,000 contractors, according to the Pentagon, but really, who's counting?
A document — part of a whistleblower lawsuit obtained by CBS News — alleges a blueprint of contractor abuse in Iraq, detailing how the government was billed 10 times more than it should have been when U.S. troops used a recreation facility in Iraq.
That's because they were not billed once per visit, but rather billed repeatedly, every time a soldier used:
a computer a phone ping pong equipment or pool equipment a towel a bottle of water. The contractor in question, Kellogg Brown and Root, denies any wrongdoing.
Says Senator Leahy:
"Eventually we're going to have a bill for about $1 trillion, and people are not going to be able to account for a very, very large part of it," says Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.
CBS continued:
The Pentagon and Congress are investigating about 80 cases of alleged contractor waste, fraud and abuse in Iraq. To date, 26 have been referred to the Justice Department for possible prosecution.
So far a few individuals have been charged, most from a single case, and a few million dollars has been paid back. After 3 1/2 years of war, not a single criminal case has been filed against any large corporation doing work in Iraq.
The Leahy legislation is a much needed first step in fighting profiteers and politically-connected corruption. However, the main event -- Congressional crackdowns on known profiteers -- has yet to come.
[Matt Ortega writes at SOTUblog and The Right's Field, a group blog focusing on the Repulican field of candidates for 2008.]
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Matt O.!
Matt o Fitz!!
MattO and Leahy and Fitz! (oh my!)
NOW THIS is what our leaders are supposed to do!
this is epu’d from the last thread and I’ve been meaning to write about it for a while and never got the chance until responding to a post downstairs, I hope it’s not too off topic too soon;
scarecrow @ 157
colon powel enumerated that very scenario, telling us there are no additional troops, what’s inteneded is keeping soldiers there scheduled to leave and moving up soldiers schedule to get there
that’s why I think it does NOT serve us well to call this an “escalation”
this is a surge, we are borrowing from paul to pay peter, a “surge” is a MUCH WORSE scenario then an “escalation” and we really shouldn’t be putting the “escalation” face on it
for instance, we HAVE to point out that this surge is depleting our assets, it isn’t adding to assets as an escalation would indicate, it’s depleting assets that are already stretched too thin
surge is the right word and it’s an indictment of this president’s military foresight, escalation is the wrong word and it indicates the troops are available which they are not
now back to the post, EXCELLENT matt
highlights are mine, OH BABY, I LOVE that;
“to convicted administration officials”
MAN OH MAN OH MAN, they must be PISSING in their pants right now
What ever you call it, it boils down to eating our seed corn.
Very good and timely post, Matt.
Question: Will this bill do anything to stop the (apparently) now entirely legal process used by Haliburton and others to pad their expenses by massive subcontracting (and those entities subcontracting, etc.) on cost-plus contracts?
Well this is a good start. Now about that ‘War Profiteering Reclamation Act of 2007′.
A cvouple of questions, if you know this:
re:
Do you know if this closed the previous loophole re the Provisional Coalition? IIRC, many known cases of fraud could not be pursured because it was the coalition that was robbed, not the US or Iraq.
$1,000,000 seems like a ridiculously low cap considering the scope of some of these frauds.
And hiring lawyers.
you know what would be one EXCELLENT idea?
when the democrats take office in 08 they need to release the information that was made “top secret” which allowed convicted criminals go free, (read olie north)
Scarecrow really amazes me. Excellent post that #5 from last thread. And that intervention by Leahy is perfect.
jeffreyw @ 7
(my EPU’s comment) If this was with money it would be called kiting.
ps I meant #15 by Scarecrow. Sorry for the OT
Pat Leahy was my Senator when I lived in Vermont in 1975 and it should tell you something that he’s still there. I don’t think you can stampede Pat Leahy, and you sure as hell can’t pull the wool over his eyes.
Remember when the Republicans hated lawyers? Booyah!!
ccmask @ 17
MUWAHAHAHAH
perris @ 5
I’d come to the same conclusion independently, for whatever that’s worth. There really isn’t anywhere else to draw from, at this point. Fully activation the guard and reserve isn’t really an option for a number of reasons. They’re as activated as they can get.
Here I have to disagree. It’s an escalation, albeit a pointless one. Whether it actually results in more combat operations or not remains to be seen, but since these are not going to be training units, it’s clearly not aimed at better preparing the Iraqis to handle this mess themselves.
Any lawyers want to chime in with definitions of the, ahem, emboldened terms?
Seems like a fair selection of loopholes, there.
ccmask @ 17
That was only TRIAL lawyers, you know, the evil ambulance chasers… not CRIMINAL lawyers, who are very different because they remind us that everyone is innocent until proven guilty… unless you’re in Gitmo…
With billions on the line, $1,000,000 is not nearly a big enough fine. Hell, why should we (taxpayers) not get every red cent back, plus whatever it takes to prosecute plus 20 yrs room and board.
A measly million? They’ll just build it in as a cost of doing business. Slammer time can be negotiated and may not be so bad, esp in a privately-run prison. But it’s got to be twice the amount of any illegal gross profits, NO CAP, plus prison time.
you know, this is happening even faster then I had hoped in my wildest dreams
now we have to begin our own marketing strategy and make it impossible to disagree with leahy
we have to make it look like anyone who doesn’t support anti war profiteering legislation to be against our boys and girls in uniform and stealing from them, we have to make it clear you are arguing against a strong military when you argue against ant war profiteering legislation, we have to make it against national security if you are against ant war profiteering
every conversation, every discussion, every time someone makes and excuse to avoid anti war profiteering we have to pepper their response with;
“war profiteering steels from our soldiers” or something to that effect
maybe we can create a list of things to pepper every response when someone argues against anti war profiteering legislation
One question about this wonderful piece of legislation –
Will it apply to CURRENT military contracts, or only to newly created contracts?
I fear that the most awful, egregious crimes may slip by because the hideous deeds are done already. Is there any way possible that the evil greedy hyenas, who have feasted on the corpses of our troops and innocent Iraqis, can be made to pay for what they have ALREADY done?
Do lawyers often vote Republican? It must surge and escalate their billing hours when the neocons are coming out of office.
Marion in Savannah @ 21
Or in an ICE concentration camp.
ccmask @ 17
Maybe “Gold Bars” Luskin will be available?
I’m sure he won’t be free.
How much was Janet Jackson’s or Howard Stern’s FCC fines? Doesn’t seem right…
BUNNY!!!
The million dollars is the fine. Isn’t that separate from repaying illegal gross profits?
In this case it’s too bad you can’t make a law retroactive.
Nice post, Matt.
I assume/hope this is for each separate offense. Sorta focuses the mind, doesn’t it?
Cujo359 @ 19
it’s really semantics we’re discussing but here’s my point;
if we “escalate” it means we have upped our investment, we’ve escalated our commitment
this is not the case, we’ haven’t upped our commitment, we’ve borrowed the assets and will return those assets because they will be depleted, we haven’t escalated we’ve surged.
in any event it’s just semantics
No wonder Harriet Myers is gone. She’s no match for Leahy or Waxman.
Damn, the next couple years are going to be very interesting.
Mrs. K8 @ 24
you know, the president has rescinded habeas corpus hasn’t he
OH BABY, can we make that bit him in the butt?
ccmask @ 25
My guess is it depends on what type of attorney. The vast majority of lawyers who help the “little guy” are Dems, according to a lawyer pal of mine who belonged to that group.
Corporate tax attorneys or the type of attorney who helps The Evil Mouse pursue a SLAPP suit against a citizen activist or the folks at Baker, Botts, for example, are a different animal altogether.
IMHO.
SusanD @ 31
not before the president rescinded habeas corpus, but he did after all didn’t he.
Criminalizes war profiteering, which is defined as materially overvaluing any good or service with the specific intent to excessively profit from the war and relief or reconstruction activities[Bold added]
The legal eagles here can correct me if I’m wrong, but proving intent is notoriously difficult, and it is here further complicated by the adjective “specific”. This may be more show than go - it has the look of compromise language provided more for appearance than effect.
perris @ 35
I like the way you think!
But seriously, though, does anyone know if Leahy’s new legislation will enable the Public Integrity section of DOJ (if that’s the right dept.) to go after Halliburton, for example, for contracts they’ve already been paid for?
Or will it only apply to NEW contracts?
TheOtherWA @ 34
Yes, on Thursday/Friday?? there were a couple of stories on CNN and elsewhere about the WH realizing they need to “lawyer up” with really mean bulldogs. We may see a new definition of “stonewalling.”
32 scarecrow says:
January 6th, 2007 at 4:25 pm
Nice post, Matt.
? Subjects violators of this provision to up to 10 years imprisonment and a fine not to exceed the greater of $1,000,000, or twice the amount of any illegal gross profits, or both.
I assume/hope this is for each separate offense. Sorta focuses the mind, doesn’t it?
So, for every day that Halliburton overreports the number of soldiers using a recreation facility, or for every day that Halliburton provides unsanitary drinking water, and so forth, there could be a separate count and a separate penalty. I hope that is the way it works.
TheOtherWA @ 30
I do believe that’s correct.
Mrs. K8 @ 24
I think some parts of it clearly will apply to current contracts. One provision is to extend the statute of limitations for bribery and fraud from five to eight years. This could be applied retroactively. It also seeks to add some wiretap rules now applied to RICO investigations to bribery cases, as well.
From Leahy’s page on the act:
This, too, could be applied to any case.
IANAL, so don’t take this as legal advice ;)
scarecrow @ 32
As I read it, the 10 years is for making false statements, but I’m no lawyer. As I read the above for actual DOING it you’re liable for 20 years. But, as I said, I’m no lawyer, not even close…
SIGIR Stuart Bowen is a Republican and he’s doing a stand-up job. Thus why the GOP tried to fire him.
As for specific questions about legal loopholes, post-facto restrictions, etc., I don’t think I have the legal expertise, nor have I heard enough about the legislation, to say for certain.
I would put the question to Christy or Glenn Greenwald.
My comment at 4:31 p.m. was quoting Scarecrow, all except the final paragraph, which is mine.
Sorry about any confusion.
The “Quote This Comment” function on the comments has stopped working for me. Is anyone else having that problem?
neurophius @ 46
Not I. Try refresh from the top.
Thanks Mrs.k–it’s been awhile. Good to see you.
Cujo, thanks!
I read about the increased statute of limitations, but hadn’t put it together with the rest of the bill in that way. That makes sense. I hope.
Or does the defendant get to argue “gee, when I entered into the contract with the gov’t it wasn’t YET illegal to bilk them rapaciously, so how can you get me NOW for it”? I hope not.
There are two groups of people, among other groups, that ring the Republican bell. One is public school teachers and the other group is trial lawyers. The GOP detests members of these two professions.
neurophius @ 46
It’s working fine for me. I’m using Firefox, though, which seems to be better supported.
scarecrow @ 47
Thanks, Scarecrow. That worked.
Works for me, Firefox 2.x, Win XP.
Isn’t the function a Java script thing? Might try to download/install the latest iteration.
ccmask @ 48
Good seeing you! Here’s a smooch –
{{{{ ….mwaaahhhh…}}}}
Oklahoma kiddo @ 50
The GOP wants to do away with these two professions.
neurophius @ 46
I have enormous problems with it. I’ve been told that it’s because I haven’t updated to the very latest version of my browser.
But I have no idea if that’s correct or not. So I just am super careful now, it’s a PITA. And I don’t want to update to the latest version of my browser, so I just live with this for the time being.
If you learn anything more specific, please let me know too.
They want to bust the union because it opposes them and is effective. The lawyers don’t have a union, but the fees they recover in suits allow them to be very effective in opposition. They want to make it hard for the lawyers to earn big fees by capping them. All for the sake of the people, of course.
GOP doesn’t care much for nurses either.
I’ve been using Firefox for some time, now. The latest upgrade was pretty painless.
I haven’t read it all yet but does it address the issue of multiple pass-throughs of an original cost-plus contract? This is one way that excessive profits were realized but it can also be a legitimate form of excessive subcontracting. The bill for services is passed through multiple entities with a markup on each contractor/sub it passes through. An example of this is the current case of Blackwater being sued by the families of workers killed. I think it was Waxman that had several questions for them and he wanted to deny most of that payment.
, “Iraq - In the opening battle of a major new drive to tame the violent capital, the Iraqi army reported it killed 30 militants Saturday night in a fire fight in a Sunni insurgent stronghold in the center of the city, just to the north of the heavily fortified Green Zone.
So Clusterfuck and his sometimes henchmen have decided that having shiites kill sunnis is the road to victory?
jeffreyw @ 59
I got Firefox based on a recommendation by a firepup about 4 months ago. It’s free, it’s fast, and I love it. Editing comments works and preview works. My advice is to download and use Firefox. (You don’t have to do what I did, which is make FDL my Firefox home page…)
This doesn’t look good…except for the NeoConvicts:
jeffreyw @ 59
I’m not keen on the new fiddling with the tab size/font and method of tab handling. I upgrade lots of things all the time, I’m not afraid of the process, I just don’t want the new version.
neurophius @ 55
interesting anecdote;
the saying that is supposed to demonstrate contempt for lawyers comes from one of Shakespeare’s plays ;
“the first thing we do is get rid of all the lawyers”
this is misinterpreted, the quote is actually a
compliment to lawyers
in henry the VI there is an attempted coup to take over the country and one of the characters says [paraphrased] the only way to succeed, “the first thing we do is get rid of all the lawyers”, a compliment to the profession not a perjuratve expression in the play at all
hi all, thanks Matt and go Leahy!
OT here’s something I just stumbled across:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/a....._1,00.html
“Report: Israel planning nuke strike on Iran.”
Boy- if Clusterfuck hadn’t thought up that roadmap to peace thingee- this kind of nuclear bombing could seriously jeopardize peace in the region!
a little tab’ll two ya
Mary McCurnin @ 58
I watched the replay of Barney Frank at the Press
Club, taped just before the turnover. He gets the union issue.
Hey Clusterfuck- would ya take out that road map and tell us how much longer we got ta go?
angie @
66
Will they be using nuclear weapons or nookulur wepuns?
Oklahoma kiddo @ 50
Mary McCurnin @ 58
They detest unionized employees for the same reason they detest trial lawyers - both groups endanger the corporate profits so dear to their “base”.
Lou Costello @ 63
Why am I not surprised. The Israeli government realizes full well once they start something like this, our government will back them. The Israeli Gov’t has long been running amok. Cut off the money to Iraq and the Israeli government. This is getting serious.
Good. The Bushits passed a law recently that made nurses with seniority part of management. This meant they couldn’t belong to a union.
OT - Bush’s dusty veto pen may soon get busy
One might be a recycled version of the stem-cell funding bill that drew Bush’s lone veto last July. Other possibilities include measures that would raise the minimum wage without offsetting tax breaks for businesses, fully put in place the Sept. 11 commission’s recommendations and curb oil-industry subsidies.
twolf1 @ 71
I thought it was three words;
new que liar
punaise @ 68
Aha! Nothing gets past you, sweetie! You *knew* I was talking about Firefox two point oh.
I can always count on you for a smile, if not a full-out laugh. But I wonder how many of the youngsters amongst us would no longer get the reference you’re making — to that ancient Brylcreme (or was it Brylcreem) commercial?
twolf1 @ 71
Just a quibble here…. it’s nookular weapons.
Hi Lou– looks like you beat me to the baaad news.
they’ll be nookulur wepuns/weepuns but guaranteed to kill and pollute… we know cause we helped!
Will the nuclear war be televised? Could be a great chance to win rating points for the cable news stations- couldn’t be as good as a missing white woman with large breasts- but it would make the meter move!
Marion in Savannah @ 78
no no no, I’m pretty sure it’s new QUE liar
I used to like drinking Tab and Fresca. Don’t know if they still make them though.
perris @ 76
Yes, there’s those too. But, they can’t be made into low-yield bunker-busters. They remain high-yield nation destroyers.
ccmask @ 82
isn’t fresca supposed to make it snow in the summer time?
we’re gonna need that…here in lawn guy land new york it was about 80 degrees this january seventh, 2007
The war would be better for ratings if it were announced in advance- so that americans could all clear their calendars and take time off- it should happen in Prime Time too- not in the middle of the night eastern standard time…
It would be somethin ta tell yer grandchildren- if yer inta family values.
Not sure I understand.
I know its possible to do a lot of fiddling, but it’s not required. I ran mine with no problems for a while before I did some minimal tweaks.
No matter.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 73
No doubt I’ll get flamed for this, so I’m putting on my fireproof suit….
My brother-in-law went to Israel on a 1-year contract as a chemical engineer in the late 1970s and came back with tales of a police state. He knew when his apartment was tossed by the Mossad, which happened about monthly. Do I really have any reason to think anything has changed? This was no spy or terrorist. This was someone they ASKED to come and help them on a project…. My guess is that BushCo has been learning from the Israelis.
angie @ 66
Ties in with Wes Clark’s reaction to related stories about Israeli intentions:
Huffpo article on Wes Clark and Iran
perris @ 81
Well, you got that “liar” part right!!
We need time to get the reporters embedded- a few on the drop vehicle- and others on the ground (but safely out of range) Live interviews would be historic! We have miles of film of japanese with their skin falling off- but not many interviews of em while it was happening…
Would sponsorship draw more or less than a super bowl spot I wonder.
ccmask @ 82
They sure as crap make Tab, which is crap. One of the docs in my office swills it down by the gallon… EEEWW….
Marion in Savannah @ 87
…a rare instance where ‘BushCo’ and ‘Learning’ are used in the same sentence.
Mrs. K8 @ 77
smiles are good. :~)
if a tab falls in the forest…
good question actually - some cultural references are best left to drift into oblivion.
I drink Fresca all the time, they have regular, black cherry and peach.
perris @
84
It’s dawning on me that the Israeli government is perhaps trying to draw this country into WWIII.
Perris: Is it really 80 degrees in NY? It’s 80 in Florida. We had three days of winter this year. The heating coil or core or something like that went on my car and they want $900. and I’m not even going to bother.
Much less Burma Shave!
Mrs. K8 @
77
ccmask @ 96
ya, it was 80 degrees here, we closed early and I went to play some tennis
ccmask @ 82
10 - 2 - 4
Wouldn’t you like to be a pepper too…
punaise @ 93
I miss the Burma Shave signs.
Shaving brushes
You’ll soon see ‘em
On a shelf
In some museum
Burma-Shave
Brylcreeme, Brylcreem, Brylcreem…! A little dab will do ya.
How bout, “Everybody likes it. . . “
rumi @ 99
rumi @ 99