Case of the Disappearing Article By Vicky Davis
Yesterday, March 2, 2007, the Washington
Post had a rather lengthy article on the scandal of outpatient care at Walter
Reed. It was a three-page article titled, “Bush Orders Review of
Service Members Care” written by William
Branigin. Today,
after settling in to write a commentary about the article and Major Gen.
Weightman, naturally, I tried to bring up the article from the Washington Post
website, but curiously, a different article came up. Rather than
“Bush Orders Review of Service Members Care”, the link pulled up the
article, “Army Secretary
Ousted”. Being
a programmer, that sort of thing sets me into debug
mode.
==========================
Yesterday,
March 2, 2007, the Washington Post had a rather lengthy article on the scandal
of outpatient care at Walter Reed. It was a three-page article titled,
“Bush Orders Review of Service Members Care” written by
William
Branigin. In
the article it stated that the man in charge at the point the scandal broke was
Major General George W. Weightman. He had only held the command for six
months. He was fired by Lt. General Kevin C. Kiley, the man who held the
position for two years prior to Gen. Weightman’s assignment.
In other words, Maj. General Weightman was set up to be the goat - to take the
fall. Today,
after settling in to write a commentary about the article and Major Gen.
Weightman, naturally, I tried to bring up the article from the Washington Post
website, but curiously, a different article came up. Rather than
“Bush Orders Review of Service Members Care”, the link pulled up the
article, “Army Secretary
Ousted”. Being
a programmer, that sort of thing sets me into debug
mode. Debugging computer programs involves testing to find
patterns in the errors so that the problem can be precisely identified and
fixed. I found the problem fairly easily. Somebody scrambled
the indexes (unique identifiers) on the Washington Post’s News
database. Now
who would want that to happen and why? Simple, logical deductive
reasoning points to the military contracting agency and the contractors they are
hiring to perform services for the
government. How
is it that I have the audacity to point the finger without conclusive proof, you
say? In the mysteriously disappearing article, “Bush Orders Review
of Service Members Care”, it identifies IAP as being the facilities
manager for Walter Reed’s outpatient facility and it notes that IAP -
which is actually IAP Worldwide Services of Cape Canaveral, Fla. was also the
contractor
who was hired to deliver ice to the victims of hurricane
Katrina. This information came from
a letter Henry Waxman, Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform sent to General Weightman. More important than that
however is that the root cause of the problem was identified. On page 2 of
Waxman’s letter, it states the
following:
“It appears that over the past six
years, the Defense Department has been engaged in a systematic effort to replace
federal workers at Walter Reed with private companies for a host of functions,
including facilities management, patient care, and even guard post duty
entrance. This effort occurred under the A-76 process, which is shorthand
for OMB Circular A-76.
The A-76 process was an element of Vice
President Gore’s reinventing government initiative. The idea behind
A-76 is to force federal employees to compete with the private sector for the
jobs being performed by federal employees.
The process of considering Walter Reed for
A-76 competitions began in 2000. But the push to privatize support
services there accelerated under President Bush’s “competitive
sourcing” initiative which was launched in 2002. According to OMB,
the goal of President Bush’s competitive sourcing initiative was to allow
the private sector to compete for nearly half of all federal
jobs.” So
what’s the problem with contracting out federal jobs to the private sector
contractors? After all, corporations do things better and cheaper
right? WRONG! If a corporation is producing a product
for sale, they will do it as cheaply as possible to maximize profits. The
proof is that all manufacturing is being moved to China because a Communist
slave labor workforce can produce products far more cheaply than they can be
produced in the United
States. When
a corporation contracts for a service however, maximum profit is achieved by
bloating charges to the contract, adding paperwork requirements, reducing costs
by reducing services and in general - gumming up the works - especially when
they “own” the function as in the case of a facilities management
contract. The case of IAP
and the traveling ice is
classic:
“Ninety-one thousand tons of ice
cubes, that is, intended to cool food, medicine and sweltering victims of the
storm. The ice would cost taxpayers more than $100 million, and most of it never
would be delivered.”
…
After a day and a half in Montgomery, he was
sent to Camp Shelby, in Mississippi. On Sept. 8, he was waved onward to Selma,
Ala. And he was redirected two days later to Emporia, Va., along with scores of
other frustrated drivers who had been following similarly circuitous
routes.
Kostinec sat for an entire week at Emporia,
his trailer burning fuel around the clock to keep the ice frozen, as FEMA
officials studied whether supplies originally purchased for Katrina might be
used for Hurricane Ophelia. In the end, only three of about 150 ice trucks were
sent to North Carolina, he said. So Kostinec on Sept. 17 headed to Fremont,
Neb., where he unloaded his ice into a government-rented storage freezer the
next day.
"I dragged that ice around for 4,100 miles,
and it never got used," Kostinec said. He was pleased to earn $4,500, double his
usual paycheck. He was perplexed, however, by the government's apparent
bungling.
Why
wasn’t it delivered? Because IAP made more money driving it
around than they did by delivering
it.
“Under the contract, the government
pays about $12,000 for a 20-ton truckload of ice, delivered to its original
destination. If the ice is moved farther, the price is $2.60 a mile, and a day
of waiting costs up to $900, Holland
said.” Was
this just a contract snafu? Don’t get me started on
this…. There are no mistakes when dealing with this kind of money.
There are only corrupt government contracting officials and contract marketing
people. And apologies and “Lessons Learned”
doesn’t cut it. The only “Lesson Learned” should be that
everybody gets the ax when things like this happen. The fact that
the contractors are never barred from government contracts and it keeps
happening over and over and over again reveals the extent of the corruption of
government. Reinventing
Government - Circular OMB
A-76 The
real problem here stems back to Al Gore and his ‘reinventing’
government initiative. Setting up federal employees to compete with the
private sector for their jobs was a strategic move to dismantle the government -
to make way for a “market-based”
governing structure - succinctly, a fascist takeover of
government. Federal
employees can’t compete with the private sector. They are governed
by the civil service system. When services by federal employees are
costed, their rates for services include the embedded facilities and overhead
charges like pension and medical insurance. Their competition in the
private sector has the ability to low ball the first bid to get the contract and
then raise the prices sky high after they ‘own’ the function.
This isn’t even Contracting 101, it’s more like the remedial course
for
dummies. Sometime
back, I read something in which the author said something to the effect,
“the real power to govern is in the hands of government
employees”. And that is the truth. Under a market-based
(fascist) form of government, that power is transferred to the private sector
corporations whose primary goal is profit. In effect, it turns
government into a corporation for profit - with citizens transformed into
expendable slaves for the
corporation. This
“transformation” away from the American form of government, has been
obvious as corporations lobby to replace the American people in our labor market
with cheap imported replacements for maximum profit. With a
‘market-based’ government, you get ‘market-based’
propaganda - marketing of what they want you to think - rather than what is
true. “Buy my snake oil and your problems will be
over”. In
the U.S. today, the snake oil is “shortages of programmers, doctors,
teachers, accountants, nurses, lawyers, engineers, motel maids, kitchen help -
name the job and there are “shortages”. Several
years ago, I even heard Clay Johnson of the OMB say there was a
“shortage” of government workers. Corporate propaganda is why
there is such a credibility gap between what government officials say about our
economy and what we - the American people know to be true of the American
economy. Our economy is failing while government officials claim the
economy is booming. It's because of the corporate control over the
non-glamorous, but critically important, administrative
functions of
government. Who
is it that doesn’t understand that in order to solidify the power of
government that private corporations now have, they must disempower and
eliminate American citizens as a factor? And by extension, who
is it that doesn’t understand that in order to retain that control, the
American military must also be replaced with corporate
employees? And that’s the answer to the question of what
we are doing in Iraq. We’re eliminating American government
employees - American soldiers - so they can be replaced with private
contract mercenaries. And, if you think a little more, you should also be
able to understand what happened on September 11, 2001 and everything else that
has occurred in our country since
then. So
you see, outpatient care at Walter Reed is just the tip of the iceberg and the
Washington Post not only shined a light on it, they set fire to it and the whole
treacherous, treasonous scheme is about to meltdown - as long as we continue to
apply the
heat. And
the best for last, I just happened to have copied the entire Washington Post
article, "Bush
Orders Review of Service Members Care" for my files so the scrambling
of the Washington Posts story indexes did nothing except to give me the best
opening possible for the commentary I intended to
write. More
Info: Privatizing
War
How
affairs of state are outsourced to corporations beyond public
control.By Ken Silverstein
The
Nation, July 28,
1997 With
little public knowledge or debate, the government has been dispatching private
companies -- most of them with tight links to the Pentagon and staffed by
retired armed forces personnel -- to provide military and police training to
America's foreign allies. The government has also vastly expanded the use of
private firms to support its own overseas military operations, including
top-secret antidrug actions in Latin America, intelligence gathering and
military assistance programs for U.S.
clients. But
based on the testimony of those who will speak -- and most agreed to talk only
on background or not for attribution -- it is clear that dozens of companies,
ranging from a $1 billion high-tech giant like SAIC to small-scale operations
run by retired Green Berets, are offering military training and related
assistance to foreign governments at the bidding of the United States. "The
[private training] programs are designed to further our foreign policy
objectives," says a former high-level official at the Defense Intelligence
Agency (D.I.A.). "If the government doesn't sanction it, the companies don't do
it. But
while this soldier-of-fortune element occupies a niche, it has had more and more
difficulty landing anything beyond small-scale consulting contracts on
counterterrorism or deals to provide protection for visiting V.I.P.s. For
projects of scale, the freelance warriors have lost out badly to well-connected
corporations stocked with elite government and military retired officials. As
one Pentagon staffer told me, "Privatization is another way to reward the
alumni." It's the revolving door all over
again: §
At M.P.R.I., twenty-two corporate officers are former high-ranking military
figures. These include Gen. Carl Vuono, U.S. Army Chief of Staff during the
invasion of Panama and the Gulf War; Gen. Ed Soyster, former head of the D.I.A.;
and Gen. Frederick Kroesen, former commander of the U.S. Army in Europe.
§ Vinnell is owned by
B.D.M., a Beltway megacompany controlled by the
Carlyle
Group, an investment firm headed by former
Secretary of State James Baker, former White House budget chief Richard Darman
and former Secretary of Defense Frank
Carlucci. B.D.M.'s president, Philip Odeen,
headed the Pentagon task force on reshaping the military for the twenty-first
century.
§ Board members at
SAIC have included two former defense secretaries, William Perry and Melvin
Laird, and two former C.I.A. chiefs, John
Deutch and Robert
Gates.Click
the HERE for the
rest of the
article-------------------------------Reprinted
with permission.Original link here
Posted: Sun - March 4, 2007 at 12:24 PM
|
Quick Links
Categories
Calendar
| | Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat
|
Media
LINKAGE
XML/RSS Feed
Archives
Search
Entry Content
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Nov 04, 2007 08:44 AM
|