HOME
DV NEWS
SERVICE ARCHIVE SUBMISSIONS/CONTACT ABOUT DV
Halliburton,
Dick Cheney, and Wartime Spoils
by
Lee Drutman and Charlie Cray
April
4, 2003
When
Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle revealed that he was getting
$725,000 to help Global Crossing navigate the national security issues
surrounding the sale of its assets, the press jumped all over Perle, and
rightly so. There was indeed something fishy about the chairman of a board that
advises the Pentagon making that kind of money to help a company that was
having problems with national security issues. Perle is also on the board of
Onset Technology, the leading provider of message conversion technology and a
major supplier to Bechtel – one of the leading candidates for rebuilding the
Iraqi infrastructure.
As
the Center for Public Integrity has documented, this kind of thing is quite
prevalent on the Defense Policy Board, where at least nine of the 30 members
have ties to companies that have won more than $76 billion in defense contracts
in 2001 and 2002. As more and more wartime contracts are announced, more and
more conflicts of interest are coming to light. After all, the Bush
administration is riddled with ties to the weapons, engineering, construction,
and oil companies that have the most to profit from a war in Iraq. Perle’s
story is certainly not unusual.
However,
of all the administration members with potential conflicts of interest, none
seems more troubling than Vice President Dick Cheney. Cheney is former CEO of
Halliburton, an oil-services company that also provides construction and
military support services – a triple-header of wartime spoils.
A
few weeks ago, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers awarded a no-bid contract to
extinguish oil well fires in Iraq to Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR), a subsidiary
of Halliburton. The contract was granted under a January Bush administration
waiver that, according to the Washington Post, allowed “government agencies to
handpick companies for Iraqi reconstruction projects.”
The
contract, which was not announced until more than two weeks after it was
awarded, was open-ended, with no time limits and no dollar limits. It was also
a “cost-plus” contract, meaning that the company is guaranteed to recover costs
and then make a guaranteed profit on top of that. Its value is estimated at
tens of millions of dollars.
This
is not the first buck that Cheney’s former company has made off military
conflict and likely won’t be the last. KBR currently has thousands of military
support personnel on the ground in Kuwait and Turkey as part of a multi-year
contract worth close to a billion dollars. The engineering subsidiary was also
one of a select few firms invited to bid on an initial $900 million USAID
contract for rebuilding post-war Iraq. Though it didn’t get that job, Halliburton
says it is still in the running for subcontracts and there will likely be
plenty more opportunities. After all, the American Academy of Sciences
estimates the rebuilding Iraq will cost between $30 and $105 billion dollars.
At a recent investor conference call, Halliburton reported a 30% increase in
year-over-year revenues, to $1.6 billion, for KBR.
Cheney,
who served as CEO from 1995 to 2000, continues to receive as much as $1 million
a year in deferred compensation as Halliburton executives enjoy a seat at the
table during Administration discussions over how to handle post-war oil
production in Iraq.
The
Cheney-Halliburton story is the classic military-industrial revolving door
tale. As Secretary of Defense under Bush I, Cheney paid Brown and Root services
(now Kellogg Brown and Root) $3.9 million to report on how private companies
could help the U.S. Army as Cheney cut hundreds of thousands of Army jobs. Then
Brown and Root won a five-year contract to provide logistics for the U.S. Army
Corp of Engineers all over the globe. In 1995, Cheney became CEO and
Halliburton jumped from 73rd to 18th on the Pentagon’s list of top contractors,
benefiting from at least $3.8 billion in federal contracts and taxpayer-insured
loans, according to the Center for Public Integrity.
But
the Halliburton story is more than just a simple revolving door tale. Even
without the Cheney conflicts of interest, serious doubts remain about whether a
company with a record like Halliburton’s should even be eligible to receive government
contracts in the first place. This, after all, is a company that has been
accused of cost overruns, tax evasion, and cooking the books and has a history
of doing business in countries like Iraq, Iran and Libya.
Cost
overruns: In September 2000, the General Accounting Office (GAO) found that the
U.S. Army had not taken appropriate steps to limit the $2.2 billion costs
Kellogg Brown and Root charged for logistical and engineering support in the
Balkans. According to the report, Army officials “frequently have simply
accepted the level of services the contractor provided without questioning
whether they could be provided more efficiently or less frequently at lower
cost.”
Questionable
Accounting: The SEC recently formalized an investigation into whether
Halliburton artificially inflated revenue by $234 million over four years.
Halliburton switched to a more aggressive accounting method in 1998 under
Cheney.
Access
to Evil -- business dealings in Iraq, Iran, and Libya: News reports suggest
that Pentagon is currently using the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA) to draw up
a blacklist of non-US companies that have done business in Iran. Yet,
Halliburton has conducted Business in Iran through subsidiaries. When Cheney
was CEO of Halliburton, he inquired about an ILSA waiver to pursue oil field
developments in Iran. In 1997, Halliburton subsidiary Halliburton Energy
Services paid $15,000 to settle Department of Commerce allegations that the
company had broken anti-boycott provisions of the U.S. Export Administration
Act for an Iran-related transaction. Halliburton recently agreed to evaluate
its operations in Iran, after the Securities and Exchange Commission rebuffed
the company’s request to dismiss a New York City police and fire pension funds
shareholder proposal for the company to examine its role in Iran.
Also
forgotten is that story about how Cheney’s Halliburton did business with
Saddam. According to the Washington Post, “Halliburton held stakes in two firms
that signed contracts to sell more than $73 million in oil production equipment
and spare parts to Iraq while Cheney was chairman and chief executive officer.”
Halliburton
has also done business in Azerbaijan, Burma, Indonesia, Libya and Nigeria. As
Dick Cheney once said, “The good Lord didn't see fit to put oil and gas only
where there are democratic regimes friendly to the United States."
Tax
Havens: Under Cheney’s tenure, the number of Halliburton subsidiaries in
offshore tax havens increased from 9 to 44. Meanwhile, Halliburton went from
paying $302 million in company taxes in 1998 to getting an $85 million tax
refund in 1999.
All
told, the IRS loses about $70 billion a year in offshore tax sheltering by
corporations and wealthy individuals – almost enough to cover the $75 billion
Bush has asked for to cover the first six months of war.
***
It
is hard to know what to do about Halliburton. While the contracts reek of crony
capitalism, almost all the major firms that provide this kind of work are tied
to the administration, and somebody has to do the job. However, there is no
simply need for the level of secrecy surrounding Halliburton’s contracts so
far. Just as Cheney’s stubborn refusal to release the meeting notes of his
energy task force has made everyone wonder what exactly he is trying to hide,
the secretive no-bid nature of these Halliburton deals also feeds our worst
fears.
While
we advocate stopping this war now and turning over the rebuilding process to
the UN, we recognize that this remains unlikely. However, if President Bush
plans to continue this ill-advised war and keep tight control over the
rebuilding process, the administration should stay true to its stated intention
of ending a brutal and secretive regime by making sure that the billions of
dollars that will inevitably flow to rebuild Iraq are awarded in a fair and
open manner, not in a shroud of secretive cronyism.
Note:
In honor of Big Business Day 2003, Citizen Works will present Dick Cheney the
“Daddy Warbucks” Award for eminence in corporate war profiteering on Friday,
April 4.
Lee Drutman is the Communications Director for
Citizen Works, a Washington, DC-based nonprofit (www.citizenworks.org). He can contacted
at: ldrutman@citizenworks.org.
Charlie Cray is a lifetime activist and writer.
He is the Project Director of Citizen Works’ Campaign for Corporate Reform.