Okay, so many folks like to poke fun at me for being so obviously anti-Halliburton and anti-Cheney, so I figured there must be some waiting for me to comment on the article that appeared today by Walter F. Roche, Jr. of the Los Angeles Times titled "Halliburton performance under fire again".
(I read the article in the St Paul Pioneer Press, but being nearly computer illiterate I still am unable to do a decent job of linking stuff)

Anyway, the gist of the article has to do with a report issued regarding the 3rd contract with Halliburton dealing with repair of the oil fields in southern Iraq. Apparently there is a problem with Halliburton executives repeatedly failing to comply with government reporting requirements, even after being threatened by government auditors; and, there seems to be a problem with $26 million being charged for costs that were never incurred; and, there is also a problem with another $45 million in costs that are deemed unreasonable or unsupported.

Well, to those of you who like poking fun at me for having such a low opinion of this company, YES, I did read the article. However, I have other matters occupying me at this time, so will not be making any comment on it, or doing any "I told you so" type postings.

Too late, you just did.
Is there another company you'd like to see doing the job of Haliburton? Links and Data please?

Is there another company you'd like to see doing the job of Haliburton? Links and Data please?

You know, I've heard this argument a lot and it's valid...there is no other company capable of doing some of the things Haliburton is capable (and I use this word very loosely) of doing. But ask yourself why there isn't another company up to task? Is it, perhaps, the great(or corrupt, pick your own words) politcial power behind HB that makes sure they win any bids...if there is even a bid. Another question you should ask, is it healthy to only have one company able to do this stuff?...answer, no. Single source almost always, no matter how good they start out, leads to corruption, over-charges, lies...etc.

I would bet Haliburton sub contracts a lot of work to others, Just guessing here but thats pretty typical. They are to (halirburton) construction as Microsoft is to software/O.S. systems.

if there is even a bid


LOL...that is the key!

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/richlowry/2003/09/18/168541.html

I know its town hall, but there is a reference here to no bid contracts:


The Clinton administration nonetheless awarded a no-bid contract to Halliburton to continue its work in the Balkans supporting the U.S. peacekeeping mission there because it made little sense to change midstream. According to Byron York, Al Gore's reinventing-government panel even singled out Halliburton for praise for its military logistics work.

Doesn't anything to do with any arguments...and it sounds like Clinton awarded the contracts because Haliburton was already a monopoly.

I didn't see anyone say they have never done a good job...they do, sometimes...they also get away with an awful lot and have more than their fair share of corruption.

Again I ask, is it healthy to only have one company capable of doing a lot of these jobs. If there were only one home builder you could choose from in the US, how comfortable would you be that you're going get a well built, warranty supported home, for a fair price?

Doesn't anything to do with any arguments...and it sounds like Clinton awarded the contracts because Haliburton was already a monopoly.

So Bush is evil for using them, but Clinton is a victim. Priceless.

Again I ask, is it healthy to only have one company capable of doing a lot of these jobs. If there were only one home builder you could choose from in the US, how comfortable would you be that you're going get a well built, warranty supported home, for a fair price?

I do agree with you there, 1 company to build homes is not a good thing. There are lots of qualified homebuilders that can do a great job.
I'm all about the Free Market. Just tell me who the competition for Haliburton is, and what the offer at a lower price.

So Bush is evil for using them, but Clinton is a victim. Priceless.

You have a penchant for putting false words in other people's mouth. But in this case, you're half right...which is good for you. j/k

Bush is evil.

Just tell me who the competition for Haliburton is, and what the offer at a lower price.

That is just my point...there can't be any competition as long as our corrupt government...and this wasn't started by Bush...continues to only feed a single company. In the current climate there can be no free market for a lot of these services.

If Halliburton subcontracts so much of their work, we could contract directly with those organizations.

If Halliburton fails to perform, the administration can hold the company and its leadership accountable for their breaches of contract.

I know, accountability, I'll give you time to pick yourself off the floor before my next post.

1. Halliburton subcontracts - so obviously there are other companies doing this work.

2. I really don't get why, if there are so many issues with cost and requirements, the government doesn't appoint a group to head the project and THEN subcontract it out, instead of subcontracting the WHOLE thing, including management of the project. If a small group of people were in charge, it would be easier to divvy up the work into smaller projects and then track the goals for those projects.

Hmm, I see folks want to discuss halliburton, but nobody seems to want to discuss the real issue here.

I am assuming each of you posting is employed in some capacity, and therefore a tax-payer, as am I. It is you and me that Halliburton is attempting to steal $26 million in phony charges from, and another $45 million in questionable ones. Bush does not write a check from his bank account for these contractors, he writes it from the tax monies WE pay.

So, why the hell is there no outrage that a company like Halliburton can attempt to defraud the government of tax monies that WE paid, then have the government extend/renew those contracts, and do the same goddamn thing trying to rip off the taxpayers again to the tune of $26 million this time.

Folks want better border security, and better school systems, and better health care, etc.; we cannot afford any of that as long as the leaders in Washington keep doing business with a company that keeps trying to STEAL our TAX monies, by overcharging, charging for costs never incurred, etc. The bank book is only so large.

Well, since we don't see that money, it's hard to be outraged.
Waste has been the catchphrase of the government since the 1970's
We come to expect it, in a way.
With a company like Halliburton getting over on the government, it's almost like just desserts.

Halliburton has only a few competitors, but they are not civilian.

Army Corps of Engineers.
NAVFAC/CEC Corps/Seabees.
Airforce Prime Beef (yes, that is a unit in the USAF)
Marine Corps construction MOS.

Halliburton and all of these tend to be able to build the same structures and accomplish the same mission, only Halliburton is faster on turn around time. Halliburton also employs civilians who demand top dollar in order to work in war zones and employ former military brass from the above 4 who can work the system....and exploit it.

The above 4 can get it done, but typically slower, as they are not pure soldiers or pure construction workers so the compromise leads to quality control problems from these 4 not always doing construction all the time. They are also free labor in many ways, compared to Halliburton workers whose pay alone can be 150k a year and have room and board frequently provided. Still, Halliburton will always be the only show in town because it draws alot of its man power from the other 4 military units and is well versed in the ponderous system that is government construction work.

There are numerous "huge company" companies that do what Halliburton does, though thanks to political activism Halliburton has been allowed to buy many of the domestic ones. Aramco, Siemens, Asea Brown Boveri (these guys own Lummus now, amusingly), and GE all have substantial overlap with Halliburton even if they don't cover all the same bases individually.