Halliburton caught bilking the American taxpayer

[CShine 0]

A U.S. Democratic lawmaker on Wednesday accused Halliburton, the Texas oil services company once run by Vice President Dick Cheney, of overcharging the U.S. government for gasoline the firm imports into Iraq.

"Millions of Americans want to help Iraqis but they don't want to be fleeced (by Halliburton)," Rep. Henry Waxman, of California, told a news conference.

Waxman said army documents showed that as of Sept. 18, the United States had paid Halliburton $300 million to import about 190 million gallons (719 million litres) of gasoline into Iraq.

Halliburton charged an average price of $1.59 per gallon (3.7 litres), excluding the company's fee of 2 percent to 7 percent, said Waxman.

He said the average wholesale cost of gasoline during that period in the Middle East was about 71 cents a gallon, a figure an oil industry source told Reuters was accurate. That meant Halliburton was charging more than 90 cents a gallon to transport fuel into Iraq from Kuwait

"When we checked with independent experts to see if this fee was reasonable, they were stunned," said Waxman, adding a reasonable transport cost would be 10 to 25 cents per gallon, especially as the U.S. military was providing security.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...d=615&ncid=1480

[Jenny AU-92 0]

Good GRIEF, can't you get over Halliburton? Were you one of the plaintiffs in their asbestos suit? What is your hatred of that company?

First, Waxman ACCUSED - your tag line says "Halliburton CAUGHT". There is a lot of difference between the two, especially when Waxman is the one doing the accusing. "Caught" implies some kind of a legitimate investigation, not Henry Waxman doing some fingerpointing and claiming fraud. If you were smart, you would take anything Waxman says with a grain of salt. He is pinko, he is from California and he is a headline grabbing moron.

Second, anyone who knows anything about contracting knows that prices have to be established up front - the military knew what they would be charged for gasoline before allowing HAL to proceed. You can't tell me that the military procurement people just blindly accepted some supposedly astronomical figure without doing some investigating of its own, and obviously determining that their costs for the gasoline are acceptable. I am sure you will next tell me that Waxman thinks Cheney forced military procurement to take whatever price HAL forced on them. :roll:

Third, I am sure this is not ordinary, run of the mill Shell or Exxon gasoline that HAL just pulled up to the pay at the pump and bought. Can you run an armoured personnel carrier on regular unleaded? I don't know the answer to that, but if I can't run my leaf blower on it, then maybe there is something more to this gasoline blend than meets the eye.

Again, typical lib - GOD FORBID a company make a profit!! HAL is not in business for altruistic reasons - they are a company with stockholders who want to make MONEY!!! It's called CAPITALISM!!!!!!!! And I know that it is the antithesis to your and Mr. Waxman's socialistic point of view, but HAL deserves to be compensated for their work, whether you like it or not.

[channonc 466]

Not that I am supporting this, I totally am not, but this stuff happens all the time. Big companies think the government just has a unlimited amount of money, so therefore, they can overcharge them for everything. It is hardly noticed, nor investigated. Check out the Boeing, Air Force deal, same sort of thing.

Link

[MDM4AU 336]

Typical Lib! :roll: Twist everything until it reads, "CONSERVATIVES ARE THE SPAWN OF SATAN AND THEY KILL PUPPIES!"

[CCTAU 3,349]

Not that I am supporting this, I totally am not, but this stuff happens all the time. Big companies think the government just has a unlimited amount of money, so therefore, they can overcharge them for everything. It is hardly noticed, nor investigated. Check out the Boeing, Air Force deal, same sort of thing.

Link

It all goes to pay for the "Men in Black." Just like all those $50 hammers.

If they are fleecing the government, then they need to pay it back and lose their contract. if the government made that contract with them, then the individual responsible should lose their job, just like in the real world.

[CShine 0]

Jenny,

You are such a doll. That rant was absolutely priceless.

Good GRIEF, can't you get over Halliburton? Were you one of the plaintiffs in their asbestos suit? What is your hatred of that company?

Why are you so eager to protect Halliburton? I guess you own some of their stock. Looks like this is a good time for you to sell.

First, Waxman ACCUSED - your tag line says "Halliburton CAUGHT". There is a lot of difference between the two, especially when Waxman is the one doing the accusing. "Caught" implies some kind of a legitimate investigation, not Henry Waxman doing some fingerpointing and claiming fraud.

Ummm, just how do you think companies get caught when they overcharge the federal government? Congressional investigations is how. Just who else do you think is going to do it, the local cops?

Second, anyone who knows anything about contracting knows that prices have to be established up front - the military knew what they would be charged for gasoline before allowing HAL to proceed. You can't tell me that the military procurement people just blindly accepted some supposedly astronomical figure without doing some investigating of its own, and obviously determining that their costs for the gasoline are acceptable. I am sure you will next tell me that Waxman thinks Cheney forced military procurement to take whatever price HAL forced on them. 

Please don't pretend that you're this naive. Perhaps you're unaware of the huge scandal back in the 80's where numerous companies were radically overcharging the Pentagon and were caught by Congressmen who started looking in it. Remember those world-famous $600 toilet seats.

Don't even try to come in here and tell us all about how military procurement people are such sharp business operators. Their history stinks when it comes to getting bilked. If you've even read a LITTLE BIT of history on the subject you'd know how incredibly wrong you are.

Third, I am sure this is not ordinary, run of the mill Shell or Exxon gasoline that HAL just pulled up to the pay at the pump and bought. Can you run an armoured personnel carrier on regular unleaded?

Those vehicles run on diesel, the same diesel you can buy at every truckstop in America. The same diesel used to drive your average 18-wheeler with a gross weight limit of 40 tons.

Again, typical lib - GOD FORBID a company make a profit!! HAL is not in business for altruistic reasons - they are a company with stockholders who want to make MONEY!!! It's called CAPITALISM!!!!!!!! And I know that it is the antithesis to your and Mr. Waxman's socialistic point of view, but HAL deserves to be compensated for their work, whether you like it or not.

Oh, so there's no such thing as price gouging, eh? If someone is charging more than 100% above wholesale cost to simply move fuel across the border while under the armed guard of our military then they're just doing what it takes to "make a profit." And if we taxpayers sudden start questioning the prices we're being charged then we're nothing but a bunch of socialists. :roll:

Puuuuuuhhhhhhlease!! You don't have a leg to stand on here girl! The Pentagon has a long history of getting bilked by contractors. But you think that when we find this happening we should all just accept getting gouged out of reverence for capitalism. Heaven forbid that we actually demand a FAIR MARKET PRICE!! Why if we did THAT we would all be a bunch of PINKO COMMIES, wouldn't we??

[CShine 0]

Typical Lib!  :roll:  Twist everything until it reads, "CONSERVATIVES ARE THE SPAWN OF SATAN AND THEY KILL PUPPIES!"

Stop being silly. This is about Halliburton, not conservatives. Are you saying that Halliburton automatically equals conservative?

This is about price gouging. The American taxpayer has every right to see it stopped no matter who is doing it. I don't care what the political bent is of some company who's gouging the government. If they're doing it, it needs to be stopped.

Nice pathetic attempt there to spin this as a liberal/conservative thing. This is business price gouging, nothing more.

[channonc 466]

Typical Lib!  :roll:  Twist everything until it reads, "CONSERVATIVES ARE THE SPAWN OF SATAN AND THEY KILL PUPPIES!"

Stop being silly. This is about Halliburton, not conservatives. Are you saying that Halliburton automatically equals conservative?

This is about price gouging. The American taxpayer has ever right to see it stopped no matter who is doing it. I don't care what the political bent is of some company who's gouging the government. If they're doing it, it needs to be stopped.

Nice pathetic attempt there to spin this as a liberal/conservative thing. This is business price gouging, nothing more.

Well, said. Taxpayers should not have to pay a 100% premium just because it is a government service.

[CarolinaTiger 0]

i killed a puppy once...

it was an honest mistake...honest!

i knew it...i'm a bad person.

[MDM4AU 336]

CShine:

Simply referring to your "Caught" rather than "Accused." According to your thinking and pathetic defense of your wording, they are guilty until proven innocent, huh?

Was not referring to the article just the way you tried to pose it! I am not defending Halliburton.

You are one of the resident Libs. Why should I expect any different, though.

[MDM4AU 336]

Are you saying that Halliburton automatically equals conservative?

No, but you know as well as everyone else that this is one of the Dems main points of attack on a constant basis. What should I expect when it comes from someone who constantly posts Lib propaganda on this board?

[Jenny AU-92 0]

I am NOT eager to protect HAL - I do not own any of their stock. I have never worked for them - as I have mentioned TIME and TIME AGAIN, I used to work for their biggest competitor. No member of my family has ever worked for them. I have no vested interest in them. My beef with your constant sniping about HAL is that they are a DAMN good company doing a hard job for which they are perfectly suited, and if Cheney has not ONCE UPON A TIME been their COTB, they would not have ever been in the news. This is just another sad, pathetic attempt by a bunch of libs to try to imply some kind of sneaky underhandedness on the part of the Bush Administration. The sad part is that the libs think that EVERYONE is just like they are and can't accept the fact that HAL is doing this work because they are truly the best ones for the job.

My main point was that there is probably a lot more to this story than was "disclosed" by Henry Waxman. He is a media hog - he says inflamatory statements to get on TV and stir the pot, but most of the time, he can't back them up. Usually it turns into a "non-story". His comments and a few phone calls do not an "investigation" make, in my book. You said "CAUGHT" - HAL has not been CAUGHT - Waxman has ACCUSED based on his own PERSONAL findings. IF there is a full blown investigation, fine - but that ain't it. HAL has not even been given a chance to respond, if they even intend to take the ravings of a pinko seriously.

And I am NOT being naive - Maybe not every military procurement person is a rocket scientist, but you also can't tell me that NO ONE in military procurement looks at the prices being submitted, and that NO ONE questions those prices. My co-worker is a retired AF Lt Col who was head of procurement and crap like this does not and did not get by him. And to remind you, HAL is currently working under a contract that was RENEWED BY THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION AND PRAISED BY AL GORE FOR BEING EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The $600 toilet seats were blown out of proportion by Congress looking to score points - the toilet seats themselves did not cost $600 and anyone with half a brain knows it. But you see, it is really hard to include a specific line item for black ops and Delta Force in the military budget - but they have to have funding from somewhere.

Again, you missed my point. You don't know for a FACT, based on the information given by a suspect source (Waxman) that this is PRICE GOUGING. NO, I do not approve of or agree with price gouging. But neither am I going to take the word of an open and admitted enemy of the Bush Administration either. Show me legitimate proof and I will concede the point. Waxman is NOT proof.

[CShine 0]

CShine:

Simply referring to your "Caught" rather than "Accused." According to your thinking and pathetic defense of your wording, they are guilty until proven innocent, huh?

Was not referring to the article just the way you tried to pose it! I am not defending Halliburton.

You are one of the resident Libs. Why should I expect any different, though.

This comes from the army's own purchasing records. It is a business matter. It is not a crime. There will be no trial.

What we're dealing with here are hard numbers, numbers that are not in doubt. When price gouging is exposed, there's never really any doubt. All you have to do is look at current market prices and compare them to what Halliburton charged. That doesn't take a judge and jury, but don't be surprised if Congress doesn't demand some of that money back.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

CShine:

Simply referring to your "Caught" rather than "Accused."  According to your thinking and pathetic defense of your wording, they are guilty until proven innocent, huh?

Was not referring to the article just the way you tried to pose it!  I am not defending Halliburton.

You are one of the resident Libs. Why should I expect any different, though.

This comes from the army's own purchasing records. It is a business matter. It is not a crime. There will be no trial.

What we're dealing with here are hard numbers, numbers that are not in doubt. When price gouging is exposed, there's never really any doubt. All you have to do is look at current market prices and compare them to what Halliburton charged. That doesn't take a judge and jury, but don't be surprised if Congress doesn't demand some of that money back.

NUMBERS THAT AREN'T IN DOUBT???????????? WAXMAN'S numbers? Man, if that ain't reason for doubt, I don't know what is.

Again, all you have are some numbers in a report, a few phone calls by Waxman's flunkies, and a single measure (current market value) by which to gauge the differences. You have NO explanation from HAL as to what other factors might be included in that "price gouging". I would wait and see the whole thing. Your "CAUGHT" might turn out to be a bunch of horse hooey.

Propaganda, plain and simple. All anyone will remember is that HAL was CAUGHT, even if there is no truth or substance to the story, which my money says there is not. That is ALL Waxman is after - distorting public perception. The mea culpas and retractions never make the front page.

[Tigermike 3,055]

What we're dealing with here are hard numbers, numbers that are not in doubt. When price gouging is exposed, there's never really any doubt.

All you have to do is look at current market prices and compare them to what Halliburton charged. That doesn't take a judge and jury, but don't be surprised if Congress doesn't demand some of that money back.

When you say current market prices, is there a difference in prices in Texas or Oklahoma & prices in Iraq (which is a war zone)?

It sure seems to me there should be a higher price paid, just because of where the work is done.

[CShine 0]

NUMBERS THAT AREN'T IN DOUBT????????????  WAXMAN'S numbers?  Man, if that ain't reason for doubt, I don't know what is.

Read the article, darling. They aren't Waxman's numbers. They're the army's numbers.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

Okay, you had doll and now darling. Watch the patronization.

The numbers I was referring to were the ones Waxman supposedly made a few phone calls to find.

"When we checked with independent experts to see if this fee was reasonable, they were stunned," said Waxman,

ANYTHING that comes out of that man's mouth is immediately suspect in my book. Independent experts, RIIIIIIIIIGHT.

[CCTAU 3,349]

Okay, you had doll and now darling.  Watch the patronization.

The numbers I was referring to were the ones Waxman supposedly made a few phone calls to find. 

"When we checked with independent experts to see if this fee was reasonable, they were stunned," said Waxman,

ANYTHING that comes out of that man's mouth is immediately suspect in my book. Independent experts, RIIIIIIIIIGHT.

And you better not refer to her as "Preggo," either! I would hate to see what she does to you through a network!!!!!!!

I got your back, Jenny!!

[rexbo 104]

The procurement people are, I am sure, very aware of the price they are paying under this contract, and are probably doing all they can to control the costs. The problem is that the contracting rules, made by CONGRESSMEN like Waxman, take a great deal of control out of the people administering the contract. The contractor's take advantage of every loophole, and rate negotiation fine print that they can, and as they should in making sure their stockholders are happy. Do not blame this on the people administering the contract, I am sure if they could negotiate the contract without their hands tied behind their backs with all of the Federal Acquisition Requlations, they would make sure the taxpayers were paying fair and reasonable prices.