Reply #52: I think something is going on, too...

[FormerOstrich]

and I think it's greed.

This sort of veers off the thread topic but it does tie in. I posted this on another site a couple of days ago:

I found it curious that nearly every state that accepted Katrina victims was declaraed a National Disaster. I have felt certain the reasoning would eventually come to light. This article doesn't mention the declarations of National Disaster. This article is speaking of declarations of National Emergencies.

Look at a few of our current national emergencies:

1. Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq , May 19, 2005
2. Threatened Peace in Western Balkans, June 23, 2005
3. Repression of Democracy in Burma , May 17, 2005
4. Undermining Democracy in Zimbabwe , March 2, 2005
5. The Liberian Illicit Trade in Round Logs and Other Timber Products, July 19, 2005

I think we will find out (eventually) the disaster declarations will have similar implications as being brought to light in this article.

Personally, I think this is so much more important than party affiliation territorial pissing matches. I don't see any democrats stepping up to the plate in what I perceive as an assault on the tax payers interests. The very few in Congress that do seem to work towards this end don't have the exposure or means for the task.

Countries much poorer than us are financing us and our current way of life (spending). Yet we keep plunging deeper into debt to them. How long is that sustainable? I'll stay off the "tax cut" soapbox for this thread but keep it in mind.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Big federal contractors have scored a major victory with yesterday’s news that House Government Reform Chairman Tom Davis (R-VA) and Representative Kenny Marchant (R-TX) introduced legislation that will waive meaningful taxpayer protections and competition in contracting whenever Congress or the President declares a national emergency or there is a disaster. It is rumored that the legislation will be included in a manager’s amendment to the next Katrina relief bill. Project On Government Oversight (POGO) has dubbed the legislation (H.R. 3766) the “Disaster Profiteering Act.”

The Davis legislation would allow agency heads across the federal government to treat all purchases related to national emergencies as “commercial items,” meaning that contracts can be made under a no-bid process and that the government would not have the authority to audit purchases after they have been made. A second, unrelated provision deals with Katrina volunteers.

The President has at least a dozen current national emergencies according to annual filings made in the Federal Register including the national emergency which he renewed last week in response to terrorist attacks. Presumably, this would apply to all homeland security-related spending and broad swaths of national security spending.

Contracting officers already have enough authorities at their disposal to respond to the Katrina crisis. Senior procurement official David Drabkin underscored this after passage of the Homeland Security Act in a 2003 memo where he said: “Remember, you have many tools in your acquisition toolbox that allow you to respond to emergencies”. Brigadier General Scott outlined the flexible procurement authorities as well in an October 2001 memo written to assist contracting officers working on the war on terrorism.

Of greatest concern is the prospect that homeland security and defense contractors engaged in billions of dollars in contracts on major systems designed to address the war on terror or some other declared national emergency abroad will avoid competition and auditing. These taxpayer protection provisions were established after the notorious era of defense contracting scandals in the 1980s. Government-wide, 84% of all contracting dollars are spent on a non-commercial basis, according to the Federal Procurement Data Center .

http://www.pogo.org/p/contracts/ca-050903-katrinacontracts.html