|
Overcharging for Gas?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| anuneventrade |
| quote: | WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush Friday said if any company involved in Iraqi reconstruction has overcharged the government, it will have to repay the extra funds.
"If there's an overcharge, like we think there is, we expect that money to be repaid," the president said when asked by a reporter about a Pentagon audit that may have uncovered a potential overcharge by Halliburton, the oil services company once run by Vice President Dick Cheney.
"I appreciate the Pentagon looking out after the taxpayers money. They felt like there was an overcharge issue, they put the issue right out there on the table for everybody to see, and they're doing good work," Bush said.
"We're going to make sure that as we spend the money in Iraq, it's spent well and spent wisely. Their investigation will lay the facts out for everybody to see, and if there's an overcharge, like we think there is, we expect that money to be repaid," he said.
The Pentagon audit has raised questions about whether a subsidiary of Halliburton overcharged the U.S. government $61 million for gasoline imported from Kuwait to Iraq.
The Pentagon said Thursday a routine review turned up the potential overcharge by subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root, which was awarded a no-bid contract in March to rebuild Iraq's oil industry.
But there is no allegation that Halliburton unduly profited from the overpriced gas.
The audit questions if Halliburton paid above-market rates to a Kuwaiti subcontractor when it paid $2.27 per gallon for the gas. Another supplier bought gas at $1.18 per gallon from Turkey.
Halliburton says the higher cost was due to having to negotiate a short-term contract, at a time when there weren't enough trucks in Kuwait to deliver the fuel. It says trucks had to be brought in and shipping in a war zone pushed up the transportation and security costs as well.
In a statement, Halliburton insisted those costs are "pass through costs" and said the company "only recovers a few cents on the dollar."
Congressional critics, who accuse the company of price gouging, don't believe the claims.
"There have been indications for some months now that taxpayer interests aren't protected," said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon. "I'm glad the Defense Department is finally coming to ask some tough questions. They should have been raising these issues many months ago."
Pentagon Comptroller Dov Zakhein insists his auditors have been hard-nosed.
"Contractor improprieties and/or contract mischarging ... will neither be condoned nor allowed to continue," Zakhein said in a statement.
Meanwhile, the contract is being reviewed, and Halliburton will have to justify the sum. If the government does not believe the cost is legitimate, the bill will be disallowed.
In that case, Halliburton would have to assume the debt, or it could go back to the Kuwaiti subcontractor to try to address the issue.
Auditors also found another potential Halliburton overcharge of $67 million for dining halls in Iraq, but they say that seems to a billing error.
That bill has not been paid.
Democratic presidential candidates are already jumping on the issue.
Howard Dean called Halliburton "a special interest contributor that is overcharging taxpayers" and Dick Gephardt charged that Cheney's former employer is "bilking the taxpayers." |
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast...rton/index.html
Do you think they overcharged? Is this another scandal to weasle out some money out of the government? It's clearly stated that they haven't had any real "profits". Does it occur to them that not all profits are visible? ffs. However, then again, there is the fact that it would be probably more expensive to bring gas into a war zone and on quick notice. Seems to be something missing... |
|
|
| imokruok |
1) The only reason why the press has made this into a story is because they can put "Dick Cheney" in the first line. Nevermind that Dick Cheney is no longer head of Halliburton, and no longer owns any stock in Halliburton.
2) It was the Bush administration that uncovered the overcharging. If they were trying to run a scam with Halliburton, why the hell would they have told anyone?
3) $2.27/gallon to deliver gas in a war zone is not a shocking number. If you had asked me before this story came out how much it would have cost, I would have guessed twice that. (Europeans would kill to pay $2.27 for a gallon of gas. They are paying twice that amount.) |
|
|
| MrSquirrel |
| quote: | Originally posted by imokruok
1) The only reason why the press has made this into a story is because they can put "Dick Cheney" in the first line. Nevermind that Dick Cheney is no longer head of Halliburton, and no longer owns any stock in Halliburton.
|
While Cheney is no longer "tied" to Haliburton, it strikes many people as fishy that Haliburton got all of these no-bid contracts right away for things that include catering meals for the troops in Iraq. Cheney does not have to be currently working for a company or own stock to do them favors does he?
| quote: |
2) It was the Bush administration that uncovered the overcharging. If they were trying to run a scam with Halliburton, why the hell would they have told anyone?
|
this was an internal DOD audit that found the overcharging, and knowing how the DOD functions it was done by either a civilian employee or a uniformed servicemember who reports directly to a uniformed officer not to a political appointee. There are very very few people in the DOD that could be considered part of the "Bush administration" outside of those people that work directly for the office of the Secretary. I am 99% sure that the person who allowed this report to be released was a uniformed officer since all the smaller entities inside DOD are headed by a uniformed officer.
| quote: |
3) $2.27/gallon to deliver gas in a war zone is not a shocking number. If you had asked me before this story came out how much it would have cost, I would have guessed twice that. (Europeans would kill to pay $2.27 for a gallon of gas. They are paying twice that amount.) |
Those prices quoted were the wholesale prices of the gasoline, not the retail prices. And in an oil rich region as the middle east oil should not cost as much as in Europe because most of the cost of petroleum products in Europe goes towards the transportation of it from the country of origin.
The big issue here is not the idea of the VP making money off the Iraq war. It is the underlying suspicion about the awarding of no-bid contracts to companies with known past ties to the administration.
MrS |
|
|
| imokruok |
Ah...Halliburton. The company the left loves to hate. Of course they get tons of contracts. Because they're frequently the only company that can do the job.
Oil well fires? There are a few companies that put them out. Only Halliburton makes the equipment. Power generation equipment used in Iraq? Halliburton is the only American company that can deal with it. Fuel refineries? They're one of the few companies that can build them from scratch.
I just think the impression has been left in a lot of peoples' minds that this is some boutique company that gets a lot of sweetheart deals. I don't know what deal was behind the food service contracts, but when it comes to the oil and heavy-industry repair, Halliburton is the one company that does it all.
Also, I would bet you're right in that some low-level staffer probably found the over-billing. But the report was issued under the name of the Comptroller of the DOD, who's a Bush appointee. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
hey shut-up! as long as haliburton is using zionist mustard in their food catering contract, there is no reason to complain or to find any fault in their accounting practices, or link with adminstration officials.
come on guys you should know better:rolleyes:
:happy2: |
|
|
|
|
