Doug wrote:
What competition is there for a _grant_?
How much competition was there for the Iraq contract(s)?
Plenty. You ever tried to apply for one? It's not easy, and it's not fun. As for the Iraq contracts, the contracts were in fact open for bidding. In fact a few years ago Halliburton lost the contract for defense support (I can't remember to whom) and it won it again under the Clinton Administration. I'm assuming you don't think _that_ was the product of corruption.
So explain the no-bid stuff we've been hearing so much about:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1010/p02s01-usfp.html
"No contract has riled critics as much as the first and most lucrative: to Kellogg, Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton. It started as a 2001 contract for logistical support to the US military, wherever it went, and it was competitively bid. But a decision to expand that contract - from supporting troops to oil-well firefighting, repairing oil systems, and now maintaining and operating oil systems - was not.
"Redefining the contract on a no-bid basis, that's where the Pentagon went awry," says P. W. Singer, a fellow at the Brookings Institution. "All the companies have decided that one way for them to achieve a corporate advantage is to hire former government officials or to make political campaign contributions."
and:
"The impression of favoritism could be tough to blot out. Recently, a new lobby shop touted its ties to the Bush administration as an asset in helping clients get business in Iraq. New Bridge Strategies, with offices in Washington and Houston, describes itself as "a unique company that was created specifically with the aim of assisting clients to evaluate and take advantage of business opportunities in the Middle East following the conclusion of the US-led war in Iraq." Its principals include Joe Allbaugh, campaign manager for Bush presidential race in 2000."
-- Doug _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
