Walter Reed privatization leads to guess who - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

wooyarn · #1 (**permalink**) 03-18-2007

This explains alot on how our Gov. did not work for the people/troops. Read the whole thing

Privatizing Walter Reed delayed 3 years - Yahoo! News

Documents from the investigative and auditing arm of Congress map a trail of bid, rebid, protests and appeals between 2003, when Walter Reed was first selected for outsourcing, and 2006, when a five-year, $120 million contract was finally awarded.

The trail goes back to the end of the Clinton administration. The Army began studying the cost benefits of privatization in 2000.
When

President Bush took office, he mandated the competitive outsourcing of 425,000 federal jobs. At the time, the Pentagon was aggressively pushing for increased outsourcing, and in June 2003, then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told a Senate committee he was considering outsourcing up to 320,000 nonmilitary support jobs.

gem · #2 (**permalink**) 03-19-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by wooyarn

This explains alot on how our Gov. did not work for the people/troops. Read the whole thing

Privatizing Walter Reed delayed 3 years - Yahoo! News

Documents from the investigative and auditing arm of Congress map a trail of bid, rebid, protests and appeals between 2003, when Walter Reed was first selected for outsourcing, and 2006, when a five-year, $120 million contract was finally awarded.

The trail goes back to the end of the Clinton administration. The Army began studying the cost benefits of privatization in 2000.
When

President Bush took office, he mandated the competitive outsourcing of 425,000 federal jobs. At the time, the Pentagon was aggressively pushing for increased outsourcing, and in June 2003, then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told a Senate committee he was considering outsourcing up to 320,000 nonmilitary support jobs.

I find it very telling indeed that the conservatives haven't responded/reacted to this news item yet, Wooyarn. I suspect that is because the conservatives don't want to be reminded what their illustrious leaders have created for our soldiers and our nation. If this is what "privatization" results in then I don't think we need any "privatization" of any other government programs that would do to them what "privatization" has done to badly needed military hospitals like Walter Reed. Our soldiers deserve better- far better- than what Bush&Co have subjected them to and they deserve far better than what they've been given. The bureaucracies are a mess already and I don't think we need anybody making an already bad situation worse.

Gem

ViolaLee · #3 (**permalink**) 03-19-2007

IAP is the same private contractor that failed to deliver the ice during the Katrina aftermath debacle. IAP is connected to Halliburton. I'm not even shocked.

Quote:

Walter Reed troubles focus on privatization
Company with ties to Halliburton scrutinized for shortage of workers
By Steve Vogel and Renae Merle
WASHINGTON POST
WASHINGTON - The scandal over treatment of outpatients at Walter Reed Army Medical Center has focused attention on the Army's decision to privatize the facilities support workforce at the hospital, a move commanders say left the building maintenance staff with too few workers.

Some Democratic lawmakers have questioned the decision to hire IAP Worldwide Services, a contractor with connections to the Bush administration and to KBR, a Halliburton subsidiary.

Last year, IAP won a $120 million contract to maintain and operate Walter Reed facilities. The decision reversed a 2004 finding by the Army that it would be more cost-effective to keep the work in-house. After IAP protested, Army auditors ruled that the cost estimates offered by in-house federal workers were too low. They had to submit a new bid, which added 23 employees and $16 million to their cost, according to the Army.

On Friday, the American Federation of Government Employees, the largest federal workers union, blamed pressure on the Army from the White House's Office of Management and Budget for the decision to privatize its civilian workforce.

"Left to its own devices, the Army would likely have suspended this privatization effort," John Gage, president of the organization, said in a statement. "However, the political pressure from OMB left Army officials with no choice but to go forward, even if that resulted in unsatisfactory care to the nation's veterans."

The Army selected IAP for the five-year deal in January 2006, but IAP did not take over management until last month. During that period, the number of facilities management workers at Walter Reed dropped from about 180 to 100, and the hospital found it hard to hire replacements.

Maj. Gen. George Weightman, who was Walter Reed's commander until he was relieved last week, testified last week that the privatization -- in combination with a decision by the Pentagon in 2005 to close Walter Reed by 2011 -- "absolutely" contributed to the problems.

IAP said in a statement it has "responded with a sense of urgency to address maintenance concerns throughout the (Walter Reed) complex."

ContraCostaTimes.com | 03/11/2007 | Walter Reed troubles focus on privatization

Mrs. M · #4 (**permalink**) 03-19-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samantha

IAP is the same private contractor that failed to deliver the ice during the Katrina aftermath debacle. IAP is connected to Halliburton. I'm not even shocked.

IAP is not responsible for the ice debacle, FEMA was.

ViolaLee · #5 (**permalink**) 03-19-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs. M

IAP is not responsible for the ice debacle, FEMA was.

FEMA contracted out to IAP.

From Chairman Henry Waxman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's letter to Major General George Weightman.

Quote:

Several sources have corroborated key portions of the memorandum. We have learned that in January 2006, Walter Reed awarded a five-year, $120 million contract to a company called IAP Worldwide Services for base operations support services, including facilities management. IAP is one of the companies that experienced problems delivering ice during the response to Hurricane Katrina. The company is led by Al Neffgen, a former senior Halliburton official who testified before our Committee in July 2004 in defense of Halliburton's exorbitant charges for fuel delivery and troop support in Iraq.

Politics As Usual

gem · #6 (**permalink**) 03-19-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs. M

IAP is not responsible for the ice debacle, FEMA was.

Looks like Samantha blew your ship right out of the water, Mrs. M.

Oh, btw, I've been wanting to ask you- are you familiar with the neighborhood around Esplanade north ( if I remember correctly) of Royal in New Orleans?

Gem

Mrs. M · #7 (**permalink**) 03-19-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samantha

FEMA contracted out to IAP.

From Chairman Henry Waxman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's letter to Major General George Weightman.

Sorry, Sammy, but repeating someone else's blog errors doesn't make it any less an error. IAP was the contractor but the delivery problems were due to the fact that FEMA couldn't get it's staging act together. They sent IAP all over the US with the ice instead of to New Orleans where it was needed. But IAP did exactly what FEMA told them to do and for that, they can't be faulted.

Mrs. M · #8 (**permalink**) 03-19-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by gem

Looks like Samantha blew your ship right out of the water, Mrs. M.

Oh, btw, I've been wanting to ask you- are you familiar with the neighborhood around Esplanade north ( if I remember correctly) of Royal in New Orleans?

Gem

Nope, looks like Sammy is just repeating all the bullshit blogs and still hasn't a clue, that's all.

I know where you're talking about but I haven't been to the area in years!

gem · #9 (**permalink**) 03-19-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs. M

Sorry, Sammy, but repeating someone else's blog errors doesn't make it any less an error. IAP was the contractor but the delivery problems were due to the fact that FEMA couldn't get it's staging act together. They sent IAP all over the US with the ice instead of to New Orleans where it was needed. But IAP did exactly what FEMA told them to do and for that, they can't be faulted.

I guess that's what happens when you are raised to believe in not asking questions and simply taking orders instead of thinking for yourself once in awhile.
As far as I'm concerned if I had been one of those truck drivers I would have put my job on the line, got on the CB and request that every trucker that was carrying ice for the Katrina victims change course and head to New Orleans.
Think we would have had any trouble finding people to help us unload those semis full of ice and pass them out to the victims?

Gem

gem · #10 (**permalink**) 03-19-2007

Quoting Mrs. M.

Quote:

I know where you're talking about but I haven't been to the area in years!

I was just curious. I used to live in that neighborhood, in 1970. I've got a couple of stories about living there too- one of them about how our landlord helped us pack and get out of the area when the Desire Housing Project incident happened.
The other story would be for entertainment value only- but it was funny!

Gem

Mrs. M · #11 (**permalink**) 03-19-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by gem

I guess that's what happens when you are raised to believe in not asking questions and simply taking orders instead of thinking for yourself once in awhile.
As far as I'm concerned if I had been one of those truck drivers I would have put my job on the line, got on the CB and request that every trucker that was carrying ice for the Katrina victims change course and head to New Orleans.
Think we would have had any trouble finding people to help us unload those semis full of ice and pass them out to the victims?

Gem

It wasn't easy to get to the area due to bridges being washed out, roads blocked with debris, etc. Many private trucks of supplies ended up stopping in Slidell because they could go no further. You've got to remember that the water was still rising in the city for several days after the storm which, of course, hampered relief efforts there.

gem · #12 (**permalink**) 03-19-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs. M

It wasn't easy to get to the area due to bridges being washed out, roads blocked with debris, etc. Many private trucks of supplies ended up stopping in Slidell because they could go no further. You've got to remember that the water was still rising in the city for several days after the storm which, of course, hampered relief efforts there.

Agreed. However, where there is a will there is a way. Surely there must have been some boats and such that were still operational in the area, especially a little more inland. Could they not have been pressed into service using the waterways and flooded zones to bring those supplies from the nearest possible access to water? Sometimes you just have to get a little unorthodox and creative, you know! And many hands make much work light!

Gem

ViolaLee · #13 (**permalink**) 03-19-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs. M

Nope, looks like Sammy is just repeating all the bullshit blogs and still hasn't a clue, that's all.

I know where you're talking about but I haven't been to the area in years!

It's not a blog, it's Henry Waxman's letter.

Mrs. M · #14 (**permalink**) 03-20-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samantha

It's not a blog, it's Henry Waxman's letter.

True and all the blogs have repeated it. Still doesn't make it correct though.

Bookmarks
Digg	del.icio.us	StumbleUpon	Google

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode