Government/Contractor Revolving Door_

July 07, 2008

Contracting Corruption ala 2003 Revisited

Connections Count in Government Contracting, Especially Defense Contracting: Big Contracts Went to Big Donors in Quid Pro Quo Deals

CBS News reported in 2003 that a report released by the Center for Public Integrity, concluded, “that most of the 10 largest contracts the government awarded went to companies that employed former high-ranking government officials, or executives with close toes to members of Congress and even the agencies awarding their contracts.

The report describes no bid contracts awarded by the Bush administration, top contract recipient-KBR, a Halliburton subsidiary former headed by Vice President Dick Cheney.

Other Contract Contacts listed from 2003 included:

(Editor Note: These names and attributions are from the original 2003 article. Especially due to the high degree of revolving door and mobility of personnel moving from contractor to contractor, these people are most likely not in the same positions now.)

George Schultz who was a member of Bechtel’s board of directors.

Riley Bechtel, who was named to the Presidents Export Council, which advises the President (GW Bush) on programs to improve U.S. trade.

Jack Sheehan, senior vice president in Bechtel’s petroleum and chemicals business. He served on the Defense Policy Board, which advises the defense secretary on a variety of issues.

David Kay, head of the Bush administrations search for weapons of mass destruction, former vice president of Science Applications Int. Corp.

Christopher “Ryan” Henry left Halliburton in Feb. 2003; at the same time Cheney did, and became principal deputy undersecretary of defense for policy.

Scott Spangler, principal owner of Chemonics International, was a senior U.S. Agency for International Development official during the first Bush administration. His company received 90 percent of its business from USAID.

Sullivan Haave Associates Inc. was founded by Carol Haave, currently the deputy assistant secretary of defense for security and information operations. Ms. Haave left the government and has served on the boards of several corporations in the defense-contracting arena since.

Link to original article: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/30/iraq/printable580998.shtml

February 11, 2008

Revolving Door Stuck in Open Position by Expanding Swamp

Now here is another cozy relationship.  Can anyone else see a problem with this?  Anybody?  -GFS

---------------------------------------------------------------------

New spy chief consulted for some of those he'll supervise

Full story: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003549374_webspy31.html

By Ted Bridis

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- President Bush's choice to be the nation's new spy chief worked as a $2 million-a-year private consultant with some of the same senior military and intelligence officials he would supervise as director of national intelligence.

Retired Vice Adm. Mike McConnell could face an unusually daunting challenge avoiding ethical entanglements after a decade working with Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., a large defense and intelligence consulting company with sales of $3.7 billion worldwide, according to an extensive Associated Press review of McConnell's finances and business deals.

McConnell's Senate confirmation hearing is to begin Thursday.

A Senate Intelligence Committee member, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said he already has urged McConnell to be prepared to discuss his work as a consultant and its implications on the job of chief over all U.S. intelligence agencies. Those agencies rely heavily on work by outside consultants, who often are hired under contracts kept secret for national security reasons.

"I'm going to bring it up," Wyden said. "I made it clear that I was going to be asking questions about issues relating to his work with contractors."

In May, for example, McConnell and other company executives met privately in San Antonio with Major Gen. Craig Koziol, a top Air Force intelligence officer in charge of information operations and cryptology, according to records obtained by the AP under the Freedom of Information Act. The company bid months later on a related contract from the Air Intelligence Agency, part of the U.S. intelligence community that McConnell would oversee as the national director.

More than half Booz Allen Hamilton's sales come from such government contracts. McConnell's closest colleagues at the company anticipate intense scrutiny over its future relationship with him as the overseer of the nation's 16 spy agencies.

"I will never be able to go in and see him in his office," said Richard Wilhelm, a Booz Allen Hamilton senior vice president who has worked with McConnell for more than 30 years. "He's said, 'Unfortunately, I'll not be able to talk to you guys anymore.' We'll have to be very careful."

Efforts to reach McConnell through the White House and through Booz Allen Hamilton were unsuccessful. Presidential nominees routinely do not speak publicly or with reporters before Senate confirmation hearings.

The White House promised that McConnell would divest any financial holdings in Booz Allen Hamilton if he is confirmed as intelligence chief. In addition to his $1,999,840 salary, McConnell owns $1 million to $5 million in company stock, plus up to $1.15 million more in other investment funds owned through the company, according to financial reports he submitted to the White House.

McConnell would earn $186,600 annually as director of national intelligence.

"There has to be the highest level of oversight within the agency and Congress to make sure any appearance of impropriety is totally investigated and erased," said Scott Amey, general counsel for the Project on Government Oversight, a Washington-based whistleblowers group. Amey said public scrutiny over classified intelligence contracts is limited because of secrecy.

Booz Allen Hamilton and the intelligence director's office separately said each will vigorously enforce ethics rules related to McConnell and the company.

In a statement, the agency pledged to refer potential business conflicts to ethics officers inside federal agencies.

A Booz Allen Hamilton spokesman, George Farrar, said the company will establish contracting firewalls to avoid conflicts with McConnell. "That has to be the case," Farrar said. "You have to maintain absolutely by-the-rules contracting."

McConnell's nomination comes in the midst of a broad, government-wide review by the intelligence director's own office about the role of private contractors in U.S. spy agencies. That report, which will examine whether the government hires too many such contractors, is nearly finished but has not yet been sent to Congress.

McConnell, a former director of the National Security Agency until 1996, is described by those who have worked with him as an affable and well-respected intelligence expert. He is credited with recognizing more than a decade ago the risks from electronic attacks by foreigners against important U.S. computer networks -- years ahead of many other government officials.

McConnell is still expecting an unspecified lump-sum retirement payment, an unspecified bonus and an unspecified payment to his retirement account from Booz Allen Hamilton, according to his financial records. The company also will continue to pay for his medical and dental insurance.

Separately, McConnell draws $90,944 annually from his Navy retirement and owns smaller amounts of stock in other companies that also work extensively with the U.S. government, including Halliburton Co., Boeing Co., L-3 Communications Holdings Inc., Cisco Systems Inc., Oracle Corp., Microsoft Corp. and others. He also earns $16,000 as a board member for CompuDyne Corp., which sells security systems to the federal government, and $30,000 as chairman of the Intelligence and National Security Alliance, a trade group that lobbies the government on intelligence matters.

It was unclear how much McConnell's finances have changed since he left U.S. government work in 1996. The National Security Agency, which he led, told the AP it could not locate McConnell's financial records from that period in its files. It suggested the records might have been destroyed because so much time had passed since he worked there.

Associated Press Writer Sharon Theimer contributed to this report.

January 18, 2008

Revolving Doors: Steven Cambone Gets CIFA Contract

QinetiQ Goes Kinetic: Top Rumsfeld Aide Wins Contracts From Spy Office He Set Up

by Tim Shorrock , Special to CorpWatch January 15th, 2008

A Pentagon office that claims to monitor terrorist threats to U.S. military bases in North America -- and was once reprimanded by the U.S. Congress for spying on antiwar activists -- has just awarded a multi-million dollar contract to a company that employs one of Donald Rumsfeld’s former aides. That aide, Stephen Cambone, helped create the very office that issued the contract.

On January 7, QinetiQ (pronounced “kinetic”) North America (QNA), a major British-owned defense and intelligence contractor based in McLean, Virginia, announced that its Mission Solutions Group, formerly Analex Corporation, had just signed a five-year, $30 million contract to provide a range of unspecified “security services” to the Pentagon’s Counter-Intelligence Field Activity office, known as CIFA.

According to Pentagon briefing documents, CIFA’s Directorate of Field Activities "assists in preserving the most critical defense assets, disrupting adversaries and helping control the intelligence domain.” Another CIFA directorate, the Counterintelligence and Law Enforcement Center, "identifies and assesses threats" to military personnel, operations and infrastructure from "insider threats, foreign intelligence services, terrorists, and other clandestine or covert entities," according to the Pentagon. A third CIFA directorate, Behavioral Sciences, has provided a "team of renowned forensic psychologists [who] are engaged in risk assessments of the Guantanamo Bay detainees."

The new CIFA contract with QinetiQ expands work that Analex has provided CIFA and its various directorates since 2003. Under its first contract, according to the QinetiQ website, Analex staffers were sifting through information “from traditional to non-traditional providers, ranging from unclassified through top secret classification using sophisticated information technologies and systems specifically designed by CIFA analysts.”

The CIFA contract was awarded just two months after QinetiQ hired Stephen Cambone, the former undersecretary of defense for intelligence and a longtime Rumsfeld aide, as its vice president for strategy. Cambone is the most senior of a savvy group of former high-ranking Pentagon and intelligence officials hired by QinetiQ to manage its expansion in the U.S. market. (See boxes.)

While he was at the Pentagon, Cambone oversaw CIFA and was deeply involved in the Pentagon’s most controversial intelligence programs. It was Cambone, for example, who reportedly issued orders to Major General Geoffrey Miller to soften up Iraqi prisoners for intelligence interrogators in Abu Ghraib in 2003. With Rumsfeld, he also set up a special unit within the Pentagon that alienated the CIA and the State Department by running its own covert actions without seeking input from other agencies.

Duane Andrews Duane Andrews, QNA’s CEO and Stephen Cambone’s boss, got his baptism in information technology during the first Gulf War in 1991, when he was assistant secretary of defense for communications, command, control and intelligence under Dick Cheney, then defense secretary. His job included managing the Pentagon’s Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance operations.

“Too many people -- even today -- think of (information) as something IT guys worry about, when really it is something that warfighters and commanders need to worry about,” he told Government Computer News in 2002. “If they pick up the phone to give a command to go to war and there’s no dial tone, or they send an ops order and it gets garbled or misread or doesn’t go to its intended recipients, the war slows down.”

Andrews left the Pentagon in 1993  to become chief operating officer of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC).  During that time, he was a key figure in developing SAIC’s extensive business -- worth about $8 billion in 2006 -- with the intelligence community and the Pentagon.

Under Andrews, SAIC won several major contracts involving the management of huge IT systems. One of its largest was the NSA’s Trailblazer project, in which SAIC was hired to create the data-mining and link-analysis tools for the NSA to monitor the huge increase in cell phone and email traffic that occurred during the fiber-optic and communications revolution of the late 1990s. (The project turned out to be a $4 billion boondoggle and was scrapped in 2005, but SAIC was hired again to start building its replacement.)

Another SAIC contract of strategic importance to the U.S. military is its prime contract to run the Joint Intelligence Operations Centers (JIOCs). These centers were established throughout the U.S. military command system by Cambone in 2004 to manage the sharing of intelligence from agencies like the NSA and the NGA to commanders and warfighters on the ground in Iraq and the Horn of Africa as well as major commands in South Korea and elsewhere.

In 2006, Andrews quit SAIC to join QinetiQ. Shortly after Andrews was hired as QNA CEO, former CIA Director George Tenet was elected to QinetiQ’s board of directors. Tenet was undoubtedly brought on to help QinetiQ  broaden its reach beyond the Pentagon and its intelligence units into the area of strategic and national intelligence represented by the CIA and the NSA.

Andrews remains close to Vice President Dick Cheney, his former boss at the Pentagon. In a 2002 interview with Government Computer News, he listed Cheney as his hero. 

The new CIFA contract comes on the heels of a series of QinetiQ deals inked with the Pentagon in the booming new business of “network centric warfare” -- the space-age, technology-driven intelligence and warfighting policies established by Rumsfeld and Cambone during their six-year tenures at the Pentagon. Other Cambone-pioneered programs that QinetiQ has won (before he went to work at their Crystal City offices that lie just two miles from the Pentagon) include military drones and robots, low-flying satellites and jamming technologies.

Cambone’s appointment at QinetiQ reflects the “incestuous” relationships that exist between former officials and private intelligence contractors, said Steven Aftergood, the director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists and a long-time observer of U.S. intelligence. “It's unseemly, and what's worse is that it has become normal,” he told CorpWatch.

Aftergood pointed out the similarities between Cambone and the career trajectory of the current Director of National Intelligence, Michael McConnell. Following McConnell’s tenure as director of the National Security Agency, “he went on to receive a seven-figure salary at Booz-Allen Hamilton, a major intelligence contractor,” said Aftergood. “And now he's back at the helm of the intelligence community (IC). The problem is not so much a conflict of interest as it is a coincidence of interests -- the IC and the contractors are so tightly intertwined at the leadership level that their interests, practically speaking, are identical.”

QinetiQ Evolution

QinetiQ was created in 2001 when the British Ministry of Defense (MoD) split up the Defense Evaluation Research Agency (DERA), its equivalent to the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). One part of the company remained inside the MoD, but the other half was sold to the private sector and became QinetiQ.

For its first 18 months, QinetiQ was run by the MoD. But in February 2003, control slipped decisively out of government hands when 33 percent of its shares were acquired by the Carlyle Group, the powerful Washington-based private equity fund with close ties to the Bush administration. Carlyle invested $73 million in the company, and the MoD retained the other 66 percent. In an unusual arrangement, however, Carlyle was granted 51 percent of the voting shares, which meant that the investment fund and its appointed executives had effective control over the company. Carlyle sold off its remaining shares in February 2007, making a $470 million profit on its original investment.

Its initial expansion into the U.S. market was led by its first CEO, Graham Love. A ten-year veteran of DERA, where he rose to the position of finance director, Love had left DERA in the late 1990s by taking one of its divisions private. In 2003, he was brought back to head up QinetiQ’s North American operations. With assistance from Carlyle’s managers, Love went on the acquisition binge that made QinetiQ what it is today.

In November 2004, it bought Foster-Miller, which builds what it calls “mobile platforms” for the U.S. military, including the Talon robot, a battery-powered machine loaded with night-vision cameras and sensors that can fire both machine gun bullets and anti-tank weapons. Talons are also used on reconnaissance missions to detect mines and disarm roadside bombs in Iraq; more than 600 have been acquired by the Pentagon, according to Fortune magazine. The Foster-Miller website says Talon robots were initially developed with funds from DARPA and have been used in Special Operations missions in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Iraq.

In January 2007, QinetiQ acquired Analex Corporation, an information technology and engineering company that earns 70 percent of its revenue from the Pentagon (after the acquisition, Analex was renamed the QNA Mission Solutions Group). Analex, which has received extensive funding from DARPA for its technologies, also holds contracts with SPAWAR, the U.S. Navy intelligence research center in San Diego, and with the U.S. Army’s First Information Operations Command. For the latter, according to Analex, it provides “subject matter experts” in psychological warfare, information security, electronic warfare and general tactics in the war on terror.

With $1.5 billion in defense revenue in 2006, QNA is now the 11th largest U.S. intelligence contractor. The QinetiQ story must be told without speaking to the company, however: QinetiQ officials were not available for comment on Cambone’s appointment or any other matter. As for the former undersecretary of defense, “Stephen Cambone is not interested in an interview at this time,” Sophie Barrett, QNA’s spokesperson, told CorpWatch on January 10.

Stephen Cambone

QinetiQ’s main reason for hiring Stephen Cambone was the fact that he had held the unprecedented job of commanding the full spectrum of defense intelligence agencies controlled by the Pentagon, under the 2002 legislation that created his position as the nation’s first undersecretary of defense for intelligence. For example he had direct line control over the three national intelligence collection agencies, the National Security Agency (NSA), the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA) and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO).

He also oversaw CIFA, which he helped set up in 2003 and transformed into one of the U.S. government’s largest collectors of domestic intelligence. Despite occasional criticism from the U.S. Congress for spying on ordinary U.S. citizens, it has thrived at the Pentagon during the administrations of both Donald Rumsfeld as well as Robert Gates, the current secretary of defense.

Cambone was the chief architect of Rumsfeld’s so-called “transformation” policies at the Pentagon, which fused data flowing from those agencies into the Pentagon’s high-tech war machine. The decisions he made greatly reduced the Pentagon’s acquisitions of large weapons systems like aircraft carriers and radically increased its purchases of space-age war technologies such as communications systems, sensors, robots, low-flying satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).

Other QinetiQ acquisitions

In 2005, QinetiQ made one of its most strategic acquisitions: Apogen Technologies, a McLean, Virginia, maker of optical sensors that was deeply involved in “black” (secret) military operations, including anti-submarine warfare  and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. At the time, Apogen’s chairman was Phillip Odeen, a longtime friend of Frank Carlucci, the Carlyle Group’s chairman emeritus. Odeen was a key figure in U.S. intelligence after serving in senior positions at the Pentagon and the National Security Council, where he led the Defense and Arms Control staff under Henry Kissinger. Odeen went on to become CEO of TRW and BDM Inc., two major intelligence contractors that were later acquired by Northrop Grumman.

After QinetiQ bought Apogen, it hired Odeen as CEO of its North American division. In 2006, while Cambone was still at the DoD, Apogen won an $11.3 million contract with the U.S. Marine Corps to provide engineering and technical support to Marine intelligence and reconnaissance operations. Other customers include the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Navy.

Other companies in the QinetiQ empire include ITS Corporation, which holds IT and engineering contracts with U.S. military and intelligence agencies, including DARPA, naval intelligence and the NRO; Planning Systems Inc., which calls itself a “leading network-centric technology company,” and includes among its product line ground-penetrating radar for the detection of IEDs; and Westar Aerospace, which specializes in network centric communications and interoperability systems.

It is precisely these technologies that QinetiQ produces. Its work for CIFA, the company said in the release announcing the deal, reflects QinetiQ’s role “as a pioneer in planning and executing the protection of government personnel, critical infrastructure and sensitive defense programs.” QinetiQ is the largest suppliers of UAVs and robots to the Pentagon and the U.S. intelligence community. It developed the Zephyr, the world’s most advanced UAV, a solar-powered drone that can transmit data and pictures continuously for periods up to three months. QinetiQ also specializes in a jamming technology (called “interference protection”) that protects satellite systems from outside activity. And the company is a major supplier of acoustic microsensors designed to track the movements of “insurgents” or “illegal immigrants.”

For QinetiQ and Cambone, therefore, this is a match made in heaven. Cambone’s insights into “national security affairs and priorities,” said CEO Duane Andrews, will help shape QinetiQ’s ability “to rapidly deliver solutions to the complex challenges that face our defense and intelligence customers.” In other words, there was a natural fit between QinetiQ’s products and Cambone’s inside knowledge of the future plans and strategies behind the U.S. “intelligence enterprise.”

Re-Inventing the Pentagon

Cambone’s early career was shaped by his deep involvement with technologies associated with missile defense. His first job out of school was as a staffer for the director of Los Alamos National Laboratory, the defense and nuclear power research center in New Mexico. After that, he worked for SRS Technologies, a defense consultancy that worked closely on missile defense.

From 1990 to 1993, Cambone worked under Duane Andrews, his future boss at QinetiQ, as director for strategic defense policy in the office of Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney. There, he advocated for building a laser- and satellite-based missile defense system known derisively by its opponents as Star Wars, a cause he also took up during the Clinton administration as a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

During the 1990s, Cambone joined the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), the core advocacy group for the cause of neoconservatism, a radical philosophy that views the U.S. as the political savior of humankind, supposedly through “exporting democracy,” and advocates the use of force to expand U.S. power and influence around the world. There, he associated with many of the officials he would later serve with in the George W. Bush administration, including Rumsfeld (another Star Wars fan), Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz, who was deputy secretary of defense from 2001 to 2005.

In 1998, Rumsfeld hired Cambone as staff director of a commission he chaired to study the foreign ballistic missile threat. The commission was created by the Republican-led U.S. Congress specifically as a counterpoint to the CIA, which had downplayed the foreign missile threat in a 1997 National Intelligence Estimate. Among the commission’s members were Wolfowitz and former CIA director R. James Woolsey, a prominent necon with close ties to the defense intelligence industry. The final report, largely drafted by Cambone, flatly contradicted the CIA by warning of an imminent threat from North Korea and Iran, and became the centerpiece of the Bush administration’s initial defense policies.

After Rumsfeld became defense secretary in 2001, he selected Cambone as his special assistant. Cambone quickly became his most trusted trouble-shooter. And in the initial months of the Bush administration, there was plenty of trouble.

Rumsfeld, with Cheney’s support, set out from the beginning to “transform” the U.S. military into a high-tech, computerized fighting force designed specifically to shoot down missiles from “rogue states” and defeat counterinsurgencies and other “low intensive” threats to U.S. national security, primarily in the Middle East. None of this sat very well with the uniformed military and the defense industry, both of which were slow to embrace Rumsfeld’s network centric policies and the accompanying cuts imposed on Cold War-era weapons such as aircraft carriers and artillery systems. But the grumbling stopped after September 11, which provided the opening for Rumsfeld and his allies in the administration to make intelligence the centerpiece of their new “war on terror.”

In 2002, the U.S. Congress embraced a proposal backed by Cheney and Rumsfeld to create a new undersecretary slot at the Pentagon specifically for intelligence, and Cambone was given the job. The position provided enormous powers: under the law, he exercised the Secretary of Defense’s “authority, direction and control” over all DoD intelligence, counterintelligence and security policy, plans and programs. That included the key national agencies, which Rumsfeld and Cambone tenaciously fought to keep within the Pentagon’s command and control system (for more on this struggle, see Foreign Policy in Focus http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4795). By 2004, according to a profile in the New York Times, Cambone was presiding biweekly conference calls that included the three-star generals and an admiral who ran the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the NGA, the NRO and the NSA. In theory, they also reported to Rumsfeld and Tenet. But Cambone, the newspaper noted, “has made himself their most active overseer.”

With their newfound power, Rumsfeld and Cambone set about to give the Pentagon greater authority in the area of human intelligence, traditionally dominated by the CIA. In 2005, Rumsfeld created a new clandestine espionage branch called the Strategic Support Branch, run out of the DIA and under Cambone’s control, to end what he called his “near total dependence” on the CIA. By 2005, under the command of Cambone’s controversial deputy, Army Lieutenant General William G. “Jerry” Boykin, the support branch was deploying small, covert teams of case officers, interrogators and special operations forces to places like Somalia, Iran and the Philippines, sometimes without contacting the U.S. ambassador or the CIA station chief, to launch covert military operations and prepare for future U.S. action.

Spying on Anti-War Activists

In 2003, the Pentagon’s CIFA launched an electronic database called Talon to collect and circulate unverified reports about people and organizations that allegedly threatened Pentagon facilities. These reports were then fed into a database managed by the agency.

The database was first revealed in December 2005 when NBC News discovered that Talon had collected data on anti-military protesters and peaceful demonstrators. In 2007, the American Civil Liberties Union released an internal Pentagon report showing that Talon (which stands for Threat and Local Observation Notices) had about 13,000 entries, of which 2,821 involved reports on U.S. citizens.

For example a February 5, 2005, planned protest against recruiting at New York University by Army Judge Advocate General personnel, was listed by Talon as a "threat.” Another entry, concerning February 14, 2005, involved a demonstration planned outside the gates of the base at Fort Collins, Colorado.

The Talon program was shut down in early 2007, shortly after Rumsfeld and Cambone left the Pentagon, by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and his undersecretary for intelligence, retired Air Force General James Clapper. CIFA itself, however, remains in business.

Those were heady days for Cambone: in May 2006, the New York Times would comment that Cambone’s “low public profile masks his status as one of the most powerful intelligence officials in the United States.” But other publications weren’t so kind. Within days of the Times piece, C4ISR Journal, a military publication, described Cambone as a grim and determined ideologue. “’Unpleasant,’ ‘deeply unpleasant,’ ‘doesn’t joke much’ and ‘Rumsfeld without the personality’ are just some of the ways other reporters and analysts” describe Cambone, the Journal said.

In expanding the power and influence of the Pentagon’s special forces, Cambone pushed for policies and technologies that would later make him so useful to QinetiQ, which by 2003 was beginning its expansion in the defense intelligence market. Throughout his tenure at the Pentagon, for example, Cambone pushed for increased spending on satellites, lasers and computer networks that would link the national collection agencies with soldiers and commanders on distant battlefields. In 2004, one year into the intensifying war in Iraq, Cambone proposed spending $30 billion -- one-third of the Pentagon budget for information technology -- on what he called a “transformational satellite system.” This was a laser-based project run by the Air Force that would allow the national agencies and the military to share intelligence data and speed its delivery to bomber pilots and ground troops.

During this time, Cambone was also deeply involved in Pentagon planning for a multi-billion dollar “Space Radar” project, a constellation of satellites designed to detect moving and stationary objects from the skies in any weather condition and in darkness. The U.S. Congress only approved a portion of what Cambone wanted for the Air Force and Space Radar projects, however.

In 2006, Cambone presided over an intelligence community review of major intelligence and reconnaissance programs. It concluded that the Pentagon should increase its use of UAVs such as the Global Hawk, which operated at altitudes of 60,000 feet and could stay in the air for 24 hours and more. By this time, the Pentagon was also operating secret “stealth” UAVs as a substitute for satellites. (By 2008, the Associated Press reported in January, the military’s reliance on UAVs “that can watch, hunt and sometimes kills insurgents” had soared to more than 500,000 hours in the air, mostly in Iraq. Between January and October 2007 alone, AP found, the Pentagon had more than doubled its monthly use of drones).

Revolving Door

When Cambone’s tenure at the Pentagon drew to a close, shortly after the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld in late 2006, the future course of defense spending had already been set: the big money was going to UAVs and low-orbit satellites for the transmission and sharing of intelligence data. (These projects became more crucial in 2007, when the Space Radar was declared a failure and scrapped by Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell.) And, in response to the increasingly sophisticated tactics of the Iraqi insurgents, millions of dollars were plowed into robots and other technologies aimed at curbing the deadly effects of homemade roadside bombs, that the military has dubbed improvised explosive devices (IEDs).

By joining QinetiQ, less than a year after he resigned from the Pentagon, Cambone has been hired to implement the very policies he helped pioneer at the Pentagon, not as a public servant but as a private businessman benefiting from taxpayer dollars. And with Cambone in the driver’s seat in northern Virginia, QinetiQ is set to build on its already thriving business to become one of the premier suppliers of technology to the “intelligence enterprise” that Cambone built.

Tim Shorrock’s book on the outsourcing of U.S. intelligence, Spies for Hire, will be published in May by Simon & Schuster.

January 02, 2008

CBS's "Cashing In For Profit" Worth Revisiting

Cashing In For Profit?

Jan. 5, 2005


(CBS) Chances are you’ve never heard of Darleen Druyun, but she’s been spending a lot of your money — your tax money.

For 10 years, Druyun was the Air Force official who decided how much to pay for bombers, fighters, missiles -- you name it.
She had such a reputation for toughness, she was commonly known as "The Dragon Lady." Which is why there is shock that Druyun, one of the most powerful women in Washington, is headed to prison.

In the biggest Pentagon scandal in 20 years, it appears that billions of dollars were doled out to the Boeing Company, as Druyun was accepting personal favors for her family.

Now, as Correspondent Scott Pelley reports, both the Pentagon and defense industry are reeling from what might be called "The Curse of the Dragon Lady."


The Air Force spends more on weapons than any other service, and Druyun negotiated the price on most of the deals -- $131 million each for F-22 fighters, $350 million boosters for spy satellites, and the latest satellite-guided bombs.

In all, Druyun’s taxpayer credit card racked up $30 billion in charges every year. She had a bigger budget than the Department of Homeland Security or the Justice Department.

And, as she told a congressional committee in 1998, she didn’t let generals or CEOs push her around: "I think I have a very clear, crisp record. I am also not a shrinking violet. And I can tell you very clearly that if I don’t like something, I don’t sit there and keep my mouth shut. I do something about it."

"She has a very difficult disposition," says her former boss, Marvin Sambur, the assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisitions. "She believed that no matter what the circumstances, she's in charge."

Even though he was her boss? "Well, she's had a lot of bosses over the years. They came and went," says Sambur. "So when I came in here, her view was, 'You're temporary, you're summer help, and I'm gonna be here long after you're gone.'"

That’s because top civilian leaders of the Air Force like Sambur are political appointees hired and fired by the president. Druyun was career Air Force. In fact, there were times when as much as a year would go by when there was no political appointee above her, leaving her in charge.

Did she like being in charge of acquisitions? "She definitely did," says Sambur. "She liked the power, absolutely."

And in 2000, she had enormous power over the C-130. Druyun was considering whether to pay Boeing $4 billion to update the planes. She had Boeing’s immediate future in her hands and she used some of her power to get something for herself.

Druyun called Michael Sears, the chief financial officer at Boeing, and asked him to arrange a job for her daughter’s fiancé, Michael McKee. Boeing set up the job right away. And then, three months later, with the contract still on the table, Druyun asked for a job for her daughter, Heather. Boeing again complied.

You might be surprised that under Pentagon rules, that’s not illegal.

Months after her daughter and now son-in-law went to work at Boeing, Druyun awarded Boeing the $4 billion contract. But that was just the beginning.

Next, Boeing presented an idea that was enormous, even for the Pentagon. It wanted to lease to the Air Force 100 767s as refueling tankers. The cost: $23.5 billion. Critics thought the idea was much too expensive. But during the price negotiations, Boeing internal Emails show that Druyun was siding with Boeing, not the Air Force.

After one meeting, a Boeing executive wrote: "Meeting today on price was very good. Darleen spent most of the time bringing the USAF pricer up to our number.”

Sen. John McCain, who uncovered the Emails in an investigation of the tanker deal, had this to say: "Her job was to get the best possible price of the product for the American taxpayer. Instead, obviously she drove the price up to get the best possible deal for Boeing Corporation."

Asks Pelley, "And in driving the price up, how much money do you think the taxpayer is out on the tanker deal as it was constructed at the time?"

"I don't know exactly," answers McCain. "But it had to be in the billions. It had to be."

Was Druyun padding the tanker contract just because her daughter and son-in-law worked at Boeing? Not exactly.

In the midst of the tanker negotiations, Druyun’s daughter, Heather, Emailed Boeing's Mike Sears and revealed that her mother was retiring from the Air Force. Now, Druyun herself was looking for a job, one that Heather told Sears "must be challenging, tough, lots of responsibility.” … “She is very interested in talking to us, but we would have to give her something that would blow her out of the water.” … “She also mentioned that Boeing has her most admired quality: honest values.”

"Darleen Druyun understood the rules of the game, and that this discussion about employment was gonna violate the rules of the game," says Paul McNulty, the U.S. attorney in charge of prosecuting crime at the Pentagon. He told 60 Minutes Wednesday that while getting jobs for Druyun’s family isn’t against the law, getting a job for herself is a felony -- a violation of conflict of interest laws.

If, in that time period, Druyun had made those calls and sent those Emails herself, what would that have meant?

"Well, it wouldn't really have meant much different than what happened, because by using her daughter, she was still doing something indirectly that she wasn't allowed to do directly," says McNulty, who adds that any contact, even through her daughter, is against the law. "That's part of the conspiracy to violate the federal conflict-of-interest law."

In October 2002, at the height of the tanker negotiations, Druyun and Sears met secretly at an airport in Orlando to talk about her proposed Boeing job and the F-22 fighter which Boeing was involved in.

"Right there, on that one day, in that one 30-minute meeting, a violation of federal law occurs, because they're negotiating employment and they're doing business at the same time," says McNulty.

How much did Boeing's top executives know about the meeting and the illegal negotiations? One Email that Sears sent to "The Office Of The Chairman" of Boeing said: "Had a ‘nonmeeting’ yesterday . . . Good reception to job, location, salary. Recommend we put together a formal offer.”

In November 2002, Druyun accepted an offer to be deputy general manager of Boeing’s missile defense systems -- with a $250,000 salary and a $50,000 signing bonus.

"I was terrified. I actually was terrified for the Air Force. There was just too much about the tanker program, that was going on," says Sambur. "And I didn't want anyone to perceive, in any shape or form, that there was anything wrong with this negotiation, and I felt that she going to Boeing was not right. Totally not right."

And it didn’t last long. That job offer her daughter once said should “blow her out of the water” did exactly that. Sen. McCain’s investigation of the tanker deal uncovered the Emails. Druyun pleaded guilty to a felony and has been sentenced to 16 months. Sears also pleaded guilty, and will be sentenced later.

Fallout from the scandal reached all the way to the top of Boeing. Chief Executive Officer Phil Condit resigned.

An audit by the Congressional Budget Office found Druyun’s tanker deal would have overcharged taxpayers nearly $6 billion. If there was any doubt about her motive, Druyun cleared that up in a statement to McNulty's investigators.

"Well, in fact, she referred to her decision on the tanker deal as a parting gift to Boeing," says McNulty. "As a parting gift to the company."

But it turns out that the tanker deal wasn’t the only "gift." At her sentencing, Druyun stunned the Pentagon when she admitted swinging two other contracts Boeing’s way, together worth another half billion dollars.

She also admitted that the family jobs "influenced her government decisions" and she "took actions which harmed the United States."

"Where was the United States Air Force? Where was the Department of Defense in this," asks McCain. "How could she do all this alone? That is really one of the fundamental questions in this whole scandal."

Does he believe she did it alone?

"I don't know if she did it alone or not, but where was the oversight of the secretary of the Air Force," asks McCain. "Where was the oversight of Mr. Sambur, who was supposed to be in charge of acquisition?"

How could Sambur not know what Druyun was doing? "Why would we think that to be the case? As I told you, the core value in the Air Force is integrity," says Sambur. "She has a spotless reputation. Everybody, you talked about the 'Dragon Lady.' That was due to the fact that she was a tough negotiator. No one suspected that there were any integrity problems."

Out of the 500 people who worked for Sambur, he said that none of them knew what Druyun was up to. "It appears that nobody knew," he says.

Even though there were billions of dollars in contracts? "There's no evidence, that we're finding, that there was anything that would have prompted anybody," says Sambur.

"What kind of a system is it that one individual has the ability to determine multibillion, $20, $30 billion contracts without anyone checking up on it," says McCain.

Sambur says the Pentagon is putting together an independent committee to figure out where the flaws are: "We want to learn. We want to correct. The Air Force wants to be open here. We want to restore our integrity. We wanna do what's right."

McCain plans to hold hearings into the scandal. In the meantime, he’s been holding up Senate confirmation of promotions for Pentagon civilians and officers. Under that pressure, the secretary of the Air Force, James Roche, has resigned, and so has Marvin Sambur.

"It's reached the point where my serving is hurting my Air Force family," says Sambur. "I love this family. I will do nothing to hurt it, period."

"We've got to change not only the process over there, where one person can make these decisions all by themselves, and also the culture that allows this kind of thing to go on," says McCain, who believes it will be difficult to find out the truth. "I think that there's a lot that we'll probably never know."

Druyun, her daughter, and son-in-law all declined to talk with 60 Minutes Wednesday. So did Michael Sears and Phil Condit of Boeing.

But the Druyun scandal is far from over. Investigations by the FBI and Pentagon Inspector General continue. The Pentagon is now reviewing every contract Druyun handled during her 10-year Air Force career.


© MMV, CBS Worldwide Inc. All Rights Reserved.


November 24, 2007

Another Failure in Congressional Oversight...

Congress Ignoring Critical Report on Pentagon Spending
    By Jason Leopold
    t r u t h o u t | Report

    Wednesday 10 October 2007

    In April, the nonpartisan research arm of Congress issued a damning report that criticized the Pentagon for mismanaging hundreds of billions of dollars in emergency funds it received to pay for the occupation of Iraq and the war in Afghanistan.

    Additionally, the report said, among other things, that since late 2003 the Pentagon has overstated its financial needs and has failed to turn over to Congress an accurate and transparent accounting of how it has spent the emergency funds earmarked for Iraq and Afghanistan.

    The 45-page Congressional Research Service (CRS) report, "The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror," released in the Spring advised the new Democratic leadership in Congress it should withhold funding until the Department of Defense (DOD) provide lawmakers with a detailed accounting of its expenditures in Iraq, where 90 percent of the funds the Pentagon has received have been spent.

    In July 2006, David Walker, comptroller general of the Government Accountability Office, testified before the Congressional Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Affairs. He told lawmakers that a lack of actual costs, supporting documentation and routine reporting problems by the Pentagon, with regard to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, "make it difficult to reliably know what the war is costing, to determine how appropriated funds are being spent, and to use historical data to predict future trends."

    The DOD "has not been willing to provide Congress" with the data it uses to predict its operating costs on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, Walker said. As such, Congressional researchers have recommended in their report that Congress ask the DOD inspector general to audit the Pentagon in order to resolve these various gaps and discrepancies in cost data related to the occupation of Iraq and the war in Afghanistan.

    Yet, despite issues raised by Walker and, more recently, in an updated report by the Congressional Research Service, the Pentagon has failed to open up its accounting books to Congress and the Democratic leadership in the House hasn't pressed DOD officials to do so. More than 90 percent of the DOD's funds for Iraq were provided in the form of emergency supplemental or additional appropriations requests. Emergency funding is exempt from ceilings applying to discretionary spending in Congress's annual budget resolutions. Some members of Congress have argued that continuing to fund ongoing operations with supplementals reduces Congressional oversight.

    "Congressional leaders have promised more scrutiny of the administration's requests for a [fiscal year] 2007 supplemental and [fiscal year] 2008 war costs," the report says. "Thus far, Congress is receiving fairly detailed quarterly reporting on various metrics for success in Iraq ... but cost is not one of those metrics."

    Financial documents that have been turned over by the Pentagon to Congress "have been sparse," and government agencies, including the Congressional Budget Office and the Government Accountability Office, "have all found various discrepancies in DOD figures - including understating budget authority and obligations, mismatches between [budget authority] and obligations data, double-counting of some obligations, questionable figures, and a lack of information about basic factors that affect costs such as troop strength ...," said a March CRS report on the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan military operations, and past issues associated with emergency spending requests.

    "For example, DOD provided five pages to justify $33 billion in operation and maintenance spending, about half of the [fiscal year] 2006 supplemental request. Because few details are included, [the Congressional Budget Office] notes the difficulty in determining the basis of DOD requests and estimating alternatives," the CRS report says. "And because appropriations for war are mixed with DOD's baseline budget, information about 'what has actually been spent,' or outlays, is not available. That information is important for estimating the cost of alternate future scenarios and also for showing the effect of war costs on the federal deficit."

    Furthermore, the DOD "has periodically revised the figures shown for each operation in previous years, suggesting questions about the validity of its figures," the report says, adding that some of the department's supplemental requests for 2007 included "$2 billion from some unknown source."

    Moreover, the most recent CRS report related to the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan operations dated July 16, said that while the Pentagon has made slight improvements in "in showing how previously appropriated funds have been allocated among the three operations - Iraq, Afghanistan and other counter-terror operations and enhanced security - [the Pentagon's latest funding request] does not cover over $30 billion for classified programs and other funds for repair or replacement of war-worn equipment still to be obligated."

    Late last month, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told Congress that he needs $141.7 billion - roughly a 40 percent increase over the previous year - in addition to a $50 billion emergency supplemental President Bush requested in September to continue funding operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. If approved, it would bring the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan operations to $610 billion. The $50 billion in emergency funding Bush asked for is needed, the DOD said, to pay for the 30,000 additional troops Bush sent to Iraq earlier this year. All told, the occupation of Iraq is costing taxpayers roughly $2.1 billion a week. The Congressional Budget Office predicted that by the end of 2008, the cost of the Iraq occupation could very well reach $1 trillion.

    Democratic lawmakers and their aides were unwilling to comment publicly on whether they intended to force the Pentagon to be more transparent or if lawmakers heeded the advice of CRS and would call for an audit of the Pentagon. Privately, some aides to lawmakers serving on the House Appropriations Committee said that scenario was highly unlikely to happen.

    David Obey (D-Wisconsin), the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said last month that he has "no intention" of passing an Iraq funding bill through his committee "that simply served to continue the status quo."

    Senator Robert Byrd (D-Virginia), chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, became visibly upset last month when Gates disclosed how much additional funding was needed to continue occupying Iraq.

    "If granted, we will have spent more than 600 billion! - billion! billion! - dollars" on the "nefarious and infernal war in Iraq," Byrd said.

    Still, while statements like that of Obey's and Byrd's may allow Democrats to flex some political muscle from time to time it doesn't begin to address the Pentagon's accounting irregularities CRS says will continue to be a major factor each time the Bush administration seeks additional funding for Iraq and Afghanistan unless lawmakers rein in the Pentagon's spending and take a closer look at its books.

    "Grappling with these issues is more difficult because DOD has provided limited information about prior war costs making trends difficult to decipher and explanations unlikely to be available," the July 16, CRS report said. The General Accounting Office, the Congressional Budget Office and CRS "have all raised concerns about these problems in reports and testimony. There are many unresolved discrepancies and gaps in reported DOD figures."

    Gates testified before Congress last month that a large part of the funding request will be earmarked for equipment upgrades and weapons enhancement. But the CRS report said that still doesn't account for the massive annual increase in spending.

    "Although some of the factors behind the rapid increase in DOD funding are known - the growing intensity of operations, additional force protection gear and equipment, substantial upgrades of equipment, converting units to modular configurations, and new funding to train and equip Iraqi security forces - these elements are not enough to explain the size of the increases," the report said.

    Info Box

    CRS estimates that war-related appropriations enacted to date total about $610 billion allocated as follows:
    $450 billion for Iraq (or 74%);
    $127 billion for Afghanistan (or 20%);
    $28 billion for enhanced security (5%); and
    $5 billion unallocated (1%).


    Jason Leopold is senior editor and reporter for Truthout. He received a Project Censored award in 2007 for his story on Halliburton's work in Iran.

  -------

November 10, 2007

Revolving Door and Defense Contract Awards

Defense Contract Award Protested
    By Walter F. Roche Jr.
    The Los Angeles Times

    Friday 26 October 2007

    Washington - A Defense Department medical services contract worth up to $790 million was awarded last month to a Wisconsin-based company three months after it hired a former Bush administration appointee who had supervised military health programs at the Pentagon for the last six years.

    William Winkenwerder Jr., assistant secretary of Defense for health affairs from 2001 until April, joined Logistics Health Inc. as a director and consultant in June. The firm beat out two other bidders with proposals that ranged from $80 million to $100 million less, records show. Under the new contract, Logistics Health will provide immunizations and physical and dental exams for reservists and National Guard members.

    Logistics Health of LaCrosse, Wis., is headed by another ex-official of the Bush administration - former Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson.

    "They stacked the deck," said Fran Lessans, president of Passport Health, one of the losing bidders. Her Baltimore-based firm lost despite a bid projected over five years to cost nearly $100 million less than Logistics Health's winning proposal.

    "It was wired. There is no doubt in my mind," Lessans said of the Defense procurement process.

    Two other firms involved in the bidding have filed formal protests with the Government Accountability Office. A draft copy of one protest letter, reviewed by The Times, cited Winkenwerder's role and complained that the winning bidder may have "gained unequal access to information not available to other competitors" by hiring the former Pentagon official.

    "This creates an organizational conflict of interest and potentially constitutes prohibited contact," the draft letter said.

    Winkenwerder called such allegations inaccurate and untruthful. In e-mail responses to The Times, he said he had nothing to do with the procurement process or the selection of Logistics Health. He also said he had not begun contacts with Logistics officials about the directorship and consulting job until after he had resigned his Defense Department post.

    His role at Logistics Health is to provide advice, he said, "on a variety of issues that are of concern and priority to the company. Government rules do not prohibit such advice in any way."

    The rules bar him from contacting his former Pentagon colleagues on Logistics' behalf, "and I have followed those rules scrupulously. Further I support such rules and place a high importance on strict ethical behavior in all of my conduct."

    Diana Henry, a spokeswoman for Logistics Health, said in a written statement that the company "conducts all of its business activities in a highly ethical and professional manner."

    The contract, awarded in September, supports the Defense Department's Reserve Health Readiness Program. In prepared remarks for a subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee two years ago, Winkenwerder said the program's goal was "to identify and proactively assist service members in getting needed support for deployment-related concerns." Besides routine exams, the program will provide full medical assessments to reservists and Guard members returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Logistics Health will be paid an estimated $151 million for the first year of a contract that can be renewed annually and extended up to five years at a total cost of about $790 million.

    In other letters of protest filed with the GAO, officials of rival firms also charged that Logistics won the pact despite questions raised about its performance under a previous agreement with the Department of Health and Human Services. That pact, originally awarded in 2001, only applied to the Army, while the new one includes the Navy, Air Force and Marines.

    Kenneth Moskowitz, an attorney for the Pennsylvania-based United States Military Dental Corp., said in an Oct. 12 letter that Logistics' prior performance and practices under the Health and Human Services contract "put reservists and National Guardsmen at possible undue risk."

    He told the GAO that "no one was assigned to specifically monitor the level of care" received by military personnel and that the company operated with "a built-in incentive to lower provider cost for added profit." The Pennsylvania company was a subcontractor for Comprehensive Health Services of Florida, one of the failed bidders.

    A spokesman for the Defense Department, citing the pending protests, declined to respond to a series of detailed questions about the contract and the selection process.

    Records reviewed by The Times show that the Logistics Health bid also survived a major last-minute change when partner QTC Management abruptly withdrew days before the contract was awarded.

    QTC Chairman Anthony J. Principi, another former Bush appointee, was secretary of Veterans Affairs.

    The GAO has until early January to act on the protests.

    The Defense Department gave initial notice of its intent to put the newly expanded program out to bid in October 2006.

    Winkenwerder resigned from his Pentagon post April 16, and his appointment to the Logistics board was announced May 31. It became effective the next day. In announcing Winkenwerder's appointment, Thompson said: "He brings with him a wealth of knowledge and also shares LHI's commitment of helping military members receive the healthcare and support they deserve. He is a tremendous addition to our board of directors."

    The formal notice of the bidding process was issued June 12. Bids were due July 26. On Sept. 10, QTC formally withdrew from the Logistics proposal. And on Sept. 25, the contract was awarded to Logistics.

  -------

October 28, 2007

Revolving Doors: Evolving Influences 1

By G.F. Scott

October 28, 2007

What constitutes a “Revolving Door” as in corrupted government and industry?   Employees who start in industry and move to government and use their position, authority or influence to aid, or facilitate their former employer in achieving corporate goals is one scenario.  They may be able to influence development and writing of government policies and regulations as well as how government policies and regulations will be implemented and enforced.  Employees who start out in government, and then move to industry using their previous connections, ability to influence, intimidate, or coerce former colleagues, or employees previously supervised in order to aid or facilitate their new employer’s corporate goals is another scenario.   Or someone who starts in government, may be lured, or coerced into acting in industry’s best interests and then later may be offered the high paying pay-off job at the company they helped while they were in federal employ.  Any of these scenarios, potentially ethically challenging, can involve quid pro quo agreements for the benefit of individuals or corporations and may not in the best interest of the taxpayers or our government.  And evidence is available that shows that some employees move back and forth between government and industry positions repeatedly, potentially repeating questionable conflict of interest activities over time.

Nearly always, financial gain is a big component of these types of arrangements.  Because of the risks to government interests there are currently policies in place prohibiting an employee moving from a position of power, authority, influence or oversight concerning a particular contractor, directly to a position in that contractor’s employ.  The purpose of these policies is to avoid the possible compromises or quid pro quo  “deals” that might be arranged which might not be in the taxpayers or government’s best interests.  Generally there are stipulated cooling off periods required, before employees may make certain job movements.

How can one tell if it is just a smart career move or indeed is a revolving door maneuver, complete with the typical manipulation, corruption, and payoff one might expect?  It’s not always an easy thing to identify, until the person proves himself or herself by word and deed what their goals and purposes are.  However, a person’s education, professional experiences, political connections and other elements may be illuminating and an indication of possible conflict of interest.

 

One of the most noted cases of Revolving Door Corruption recently, was that of D.D., who served as a government employee, (USAF), for a number of years, vocally advocating for a particular defense contractor while doing her contracting job, instead of advocating for the benefit of the taxpayers in government defense contracts.  Eventually, D.D. left government employ and resurfaced as an employee of the very company she had championed while managing government defense contracting, which benefited that company.  After information came out and controversy erupted over the infamous “Tanker Deal” D.D., the Defense Contractor’s top acquisition official, and the Defense Contractor’s Chief Financial Officer, M.S. were both fired by the Defense Contractor, and after a legal battle both pled guilty to conflict of interest and ethics crimes and were sentenced accordingly.

Here are some examples of other possible Revolving Door scenarios: 

A.E. started out as a legislative assistant for National Security Affairs for a Representative to the House of Representatives, and then moved on to serve as an employee of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services, where he then spent 13 years learning his craft, and had been promoted to the position of staff director.  From staff director of the House Committee on Armed Services, he was recruited to move to a large Defense Contractor, taking the position of Vice President, Aircraft & Missiles Programs, in the company’s Government Relations office in Washington DC.

His new corporate duties were to be responsible for leading the development and execution of government relations strategies for the company’s programs and issues related to the Department of Defense and in support of the company’s Aircraft & Missiles business unit headquartered in St. Lois, Missouri.  The company states in a press release that their Aircraft and Missiles group manages numerous Air Force, Army, Navy, and Marine Corps programs as well as Aerospace Support programs and the Joint Strike Fighter program as well.   His new employer waxed eloquently about this new employee’s attributes in the same press release, stating “We are proud to have a true professional with such proven leadership skills and extensive experience in Washington D.C., as we strive to become more customer-focused, this employee’s vast knowledge of the defense department’s programs and policies will serve us well.”  It appears A.E. is still in this position, and involved in various activities to plan and coordinate efforts to influence decisions and win contracts for his current defense industry employer.

G.G. started out as a Security Specialist for Defense Investigative Service (now called Defense Security Service), and was over time, promoted to Deputy Director, Industrial Security.  G.G. was very active in professional organizations and in government “reinvention” and reform, including promoting major changes in the relationship between government oversight and industry, particularly in advocating for involving industry in the writing of policy and procedural changes, and reworking how oversight would be allowed to work within the agency.    He was a presenter and active participant at conferences in the security field.  He left his management position at DSS and went directly to the position of Director, Security and Fire Protection and Facility Security Officer at a large defense contractor, at that time based in Seattle.  There is evidence to suggest that he continued to try to influence and/or coerce former colleagues and subordinates in DSS regarding implementation of policy, regulations, and enforcement and oversight activities involving G.G.’s new defense contractor employer. 

      

C.H. founded a business with her partner/husband.  She then became the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense C3I.  She was active in the government “reinvention” activities also in her role of Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Security and Information Operations in the George W. Bush Administration, replacing William Leonard in November 2001.  Prior to taking Leonard’s job, she worked with DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Project Agency), and was a member of the Defense Science Board (DSB).

Subsequently, her company,  “actually a one man shop run by a government consultant,” (her husband), was awarded lucrative contracts in Iraq while she continued to remain in her Defense Department government position.  Her company was hired by SAIC (Science Applications International Corp.), said to be one of the most politically connected government contractors holding government contracts in Iraq.

She subsequently gave testimony about TALON in a hearing before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, urging it’s purchase and use by the government.  TALON, (a program run by the JPEN program), was developed by CellExchange Inc, which is a defense-contracting partner of SAIC.  C.H. underwent an investigation because of allegations of conflict of interest, but denied anything improper had occurred.

 

Most recently, C.H. has joined the Board of advisors for Cybrinth LLC, which deals in data custody and information security.  She is also on the Boards of Oakley Networks, a leading force in the Insider Threat prevention market and ICx advanced technology and sensor solutions for military and homeland security, all of which are actively seeking government contracts.

Now, consider again the definition of Revolving Door, and the intent of the prohibitions of such activities for government and industry employees.  These are but a few of the examples of questionable government and industry employee movements and activities.  It seems reasonable to question the lack of government enforcement of even current policies intended to avert conflict of interest and other corruptions, let alone the lack of development of new stricter personnel policies to assure ethics in government contracting.

More Revolving Door Contract Impropriety

Defense Contract Award Protested
    By Walter F. Roche Jr.
    The Los Angeles Times

    Friday 26 October 2007

    Washington - A Defense Department medical services contract worth up to $790 million was awarded last month to a Wisconsin-based company three months after it hired a former Bush administration appointee who had supervised military health programs at the Pentagon for the last six years.

    William Winkenwerder Jr., assistant secretary of Defense for health affairs from 2001 until April, joined Logistics Health Inc. as a director and consultant in June. The firm beat out two other bidders with proposals that ranged from $80 million to $100 million less, records show. Under the new contract, Logistics Health will provide immunizations and physical and dental exams for reservists and National Guard members.

    Logistics Health of LaCrosse, Wis., is headed by another ex-official of the Bush administration - former Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson.

    "They stacked the deck," said Fran Lessans, president of Passport Health, one of the losing bidders. Her Baltimore-based firm lost despite a bid projected over five years to cost nearly $100 million less than Logistics Health's winning proposal.

    "It was wired. There is no doubt in my mind," Lessans said of the Defense procurement process.

    Two other firms involved in the bidding have filed formal protests with the Government Accountability Office. A draft copy of one protest letter, reviewed by The Times, cited Winkenwerder's role and complained that the winning bidder may have "gained unequal access to information not available to other competitors" by hiring the former Pentagon official.

    "This creates an organizational conflict of interest and potentially constitutes prohibited contact," the draft letter said.

    Winkenwerder called such allegations inaccurate and untruthful. In e-mail responses to The Times, he said he had nothing to do with the procurement process or the selection of Logistics Health. He also said he had not begun contacts with Logistics officials about the directorship and consulting job until after he had resigned his Defense Department post.

    His role at Logistics Health is to provide advice, he said, "on a variety of issues that are of concern and priority to the company. Government rules do not prohibit such advice in any way."

    The rules bar him from contacting his former Pentagon colleagues on Logistics' behalf, "and I have followed those rules scrupulously. Further I support such rules and place a high importance on strict ethical behavior in all of my conduct."

    Diana Henry, a spokeswoman for Logistics Health, said in a written statement that the company "conducts all of its business activities in a highly ethical and professional manner."

    The contract, awarded in September, supports the Defense Department's Reserve Health Readiness Program. In prepared remarks for a subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee two years ago, Winkenwerder said the program's goal was "to identify and proactively assist service members in getting needed support for deployment-related concerns." Besides routine exams, the program will provide full medical assessments to reservists and Guard members returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Logistics Health will be paid an estimated $151 million for the first year of a contract that can be renewed annually and extended up to five years at a total cost of about $790 million.

    In other letters of protest filed with the GAO, officials of rival firms also charged that Logistics won the pact despite questions raised about its performance under a previous agreement with the Department of Health and Human Services. That pact, originally awarded in 2001, only applied to the Army, while the new one includes the Navy, Air Force and Marines.

    Kenneth Moskowitz, an attorney for the Pennsylvania-based United States Military Dental Corp., said in an Oct. 12 letter that Logistics' prior performance and practices under the Health and Human Services contract "put reservists and National Guardsmen at possible undue risk."

    He told the GAO that "no one was assigned to specifically monitor the level of care" received by military personnel and that the company operated with "a built-in incentive to lower provider cost for added profit." The Pennsylvania company was a subcontractor for Comprehensive Health Services of Florida, one of the failed bidders.

    A spokesman for the Defense Department, citing the pending protests, declined to respond to a series of detailed questions about the contract and the selection process.

    Records reviewed by The Times show that the Logistics Health bid also survived a major last-minute change when partner QTC Management abruptly withdrew days before the contract was awarded.

    QTC Chairman Anthony J. Principi, another former Bush appointee, was secretary of Veterans Affairs.

    The GAO has until early January to act on the protests.

    The Defense Department gave initial notice of its intent to put the newly expanded program out to bid in October 2006.

    Winkenwerder resigned from his Pentagon post April 16, and his appointment to the Logistics board was announced May 31. It became effective the next day. In announcing Winkenwerder's appointment, Thompson said: "He brings with him a wealth of knowledge and also shares LHI's commitment of helping military members receive the healthcare and support they deserve. He is a tremendous addition to our board of directors."

    The formal notice of the bidding process was issued June 12. Bids were due July 26. On Sept. 10, QTC formally withdrew from the Logistics proposal. And on Sept. 25, the contract was awarded to Logistics.

  -------

October 19, 2007

Andrew K. Ellis: Revolving Door

From The Boeing Company, Press Release

Andrew K. Ellis Joins The Boeing Company in Washington, D.C.

ARLINGTON, Va., Feb. 02, 2000 -- Andrew K. Ellis will join The Boeing Company's Government Relations office in Washington, D.C., as vice president, Aircraft & Missiles Programs.

Ellis, 40, will be responsible for leading the development and execution of government relations strategies for Boeing programs and issues related to the Department of Defense and in support of the company's Aircraft & Missiles business unit headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri. Boeing's Aircraft & Missiles Group manages numerous Air Force, Army, Navy and Marine Corps programs as well as Aerospace Support programs and the Joint Strike Fighter program. He will be the principal focal point between the Aircraft & Missiles Group and the Government Relations office.

Ellis comes to Boeing from the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services, where he has served for the past 13 years, most recently as staff director. Previously he was legislative assistant for National Security Affairs for Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA).

We are proud to have a true professional with such proven leadership skills and extensive experience in Washington, D.C.," said Chris Hansen, senior vice president, Boeing Government Relations. "As we strive to become more customer-focused, Andy's vast knowledge of the defense department's programs and policies will serve us well."

Ellis holds a bachelor's degree from the University of Vermont and master's and doctorate degrees in International Relations from the University of Southern California.

Gov. to Industry Revolving Door Participants

I ran across the little note about Andrew Ellis,  in an online Alumni publication.  He appears to be another government employee moving directly from government employ to a highly paid position at a defense contractor.  This kind of activity is already against government personnel policy, but seems to be rarely enforced these days.  I wonder how many more we could list here?  Please send in more examples as you come across them.  I will add them to the list.   Thanks!  GFS


Andrew Ellis left his job in the U.S. Congress after 15 years to become vice president of the Washington, D.C., office of the Boeing Company. Class of 1981:  University of Vermont Online Newshttp://www.uvm.edu/~uvmpr/vq/VQSummer02/CN70-80.html 

Carol Haave was a former President of Sullivan/Haave Associates, a business she founded with her husband, Terry Sullivan.  She later became the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense C3I, and her company subsequently was awarded lucrative Iraqi contracts while she remained in her government position.

Greg Gwash, Deputy Director, Industrial Security, Defense Security Service moved directly from that government position with oversight of The Boeing Company to Director, Security and Fire Protection and Facility Security Officer, Boeing- Seattle in 1997.