No One’s Watching the Contracts?

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


I don’t even know what to say about this:

The chief Pentagon agency in charge of investigating and reporting fraud and waste in Defense Department spending in Iraq quietly pulled out of the war zone a year ago – leaving what experts say are gaps in the oversight of how more than $140 billion is being spent.

Apparently the Pentagon hasn’t had an inspector general watching things in Iraq for over six months. Of course, the last inspector general, Joseph Schmitz—a self-described “conservative activist”—wasn’t exactly known for his eagle eyes, spent most of his time defending Halliburton, arguing that the companies problems were “not out of line with the size and scope of their contracts.” (Schmitz eventually resigned after becoming the focus of a congressional inquiry into whether he blocked two criminal investigations over the Pentagon’s crooked air-tanker deal with Boeing; he now works for Blackwater USA, a private security contractor operating in Iraq.) In a sane world, Schmitz would have been replaced with someone who was able to do their job. Not, obviously, the world we live in.

UPDATE: More, from the Washington Post:

Stuart W. Bowen Jr., special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, [told Congress that] administration promises to use $18 billion Congress allocated to rebuild water, electricity, health and oil networks to prewar levels or better are running into cold reality. “We are going to provide something less than that,” he said….

The hearing came with uncertainty over who will be watching over future spending in Iraq. Bowen’s office could disappear as soon as next year, though pending legislation would extend its life. Krongard said he has not yet received funding for 2006 to provide oversight in Iraq. And the Defense Department’s acting inspector general, Thomas F. Gimble, revealed that his office does not have a single staff member in Iraq.

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate