War Profiteering Kills

At least a dozen Soldiers and Marines in Iraq have died as a result of electrocution, and the likely culprit? Shoddy construction work by KBR. The Houston-based war-profiteering enterprise received no-bid contracts to build bases and housing facilities for American troops in Iraq, but in multiple cases the electrical work is substandard, lines have been improperly grounded, and the results have been tragic - death by electrocution of at least ten Soldiers and two Marines.

On the fifth anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, California Democrat Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, sent a letter today to Defense Secretary Robert Gates seeking details about electrocutions of military and contract workers in Iraq and about KBR's role in making electrical repairs.

Defense Department spokesman Chris Isleib said the Pentagon "considers this matter to be serious, and we have referred it to the (Department of Defense) Inspector General for a full investigation."

KBR officials pledged to cooperate fully with agencies involved in the probe.

Waxman has asked the Pentagon to respond to his inquiry by April 4.

The probe was sparked by the death of SSG Ryan Maseth who was electrocuted when he stepped into a shower in his living quarters. The military originally told his mother that he had a small electrical appliance in the shower with him, but that was a cover story; a lie. He was electrocuted because a water pump was improperly installed, and bypassed the circuit breaker.

At first, Maseth's mother tried to get answers on her own, but was unable to. So she contacted her congressman, Jason Altmire, a Democrat. Altmire started digging, and referred what he found to Representative Waxman, who chairs the Oversight Committee.

Those deaths, said Altmire, were "[e]asily preventable. You wonder how it even could happen one time. But if a tragedy does occur once — because of a mistake — how could it possibly occur 12 times?" he asked.

Congressman, don't be coy. Money. That's how it can happen.

Wounded Vets Still Caught in Limbo While Congress Wrings Their Hands

A few weeks ago, the blogosphere went ballistic when the story about wounded veterans being ordered to repay enlistment/reenlistment/retention bonuses when they are injured or wounded and unable to complete their enlistment contract got picked up briefly by the M$M.

Congress immediately set about paying bipartisan lip service to the problem, with Senator Jeff Sessions (R, AL) and Congressman Jason Altmire (D, PA) both penning legislation to rectify the injustice. On Friday the Senate bill passed, and the House version is expected to pass today, but meek efforts at best have been made to work out compromise legislation before Congress heads out of town for three weeks for the holiday recess. Congress is planning on wrapping up all pending legislation by late Wednesday or early Thursday.

Aides to both Sessions and Altmire have said no direct talks to work out compromise legislation have taken place, in fact, Altmire aides said that they hope the Senate will pass the Altmire version without changes.

The main difference in the two bills involves retroactive payments to anyone who did not get their full bonus since 12 September 2001 when a combat injury was the reason for separation or discharge. The Senate bill, S 2400, the Wounded Warrior Bonus Equity Act, has the retroactive provision, and the House version, HR 3793, the Veterans Guaranteed Bonus Act, does not allow for any retroactive payment of bonuses.

Currently, the Pentagon leaves decisions about bonuses to the individual branches of service, “DoD does not preclude the services from paying out unpaid portions of bonuses when the service member is separated for no fault of their own,” said Pentagon spokesman Army Lt. Colonel Jonathan Withington. Withington said that unpaid “portions are paid out in full in the event of a death” and that members separated for disability “would receive a lump-sum payment of their unearned portions of any bonus.”

Sessions maintains that he is not convinced the services are following those guidelines and that is why the bonus guarantees should be set in law and should provide retroactive coverage.

I agree with Sessions on this one - his bill is the one that gives coverage to the wounded veterans that we went nuts about. Not covering the veterans who were the reason behind the legislation seems like locking the barn door after the horse has escaped, dontcha think?