TOPICS

In a partisan session that likened pre-invasion Iraq to the regimes of Adolf Hitler, the Khmer Rouge and Josef Stalin, and prompted comparisons between an embattled President Bush and wartime setbacks that Abraham Lincoln and George Washington experienced, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Tuesday launched a weeklong look into government waste, fraud and abuse.

Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and ranking member Tom Davis, R-Va., presided over a session that delved into allegations of waste under the Coalition Provisional Authority, the U.S.-led group that served as a government for Iraq following the fall of Saddam Hussein.

A hearing memorandum prepared by committee Democrats described a "wild west" atmosphere in Iraq between May 2003 and June 2004, during which CPA spent $19.6 billion before handing over control to an interim Iraqi government.


RELATED STORIES

During that time, the Federal Reserve shipped massive pallets of money to Baghdad from Iraqi accounts, eventually sending almost $12 billion in cash, according to committee documents. This cash was distributed in duffel bags to local officials, contractors and others, because in the absence of a local banking system, CPA operated largely on a cash basis.

Testimony and questioning focused primarily on whether CPA had an obligation to improve oversight of those funds, which were tracked in principle to the agency's doorstep but in practice not even always that far, according to a study by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, which looked at $8.8 billion of that money.

"As a preliminary matter, our audit report did not say that the CPA lost taxpayer money," Bowen said. "The audit did conclude, however, that the CPA's internal controls for approximately $8.8 billion in [Development Fund for Iraq] funds disbursed to Iraqi ministries through the national budget process failed to provide sufficient accountability for the use of those funds. The CPA did not establish or implement sufficient managerial, financial and contractual controls to ensure DFI funds were used in a transparent manner."

Witnesses and lawmakers debated the extent to which CPA, keenly aware of poor capacity within the ministries, had an obligation to record how the money was handled after disbursement. Bowen argued that CPA's obligation to manage those funds transparently, as set out under the United Nations law that provided access to them, would have required that coalition officials seek some level of reporting from the ministries as to how funds were actually spent.

But L. Paul Bremer, who headed CPA during its short tenure, and several Republican lawmakers said it would have been unreasonable to expect the desperately understaffed CPA to take on this level of oversight responsibility. Several Republicans also stressed that the funds were from Iraqi, not U.S., accounts, and officials' inability to trace them likely did not directly harm U.S. taxpayers.

Bremer also said the urgent need to disperse salaries to Iraqis expecting government pay overrode the need to go slower and be more cautious. He said the measures CPA officials took were adequate.

Other aspects of CPA management attacked by Democratic lawmakers included a decision by officials to back away from plans to hire a top auditing firm to oversee spending. Instead, officials awarded a $1.4 million audit contract to a firm that took a role closer to accounting support. The firm that provided those services, North Star, operates out of a small, two-story residential building in San Diego, according to committee research.

Bremer said he did not know the business capabilities offered by North Star.

Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., noted that the Iraqi government lost billions to fraud even before the U.S. invasion, and said it would be ludicrous to think that waste could be eliminated by CPA.

COMMENTS

  • Hmm, the sides have been chosen and flags unfurled. Both Gunny and the “anonymous” have their points. This is the same battle politicos have been fighting since the 1930’s. First, Gunny, our Laissez-faire economy of the past was a bust. Overly simplified, ungoverned market places led to the so-called “Corn-Hog” cycle then to the Wall Street crash of ’29, the beginnings of your Socialist programs. As for Welfare, Social Security, Medicare, governmental support of libraries, public schools, universities, hospitals, and all the rest, would you throw them all out? The bottom line is you will support social programs either now or later; spread the wealth or fund confinement facilities. You choose. Anonymous, pools of money (wealth of the rich) are necessary. They don’t just gather their income and sleep on it. They reinvest it in more profit making ventures, spreading it around; or at the very least, give it to financial establishments who do the same. Remember Reagan’s “Trickle down effect”? It did work. The difficulty lies in the balance and degree of governmental influence, as socialistic societies such as the old Soviet Union found out. My personal observation leads me to the Pendulum theory. Politicos vie for the attention of the loudest special interest groups, placating them until it backfires thus causing a swing in the other direction; reminiscent of that Corn-Hog cycle. The government has been elected primarily to manage the overall environment in which we live and work. Seems to me the problem is in degrees, both too much and too little interference has proven bad. Perhaps incremental changes would work better. Your guess is as good as mine. What amazes me is the anger generated by many centralists, like Clinton. As much as I dislike his methods, Dubya has fought the downward economic swing that took effect almost the minute he took office with the most effective means possible, a wartime economy. Now, the pendulum swings again. Tip off.
  • Gunny, Why is it when Democrats give money to help the poor and needy, it’s socialism but when the Republicans give money to the rich, the corporations and/or the war profiteers, it’s patriotism or spreading democracy or whatever other "governance by sound bite" they're using for the day? I don't mind my money going to help those who need it, but I do mind my money going to help those who make millions/billions from corporate welfare and through treason by profiting off the bodies of our military.
  • Let's see the Democrats do a better job!