TOPICS
TOPICS
CBO: Scale of contract operations in Iraq is unprecedented
One out of every $5 the U.S. government has spent on the war in Iraq has gone to contractors, and the ratio of contract workers to troops is higher than in any previous major armed conflict, according to a report released on Tuesday.
The study by the Congressional Budget Office found that from 2003 through 2007, the Defense Department and other federal agencies awarded about $85 billion in Iraq contracts, representing about 20 percent of total spending on Iraq operations. Iraq contract spending is expected to reach $100 billion by the end of the Bush administration.
The chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, which requested the report, expressed sticker shock.
"The Bush administration's move to outsource large portions of the Iraq war effort sets a dangerous precedent," said Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D. "The increasing use of private contractors restricts accountability and oversight, opens the door to corruption and abuse, and in some instances, may significantly increase the cost to American taxpayers."
Most of the contracts have been for logistical support, construction, oil and food. The most expensive is the Army's Logistics Civil Augmentation umbrella support services contract, which supplies troops with a range of services, including meals, mail, laundry and sanitation.
From 2003 through 2007, the Army obligated $22 billion for LOGCAP services. The current LOGCAP contract is held by three contractors and has a $50 billion ceiling.
CBO's tally did not include contracts performed outside of the theater, such as the manufacture of major weapons systems or mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles -- even if that equipment was eventually sent to Iraq.
The report presents the most comprehensive accounting to date of the role contractors have played in the war. The budget office estimated that there are now more than 190,000 contractors in Iraq.
CBO did not discuss the implications of such a buildup in wartime contractors or the degree to which the contracts could have been subject to waste, fraud or abuse.
But, at a press conference on Tuesday, CBO Director Peter Orszag noted that U.S. troops already are spending far more time in the theater and less time at home than the military would prefer. Without private contractors, he said, soldiers "would be running at an even less sustainable rate."
Orszag noted, however, that the scale of the contractor deployment in the Iraq conflict is virtually unprecedented. The report found that there is roughly one contractor on the ground in Iraq for every member of the military. That rate is 55 times higher than in the 1990 Gulf War, seven times higher than World War II and five times higher than in Vietnam.
The only other major military operation that ranks close to Iraq in the use of private contractors was the conflict in the Balkans in the 1990s, in which there also was a 1-to-1 ratio. But that was a much smaller operation, involving at most 20,000 U.S. troops at any given time.
"In general, the U.S. government has placed greater emphasis in recent decades on outsourcing activities to the private sector that are not inherently governmental," the report stated. "The government's policy is to subject services identified as commercial to the forces of competition. In addition, the ratio of contractor personnel to military personnel reflects the United States' attempt to reconstruct Iraq while military activities are under way, rather than delaying rebuilding until hostilities have ended."
The Defense Department did not respond to a request for comment about the report.
Slightly more than 20 percent of the 190,000 contractors currently working in Iraq are U.S. citizens, CBO found. Meanwhile, nearly 37 percent of the contracting workforce is Iraqi nationals while more than 42 percent come from third-party countries.
These third-country nationals, Conrad said, fall into an ambiguous gray area, where their legal status remains undefined and where accountability and oversight by the U.S. military is increasingly difficult.
"The record number of private contractors in Iraq raises a host of serious concerns," Conrad said. "There are billions of taxpayer dollars being funneled to both American and foreign companies, often through no-bid contracts. Ongoing Pentagon audits have revealed that vast sums of this money have been misspent or improperly recorded."
CBO also was able for the first time to quantify the number of private security contractors that are working in Iraq and how their cost compares to that of guards from the U.S. military.
There are 25,000 to 30,000 private guards in Iraq, the report stated. Thirty percent to 40 percent of them work directly for the U.S. government as prime contractors and the rest work for the Iraqi government, other coalition governments or corporations. About three-quarters of the private security guards are armed with weapons, CBO said.
The budget office estimated that that the U.S. government has spent from $3 billion to $4 billion on the private guards since 2003. That cost was comparable, and in some cases, less, than if the work had been performed by the military.
"That analysis indicates that the costs of the private contractor did not differ greatly from the costs of having a comparable military unit performing similar functions," the report stated. "During peacetime, however, the military unit would remain in the force structure and continue to accrue costs at a peacetime rate, whereas the private security contract would not have to be renewed."
Alan Chvotkin, vice president of the Professional Services Council, a trade group representing contractors, said the report did not include any surprising figures, and CBO deserved credit for presenting clear and unbiased data and for clarifying some contested points about the cost and preponderance of contractors.
"This is a welcome report in that gets the facts out there," Chvotkin said. "And it unmistakably debunked a number of these great myths about Iraq that many people want to believe."
COMMENTS
- ROTFLMAO!! Now that is a unique perspective, Paul. I must admit I never thought of it that way and it definitely has some possibilities I must explore. Still, I have to question a few of your assumptions: Costs: IMHO, and that of many folks dealing on the ground level, Skeeter’s feather merchants have never saved us dollar one. As I’ve pointed out elsewhere, the individual contractors may make less than us but the overall cost is of a plus 40% more per individual due to the profit margin and the additional overhead. You add in the turnover and the inherent training we must do for our replacements and the costs go up further. You consider the loss of funds due to no-bid solicitations, and you don’t have a running tap so much as a Niagara-type flood of funds from our coffers to their pockets; without so much as a “Thank you very much!” Foreign nationals: Without a vested interest or a patriotic motivation I must think that our goals would only be accomplished by a mercenary force in a “wartime” by excessive cost and sufficient supervision. After all, mercenaries are notorious for staying only as long as “the money is right”, or the conflict is in their best interest. I must still hold that any adequate manager of the world's largest and most professional army should have foreseen the need for managing an ongoing conflict and an exit strategy and at least polled the military professionals for their input; after all we had a classic example still within memory. Rummy did neither. The required build up should have taken place, at a minimum, back in ’05. The indicators were all there. That would have given the theater commander the forces he needed two years later when the “surge” was called for. Being comprised of mostly privates, and in accordance with their historical figures, the vast majority would be unlikely to reenlist leaving only the most dedicated and professional to remain in; thus saving us out year funds and their retirement costs. As for medical costs, there is no way around that and nor should there be. As they give to us; so should we give back in turn and kind. Still, your observation did have a certain ring of truth to it. Thanks for the perspective! Tip off Posted August 18, 2008 4:35 PM
- Skeeter and Tipsy, you are both missing the point. The current administration has broke the mold on conflict management. The ability of contractors to perform large swaths of Iraqi management is radical. . . Can you imagine the future in which military will no longer be needed to wage conflict management. We can count on private industry through contracts to accomplish the task. The contractors in turn can save costs further by hiring foreign nationals, and by setting up shell offices in foreign countries and thereby escape burdensome US laws and regulations. This is a win-win for everyone: military will not be burdened by excessive overseas duty, companies will make lots of money, and citizens and their elected representatives will be relieved by the unnecessary oversight & regulation caused by the dead hand of burdensome government. Whether you like or dislike the current government, you have to admire its creativity. The previous leftist administration by comparison was bland, all it could do was create a government surplus, cut the size of government, and generate economic prosperity. Where is the excitment in that? Paul Saunders Posted August 16, 2008 10:45 AM
- Flash/Bang !!! Well rest assured there won't be and flash or bang with Obama. Try poor house. Tipsy the military isn't a faucet that you just turn on and off, it takes years for them to get up to speed not counting $$$ and equipment, so please be honest in your attributions. I noticed that you bring up 9/11 if your renown president had taken Bin Laden when he was offered rather than allowing him to migrate to Afghanistan than the issue would have been avoided. It easy to pass blame if your unwilling to let history account for the facts. Yes see you in Nov, right now McCain is leading in the polls so as least the voting public understand what's at stake 1 candidate has gravitas and the other has the same experience as my paperboy Dan ketter Posted August 14, 2008 3:32 PM









