Byron Dorgan

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I will support that request, but I want to mention to my colleague from Montana that prior to going to the final vote, I believe Senator Reid wishes time to speak. So I want to make sure that is preserved prior to final passage.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I am not going to belabor the discussion. I think all Members understand what this is. This vote will be on whether we decide to provide a humanitarian relief piece in the legislation that otherwise does not allow a soldier--who went to Iraq to fight for America's freedom in Iraq, won the Bronze Star, and comes back here to have the freedom--to go see a sick child in Cuba. Why? Because there is no humanitarian relief in the regulation that was passed by the President. I am not going to go on at great length. I have spoken about this three times. It is not just about this soldier but about others. When I called down to the Treasury Department, they said: No, there is no opportunity for this soldier to go see a sick child. In fact, we have people calling here saying, My mother is going to die on Sunday according to the doctor, and we say, Sorry you can't go. That is the regulation. The new regulation says you get one visit in 3 years. If you had that visit, no matter what is happening to your family in Cuba, you can't go. Period. So this young man goes to Iraq, fights for his country, wins the Bronze Star, and doesn't have the freedom to go see his sick child in Cuba. That is wrong, and everybody in this Chamber ought to know it.

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. I concur with my colleague that we will indeed try to fix this conference.

Mr. DORGAN. I concur and suggest we address this error through the conference report.

Mr. DORGAN. I agree with the distinguished Senator from Montana that this is the intent of the committee bill, and the Senate expects the administration to fund the BIA Water Technician Training program at the current level of $400,000.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I thank the Senators from the State of New Jersey. This program sounds very important but how does the Rahway Valley Sewerage Authority plan to tackle this large task?

Mr. DORGAN. I would be happy to assist with such a request for a GAO audit of the Forest Service's competitive sourcing initiative.

Mr. DORGAN. I am indeed. The Senator should be proud to have such a jewel in his State. Lake Mead is not only a great recreation site within Nevada's borders, but is known worldwide for its clean waters and the unforgettable Hoover Dam that was a vital public works project during the Great Depression. I understand that the project that the distinguished minority leader is concerned with was included in the President's budget as one of the Park Service's main priorities. Is that correct?

Mr. DORGAN. I agree with the Senators from New Jersey that the Highlands Region is a vital national resource. If there are funds available in the conference report, I will work with the Senators to see if we can secure the funding needed to protect this region.

Mr. DORGAN. I thank the Senator. My State has several Indian tribes as well, and I am aware of the challenges that they face. I assure the minority leader that the committee is aware of the Indian health needs in Nevada and expects that IHS will, No. 1, continue to meet and discuss with the 22 tribes in Nevada, as well as the Intertribal Health Board of Nevada and the Intertribal Health Board of Nevada, in an effort to find ways to improve the delivery and quality of health services to Native Americans in Nevada, and, No. 2, will report back to the committee in writing, with recommendations, on how to improve secondary and tertiary care in Nevada.

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, will the majority leader yield for a question on the schedule?

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent we be allowed to have the majority leader respond to a question.

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, those amendments have all been cleared by both sides. I have no objection.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, we are on the Interior appropriations bill, waiting for additional debate. All amendments have been offered, but we are waiting for additional debate on some amendments. I am going to seek to speak in morning business.

Mr. DORGAN. Yes.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak in morning business for 10 minutes.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, to follow up on an issue I raised yesterday, I have not yet received a return call from the State Department. As I indicated, Karl Rove and the chief of staff at the White House had sent word to me following my discussion with Karl Rove last Friday that Mr. Zoellick at the State Department would be handling this issue. The issue is Mr. Carlos Lazo, a marine who fought in Iraq and won the Bronze Star for bravery and courage, came back to this country. He is a fellow who fled Cuba on a raft in 1992. His wife and children remain in Cuba unable to leave. He went to fight in the National Guard, went to Iraq to fight for this country, earned a Bronze Star last November in Iraq. He came back to this country to find out that his son was quite ill in Cuba. He wanted to go visit his son and was told he can't travel to Cuba because the President's current regulations and rules say you can only visit once every 3 years. This young man who fled Cuba, came to this country, put on America's uniform, fought for this country in Iraq, won a Bronze Star fighting for freedom, comes back to this country. He doesn't have the freedom to go to see his sick child in Cuba. That is unbelievable to me. Why? Because there is no humanitarian exemption in the travel to Cuba regulation the President proposed several years ago. I have asked all the folks involved: Do you mean there is no flexibility at all in this regulation proposed by the President? None at all, they said. We have people calling. Their mothers are dying in Cuba, and we won't let them go. You can only go once every 3 years. So Mr. Zoellick did tell me he is looking into it. I haven't heard back from him. Sergeant Lazo, who is walking around with a Bronze Star awarded by this country for his heroism on the battlefield, does not apparently have the freedom to go see his sick son. I will continue to ask these questions of the administration. Incidentally, I have offered an amendment on this legislation. I agree it is going to take a two-thirds vote, but I want to see the people in the Senate who want to vote against giving this marine the opportunity to go see his sick child. It is not just him. It is all the other people caught in the web of this bizarre travel restriction. In an attempt to slap around Fidel Castro, we have decided to restrict the freedom of the American people to travel to Cuba. What a strange thing that is. We can travel to Communist China, Vietnam, but you can't go see your sick child in Cuba. You can't take your father's ashes to distribute on the church grounds of the church he ministered at in Cuba, after your dad died and his last wishes were to have his ashes distributed on the church property in Cuba. When you do that, you get hit with a big fine. It is unbelievable. I won't go on except to say that I continue to wait by the phone for a call back from Mr. Zoellick who apparently is handling this. My hope is they will find a way to do the right thing. My hope is the Senate will be able to vote on this in the next day, and maybe the Senate will decide what the right thing is. The right thing is for humanitarian reasons to allow this courageous soldier who fought for freedom to have the freedom to go see his sick child. Halliburton

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me describe a hearing I chaired yesterday morning. It was a hearing on the subject of Halliburton. Typically, Halliburton has put out a statement saying that it was political. They have been saying this is political for a long while. I held a hearing because the authorizing committee won't. This is the fifth hearing I have held. The highest civilian official in the Department of Defense, working with the Corps of Engineers, testified at that hearing. She was describing the meetings during which Halliburton was awarded no-bid contracts worth billions of dollars. She said: I can unequivocally state that the abuse related to contracts awarded to KBR [the subsidiary of Halliburton] represents the most blatant and improper contract abuse I have witnessed during the course of my professional career. She insisted these things be done right. They weren't done right. These were sweetheart deals, worth billions of dollars, given to a company without competition for the bid, companies that had an inside track to get the money, get the bid, and they did. Let me describe one more piece of testimony from an employee of this company. We have had testimony from many others who worked for this company in the country of Iraq under the contract given to Halliburton. This is from an employee of Halliburton who testified yesterday. He was involved in food service, providing food to our troops: Food items were being brought into the base that were outdated or expired as much as a year. We were told by the [Halliburton] food service managers to use these items anyway. They are feeding the American troops, and they are receiving food that has an expired date on it; some as much as a year ago have expired. They said give it to the troops anyway. This food was fed to the troops. Continuing to quote: A lot of these were frozen foods: Chicken, beef, fish, and ice cream. For trucks that were hit by convoy fire and bombings [during delivery], we were told to go into the trucks and remove the food items and use them after removing the bullets and any shrapnel from the bad food that was hit. I will say that again: We were told to go into the trucks and remove the food items and use them after removing the bullets and any shrapnel from the bad food that was hit. We were told to turn the removed bullets over to the managers for souvenirs. When I had the military check some of the food shipments, they would turn the food items away. But there wasn't any making of the record, so KBR [Halliburton] just sent the food to another base for use. It is unbelievable. We are talking about feeding soldiers here, and this is an employee of the company that was receiving billions of dollars to feed soldiers. In fact, what caught my attention about this issue is that Halliburton was charging us to feed 42,000 soldiers a day, and it turns out they were only feeding 14,000 soldiers. They were billing the Government for 42,000 soldiers and feeding 14,000. I didn't know they were feeding soldiers food that had expired on its label, food that had come in trucks that had been attacked with bullets and shrapnel embedded in the food to be removed first and then provided to the superiors for souvenirs. This is unbelievable. Everybody here talks about honoring America's soldiers. What kind of honor exists in providing a sole-source, no-bid contract worth billions of dollars to a company that is feeding food to our soldiers that is outdated or expired on its label? They say do it any way, it doesn't matter, it is just soldiers. This is just one more example. Every time we hear this sort of thing, we get Halliburton putting out a statement that says this is just politics because the Vice President used to run Halliburton. We didn't talk about the Vice President yesterday. This is a company that got a sweetheart deal at the Pentagon and there are stories after stories of abuse. There was one about the guy who came to our hearing some while ago, and he held up a hand towel. He was in charge of buying supplies such as hand towels. Well, the hand towels he would have bought for the soldiers weren't what his boss wanted. He bought the ones his bosses wanted to buy; they were almost double the price. Why? They wanted the company logo on the hand towel. The taxpayers get bilked, and it increased the price of the hand towels used by soldiers. Unbelievable. The stories we have heard are hard to believe. They ordered 50,000 pounds of nails, but they came in the wrong size. They are now dumped in the desert in Iraq. It is just a mistake. How about driving $85,000 trucks and when you get a flat tire, you leave the truck. An $85,000 new truck gets a flat tire or has a plugged fuel pump--just trash the truck, leave it beside the road and somebody torches it. The stories are astounding every time we hear them. Mr. President, every time we hold a hearing, we have the same response. I am not interested in holding any more hearings. I have held five. The only reason we will hold hearings is the authorizing committee won't. You would think somebody would be halfway interested in this kind of fraud. Some of it is abuse or recklessness. I will tell you one other thing. This is Mr. Rory Mayberry, former food production manager at KBR, a subsidiary of Halliburton. He happens to be in Baghdad at this minute, but he is not working for Halliburton. He is working for another contractor. Here is what Mr. Mayberry said. He said: When the Government auditors came to try to determine what they were doing, I was told all of the employees were told don't you dare talk to a Government auditor. Don't you speak to them. If you do, one of two things will happen. No. 1, you are either going to be transferred to an area where there is hostile activity, in a fire zone, or you are going to be fired. He talked to an auditor at one point, and he was sent to Fallujah during the fighting. That is the way they handled him. Then he quit. It is unbelievable. They are telling employees you may not speak to auditors under the threat of being fired. You cannot talk or cooperate with Government auditors. Why? I suppose the reason is because this sort of nonsense is going on. They have a sole-source contract, a noncompetitive contract, with billions of dollars going out the door. There is massive waste, abuse and, yes, I believe, fraud. Now, we know there is, at this point, slightly more than $1 billion in billing to the Federal Government by Halliburton, which has a sole-source contract worth billions. We know there is $1 billion that has been formally objected to by the Pentagon. There is about $440 million above that for which there is not sufficient documentation. Yet, this Congress seems to be willing to snore through all of this. In 1941, right on the edge of the Second World War, Harry Truman was a Democrat and here on the floor of the Senate. There was a Democrat in the White House. Maybe it was uncomfortable to have a Democratic Senator going after waste, fraud, and abuse in the military in contracting, but he did. They went after it for 6 years. I am sure Franklin Delano Roosevelt didn't like it, but the Truman committee, as it was known, held hundreds of hearings and, in 1940 dollars, saved $16 billion. Would that, could that, should that happen now? The answer is yes. Would it or could it? Probably not because no one is interested in having these hearings--no one. Is the White House interested in having hearings like this? Absolutely not. Is anybody going to respond to the question of whether expired food is being fed to soldiers? Will one person stand up downtown at the White House or at the Pentagon and demand answers now? Will there be one hearing by the authorizing committee? Will one person be angry enough to decide this should not happen any longer? I doubt it. Month after month after month, through five hearings, nobody seems to give a damn about this. We have soldiers eating bad food, taxpayers being bilked, and nobody seems to care. Somebody should. This Congress has little reason to hold its head high when it decides to ignore these kinds of things. It is not of great interest to me to continue to hold hearings through our policy committee, but I will do it if the authorizing committees will not. I don't have the foggiest idea why somebody would want to have an authorizing committee if they weren't interested in following the trail of wrongdoing. Look, this doesn't take an ``Inspector Clouseau.'' You don't need a funny looking hat to track this down. It is all out in front of you. The whole case is laid out. Yet, nobody seems to care. We don't honor these soldiers, such as Sergeant Lazo, by saying you can fight for freedom and earn a Bronze Star, but you don't have the liberty or the freedom to go see your sick child. We don't honor our soldiers by deciding it is OK for someone to feed them bad food or expired food. I hope perhaps all those who talk about honoring soldiers will decide that honor means a responsibility to follow up. We have had these discussions on the floor of the Senate before about uparmoring humvees and other things. Every time it is raised, it is political, we are told. Perhaps sometimes we should understand there are areas of serious policy, serious concern that ought to embrace the time of this Congress. We spend so much time on things that have so little importance. I said yesterday that this is a Congress that has tended to treat the light too seriously and the serious too lightly and important things that really matter and really make a difference in people's lives are largely not the center of debate here in the Congress. I regret that. We can, and should, do much better. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record, following my presentation, the entire testimony of Rory Mayberry, former food production manager at Halliburton's KBR.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record, following my remarks, the formal statements presented yesterday by the highest ranking civilian official in the Corps of Engineers at the Pentagon, Bunnatine Greenhouse.

Mr. DORGAN. She is a woman who had a wonderful career for a long time, was given high marks always, clearly someone with a sterling reputation and a great career, who ran afoul of the ``old boy's network,'' it appears to me, in the Pentagon when they decided they wanted to steer certain contracts in certain ways. She said: You are not following regulations. That is the wrong thing to do, and we are going to see waste, fraud, and abuse as a result of it. She would not go along with it all. Guess what. They decided to tell her that, despite all those glowing performance evaluations, they are changing their mind on her if she would not go along, so she was either going to be demoted or fired. She testified yesterday, when she was told by the acting general counsel of the Corps of Engineers that it would not be in her best interest to speak publicly about these things. Oh, really? I thank her for the courage and the others for their courage. I also thank Rory for the courage to speak out. I suppose it would be easier not to speak out. I will read the last sentence of the second paragraph of the statement of Bunnatine Greenhouse: I can unequivocally state that the abuse related to contracts awarded to KBR [Halliburton] represents the most blatant and improper contract abuse I have witnessed during the course of my professional career. I continue to ask the question: Is there somebody here who cares? Is there somebody who has the reins of an authorizing committee that cares enough to begin a real investigation or shall we continue to hold hearings in the Policy Committee only because nobody else will? I yield the floor. Exhibit I transcript of the testimony of rory mayberry, former food production manager, kbr, senate democratic policy committee, june 27, 2005 My name is Rory Mayberry. I'm sorry that I'm not able to be there in person to testify to the Committee, but I returned to Iraq on June 14. I am working as a Medical Examiner and Medic Supervisor for a company called Emergent Services. I wanted to testify today about my experience working with Halliburton in Iraq. I was hired by Halliburton subsidiary KBR in January 2004 as the Food Production Manager for a dining hall at Camp Anaconda, Iraq. I worked under the Halliburton's LOGCAP contract from February 2004 until Apri1 2004. When I was assigned to the dining facility, KBR managers informed me that there were KBR practices that were to be followed everyday. These practices led to major overcharges. First, KBR was supposed to feed 600 Turkish and Filipino workers meals according to their custom. Although KBR charged the government for this service, it didn't prepare the meals. Instead, these workers were given leftover food in boxes and garbage bags after the troops ate. Sometimes there were no leftovers to give them. Second, KBR charged the government for meals it never served to the troops. Until late 2003, anaconda was a transition site for army personnel. Because there could be large numbers of extra personnel passing through everyday, KBR would charge for a surge capacity of 5,000 troops per meal. However, KBR continued to charge for the extra headcount even after Anaconda was no longer a transition site. When I questioned these practices, the managers told me that this needed to be done because KBR lost money in prior months, when the government suspended some of the dining hall payments to the company. The managers said that they were adjusting the numbers to make up for the suspended payments. I would prepare food orders each week in order to get the food we needed at the camp in the coming week. The KBR managers would triple the order every week to bring in much more food than we needed. They did this because they were charging an extra 5,000 troops they weren't actually feeding. Most of this food went to waste though. Third, KBR paid too much for the food itself. Initially, a company called Tamimi Catering was KBR's sub-contractor for the food. Tamimi paid local prices for the food products in the towns and cities around the base in addition to orders sent to their main office. Tamimi's pricing was fair for the condition of the country. Then, KBR switched to a new supplier, PWC. PWC's prices were almost triple what Tamimi's were. For example, tomatoes cost about $5 a box locally, but the PWC price was $13 to $15 per box. The local price for a 15- pound box of bacon was $12, compared to PWC's price of $80 per box. PWC charged a lot for transportation because they brought the food from Philadelphia. KBR switched from Tamimi to PWC because Tamimi complained about KBR's poor treatment of its staff; they were living in tents with sand floors and no beds. There were other problems that were not related to KBR's costs: Food items were being brought into the base that were outdated or expired as much as a year. We were told by the KBR food service managers to use these items anyway. This food was fed to the troops. A lot of these were frozen foods: chicken, beef, fish, and ice cream. For trucks that were hit by convoy fire and bombings, we were told to go into the trucks and remove the food items and use them after removing the bullets and any shrapnel from the bad food that was hit. We were told to turn the removed bullets over to the managers for souvenirs. When I had the military check some of the food shipments, they would turn the food items away. But there wasn't any marking of the record, so KBR just sent the food to another base for use. The problem with expired food was actually worsened with the switch to PWC because it took longer for the food items to get to the base as they were shipped from the U.S. to a warehouse in Kuwait. KBR also paid for spoiled food. When Tamimi dropped off food, there was often no place to put it in to the freezers or refrigeration. Food would stay in the refrigeration and freezer trucks until they ran out of fuel. KBR wouldn't refuel the trucks so the food would spoil. This happened quite a bit. In addition, KBR would cater events for KBR employees, like management parties and barbecues. This happened about 3 times a week. As a result, there were shortages of certain food items, such as beef, chicken, pork, salads, dressings, and sodas for the troops. The food service personnel were given sanitation rules from the Military Preventive Medicine information programs and rules to follow by the Armed Forces, but KBR managers informed us that the information was not to be followed, that they knew best, and to keep following their instructions. So our employees weren't following sanitation rules as set forth. Also, the Iraqi subcontract drivers of food convoys that arrived on the base were not fed. They were given MREs, or meals ready to eat, with pork, which they couldn't because of religious reasons. As a result, the drivers would raid the trucks for food. Government auditors would have caught and fixed many of the problems. But KBR managers told us not to speak with auditors. The managers themselves would leave the base or hide from the auditors when they were on the base and not answer the radios when we called for them. We were told to follow instructions or get off the base. The threat of being sent to a camp under fire was their way of keeping us quiet. The employees that talked to the auditors were moved to the other bases that were under more fire then Anaconda. If they refused to move, they were fired and sent home. I personally was sent to Fallujah for 3 weeks. The manager told me I was being sent away until the auditors were gone because I had opened my mouth to the auditors. When I returned from Fallujah, the convoy was attacked. I was put in danger because the KBR managers didn't want me to talk with U.S. government auditors. When KBR wanted me to go to Tikrit, I headed home on rotation. I wasn't officially fired and I didn't formally quit. I am happy to answer any questions the Committee may have for me. Mr. Mayberry, representatives of the Senate Democratic Policy Committee have provided me with several questions that they would like me to ask you now. Can I begin asking you those questions? Q: Are you saying that Halliburton deliberately falsified the number of meals they prepared, and then submitted false claims for reimbursement, and that they did this to make up for past amounts auditors had disallowed? A: Yes. Q: So, when they couldn't get reimbursed legitimately, they committed fraud by submitting these false bills? A: Yes. Q: How many meals were served at the dining hall each day? A: 2,500 meals, per meal, times four. There were four meals, breakfast, lunch, dinner and a midnight meal. Q: So, every day, Halliburton was charging for 20,000 meals it never served? A: Correct. They were charging for 20,000 meals, and they were only serving 10,000 meals. Q: Was it rare for expired food to be served to the troops? A: No. It was an everyday occurrence, sometimes every meal. Q: You've described routine overcharging and unsanitary practices by Halliburton, as well as shortages of food items for troops because of private Halliburton parties. Halliburton managers were not only aware of these practices, they ordered them, is that correct? A: Correct. Q: How senior were these managers? A: The managers, the main manager was a manager of all of Iraq, assigned by KBR. Q: So these practices may have been ordered at other dining halls in Iraq? A: Most likely, yes. Q: When government auditors arrived, these senior managers deliberately avoided them? A: Yes. Q: And these senior managers ordered you and other employees not to discuss your concerns with the auditors? A: Yes. We were informed if we talked, we would be rotated out to other camps that were under fire. Q: Is it fair to say that the managers used the threat of transfer to a more dangerous base to intimidate employees into keeping quiet? A: Yes. Q: When employees did talk to auditors, what happened? A: All the employees that did talk to the auditors were switched out to other camps or fired because they refused to go to the other camps. Q: Is there anything else you'd like us to know? A: Not at this time. Thank you for your testimony, Mr. Mayberry.

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, if I might make a point, because of the way the order is established, it could be 5 minutes after 3, but the Senator from Ohio will be in line following the Senators who have just been described by Senator Burns as having time. It should turn out 10 minutes, 15, 10, and 10, and it should turn out to be just about the time the Presiding Officer leaves the chair.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me see if we can clear this up without taking more substantial time. Senator Isakson wants to speak for 10 minutes in morning business. We decided following that Senator Murray would be recognized. She sought 15 minutes to speak on her amendment. Following that, Senator Akaka was to have been recognized for 10 minutes. At that point, before Senator Kerry came in, we had indicated the Senator from Ohio would be recognized, and then Senator Kerry from Massachusetts has asked to be recognized without a time limit. The one thing that is unclear to me is how much time the Senator from Ohio wishes. I know he wants to speak on his amendment.

Mr. DORGAN. I think we can lock all of that in understanding the Senator from Ohio could take the 10 minutes and then Senator Kerry from Massachusetts would be recognized. I think that actually works out to about 3 o'clock, in any event.

Mr. DORGAN

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, while we are waiting, I ask unanimous consent to add Senator Jeffords and Senator Salazar as cosponsors to the Murray amendment.