I hate to admit this, but I can do a pretty good vocal impression of Mr. Haney, the loveable--but somewhat shady--salesman supreme on the 1960’s TV show "Green Acres". The character of Mr. Haney was played by a since deceased actor named Pat Buttram—what a character he was.
Mr. Haney’s vocal enunciation is immediately recognizable and usually elicits a strong crowd reaction. I learned this years ago when I first started breaking into my Mr. Haney voice to add a bit of levity to informal business meetings or in an attempt to amuse (or offend) a captive audience in local bars and restaurants. My girlfriend absolutely hates it when I break into a few lines of my best Mr. Haney impression in the middle of a James Taylor or Willie Nelson song at the local pub while singing Karaoke.
Mr. Haney, the quintessential salesman, was always quick to show up in the story line of most Green Acres episodes with his truck loaded with items he thought necessary to sate the consumer appetites of Mr. And Mrs. Douglas’ latest situation. Things like the telephone at the top of the telephone pole, the tractor that never worked, genuine imitation sheepskin house slippers, or elaborate preplanned/prepaid wedding accoutrements for Eb or Miss Ralph Monroe (one of the Monroe Brothers) were always in his extensive inventory of products & services.
I’ve also learned that Mr. Haney, like the evil Cheney/Halliburton Empire, is either loved or hated, and it usually doesn’t take very long to find out the disposition of your audience once your make first mention of either name. The reaction to the name Halliburton, constantly vilified by democrats and their abettors in the mainstream media, usually occurs on a knee-jerk basis—not on the basis of detailed facts and knowledge of the business conducted on their behalf.
I am willing to make a substantial bet that 95% of the voting population knows nothing about this issue except that there is some implied “suspicion of wrongdoing” in Halliburton's business dealings with the taxpayers and that there is some (in my opinion-unwarranted) “measure of contempt” for Dick Cheney because he comes to the office of Vice President from a short, successful stint in the private business sector rather than an entire lifetime of being on the public payroll as a career politician. What is so wrong with being a successful businessman? Everything, say the liberals…you can’t be rich without being evil, unless you inherited the money or are an ambulance chasing trial lawyer like Democratic Vice Presidential Candidate John Edwards.
So grab a bottle of overpriced chilled water, sit back, and read, as I intend to give everyone a short primer in the details of the business of Haliburton (as apposed to that of my idol, Mister Haney.)
In spite of what the media says, Halliburton has in fact not been handed giant, overpriced government contracts by the evil President Bush and Vice-President Cheaney without competitive bidding. In fact, Halliburton is, like other giant multi-national contractors Bechtel, ABB, Dyncorp, etc., is a veteran supplier of everything from basic necessities like toilet paper, gasoline delivery, and manpower; to complicated turn-key construction projects like pipelines, hydroelectric dams, and roads.
The bidding process involves looking at a very wide ranging list of materials and services and providing a material, labor, and delivery cost for large quantities, delivered in very far flung, dangerous, world wide locations, under variable and sometimes adverse conditions. The government every two to four years usually issues the fixed price request for quotations and resulting contracts. The contracts are issued on a sliding scale of pricing that depends largely on world events and the quantities of product that is actually delivered. The purpose of issuing request for bids and negotiating contracts up front is the idea that it saves time and money in the day-to-day operational situations or more recently in the “heat of battle.” The contracts aren’t NO-BID, they’re PRIOR BID.
In fact, Halliburton bid on and won essentially the same type contracts for the provision of material and services during the Reagan, Bush Sr., and Clinton administrations. Yes, you heard right, President Clinton contracted with Halliburton for services. Call the NY Times! Call the National Enquirer! Call someone that really is informed and really cares. This isn’t a scandal…this isn’t cronyism; this is normal, day-to-day, government material contracting in action. It might not be perfect, it might not be the most efficient way, and it might not yield the absolute cheapest results, but Halliburton didn’t invent it and hasn’t done anything different than every other large contractor in a position to fill the shoes the military has asked them to fill.
Case in point, the uproar over “excessive billing for gasoline delivery in Iraq.”
How much would you charge for you or your loved one to drive your tanker truck with 1000 gallons of gasoline (1 gallon = approx. 1 stick of dynamite) into the war zone of Iraq? How much would you charge if you could cut the length of the delivery route by 75%. It would certainly cost more in Iraq than it does in South Georgia or central Indiana and it sure costs more to drive 500 miles than to drive 100. Well, the so-called over-priced gasoline that Halliburton was accused of delivering came from our ally, Kuwait, via the resulting short delivery distance between Kuwait and Baghdad.
Yes, the Kuwaitis wanted more per gallon for the gasoline (and probably should have cut us a better deal in return for saving their bacon 13 years ago), but the actual price, in delivery miles and further, the likelihood of a successful delivery, most definitely offset the increased cost of gasoline. The gas has no value to the war effort if the truck is blown up, killing the driver and never arriving at the intended destination. The option, by the way, was to drive the Iraqi’s own cheep domestic gasoline from their northern oilfields/refineries, across a torturous, dangerous route of unimproved roads that was three or four times longer than the path from Kuwait. The mainstream media has constantly omitted this little itty bitty logistical detail to this day.
Mean old Halliburton.
Not that I condone waste of taxpayer dollars or fraud, but the “issues” and “scandals” attributed to Halliburton are not unique to this one company, but are representative of systemic problems inherent in government purchasing in this country at all levels from the smallest town councils to the largest of NASA suppliers. The only thing that makes these stories newsworthy is the past connection of Bush and Cheney with oil companies in general and the prior connection of Cheney and Halliburton specifically. Get over it, people…
UPDATE October 10,2004 3:00PM
An article published in the National Review Online addresses another of what I call “itty bitty details” that never make it onto the 6:30 PM evening news or the front page Newspaper stories.
Halliburton’s stock price is down over 10% since Bush’s inauguration in January 2001, while the oil industry stock price in general is up nearly 35%. What a great manipulator of wealth Bush and Cheney have proven to be. I should have bought Haliburton rather than Home Depot (down over 20% since that same time period.)
