Privatizing- the Corporate Takeover

When the concept of privatizing first surfaced on the political landscape it seemed like a good idea whose time had come. Clearly, to save extensive taxpayers funds in the performance of a governmental function seemed like a good idea. Where was the down side ?

Unfortunately the down side is now screamingly apparent and is in the process of taking huge, destructive bites out of good government. It has become a solution in search of a problem, where in pursuit of profit, inattentive or lazy politicians are persuaded to sell a portion of their sovereign responsibility to the smiling face of some generous campaign contributor. The benefits to the politician are several. Firstly, the constituents are persuaded that privatizing will save tax dollars and that their elected officials who favor such moves are looking out for the public. By contracting out the politicians are relieved of further responsibility in the privatizing function, now the responsibility of the contractor whose obligations are supposedly set forth with great specificity in the terms of the contract. Although this is the rubric, it is seldom the actual case. Contracts, framed in vague, rosy, descriptive language setting out ill-defined objectives give the contractor vast cover, maneuvering room to weasel and craw fish, to advance varying interpretations as changes in circumstances or expectations may require. Rarely, if ever, is there any consideration for providing a valid mechanism to determine if real savings have been achieved nor any continuing examination or oversight to determine whether the public interest is being better served since this would require a continuing question as to whether the original decision to privatize was a correct one. What, a continuing responsibility for a political decision ? What a frightening, radical idea that is. Hold politicians responsible for their decisions ?

What is actually happening is that at all levels of government America is for sale, discreet pieces of government on the block, for sale to the highest t bidder. Counties have sold the responsibility to operate its jails to large corporations, Correction Corporation of America, and Wackenhut among others. The contention that this will save tax dollars is pure smoke and mirrors. We now have large executive salaries, as well as profit for the stockholders added to the actual cost of running a jail. Hiring less qualified personnel at lower salaries, creating some risks is part of the formula. Putting the conduct of management beyond the reach of the elected officials and the public is part of the price. Another part of the price is that in the event something goes wrong, County is not off the hook, not relieved of legal responsibility for the operation of the facility despite all of the laudatory language, all the reassurances inserted into the contract documents by the high powered attorneys representing the contractors. Indeed since their clients have secured the management of a large number of jails, they have developed a level of expertise far greater than the legal representative of government, especially when the elected politicians are pushing their staffs to make the deal rather than carefully examine the proposals for the pitfalls, the downside less they call their bosses judgment into question. The State of Florida’s budget in 2003 appropriated 132 million for privatizing contracts.

A careful look at privatizing leads to the conclusion that what we are seeing in the out sourcing of critical governmental functions. On occasion, the actual transfer of governmental function is presented as a mere contract for services, rather than an outright transfer of responsibility.
The recent problems which have surfaced with respect to the acquisition of “new generation” voting machines is a good example where the process of recording and compiling the voting records is claimed to be a “proprietary secret” a black box concept depriving the voters of the ability to audit and verify the correctness of reported results and without any paper trail in effect lets the contractor control the outcome of an election. What greater danger for potential abuse can be imagined yet “lazy” election officials, content to contract out their basic responsibility to the charms of technology have put our very election process in jeopardy.

Privatization has become an aggressive industry. No longer content to be a dormant availability to assist government, Dick Army, a former Republican workhorse in the House, presents it as part of a conservative battle between “Free Market” vs. the corrupt, ever expanding big government. Using seductive terms such as “streamlining ”well funded foundations such as the Reason Foundation have sprung up to promote the new enlightenment, let corporations, not elected government run the country.

Not to be outdone the publishers of legal books have hit the market with a number of “How to” books, targeting both attorneys who work for governments as well as clients who are potential contractors. An interesting document created at taxpayer expense is a GAO report to the “House Republican Task Force on Privatization. “ This tome is essentially a “how to “ outline, to assist the Republican task force in finding lucrative opportunities for their corporate campaign contributors. In the field of education privatizing is achieved, by vouchering, a backdoor way to dismantle public education and funnel money to religious institutions at the same time.

Probably one of the quietest, and most insidious examples of runaway privatization was the virtual gutting of the U. S. Army’s Quartermaster Corps. Although that entity still exists on paper, an examination of the incredible number of contractors in Iraq performing their function staggers the imagination, particularly as to have costs and questionable procurement methods. Not adverse to helping a political friend, the current administration has let multibillion dollar contracts to such entities as , Halliburton, without the benefit of obtaining competitive bids, nor with any great specificity as to mission. Here is a bucket of money, do good. Of course Halliburton, after slicing a huge cut for their own coffers, turns around and sub contracts most of the work out, some to subsidiary companies, totally owned and controlled by themselves but provide a “cut out” so they can take an additional slice for profit. They operate the food services, cafeteria style, transportation, logistics, communications, protection contractors, all receiving huge salaries for performing services formerly performed by the military. Taxpayer savings? It is to laugh.

Vice President Cheney was Secretary of Defense during Ronald Reagan’s administration, when privatizing became all the rage. After leaving DOD he joined Halliburton as CEO, thereby enabling him to catch his own pass. Whether his blind trust hidden behind a “Chinese wall” contains stock options and residual interest in Halliburton is not known. His going away package was 35 million.

One has only to recall the recent attempt to contract our port security concerns to a foreign corporation owned by a foreign Muslim government to demonstrate how deep this rot has gotten nor how dangerous to U.S. interests it has become.

The best, only answer is to elect officials who are willing to perform a difficult job and not “contract out” for a quick fix. Like the man says, “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty”.