| ARMS
TRADE RESOURCE CENTER
CURRENT
UPDATES: August 24, 2005
Dear Friends,
We are safe!! Thank goodness, the city of New York has contracted with military contractor Lockheed Martin to build a surveillance and security systems for the bridges, tunnels, commuter trains and subway system throughout the area. The $200 million project will take three years to put into place, and will use about a third of the money allocated to NYC for Homeland Security.
Senior Research Associate Frida Berrigan was up early yesterday morning to speak about this with Deepa Fernandes on our local Pacifica station. If you are high-tech, you can listen to the segment as a pod-cast (August 24, 2005, 7am segment, wakeupcallradio.blogspot.com/ )
If you can't listen online, my main point was that Lockheed Martin has set up a self-licking ice cream situation for itself. The company profits when we feel unsafe, even if it is also profiting from the wars creating that insecurity. The world's largest and most politically-hardwired military contractor is reaping billions in Pentagon contracts from the United States' war on terrorism- a war that the majority of Americans now say makes them feel less safe- a war that is exacerbating the threats of terrorism in this country and abroad. At the same time the company is carving a niche for itself as a provider of Homeland Security. There is no techno-fix for this war. That was my argument in a nutshell.
Read the profile of Lockheed Martin included in this issue of the ATRC E-Update for more on LM's connections to the Bush administration (especially-big surprise- Dick Cheney).
In this issue we ask the question: Are these bumper or bummer times for the military industrial complex?
On the one hand, military spending continues to rise, the end of the war is nowhere in sight, and the revolving door between the Pentagon and military corporations is in full swing. On the other hand, Republican Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA) is in the dog house (as in under federal investigation) for allegedly exchanging favors with friendly defense contractors.
In this update:
I. A BUMPER CROP OF REVOLVING DOORS
II. THE DUKE OF FAVORS: Randy Duke Cunningham
III. LOCKHEED MARTIN PROFILE
IV. RESOURCES FOR RESEARCHING THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
I. A BUMPER CROP OF REVOLVING DOORS
From his ranch in Crawford, Texas (a site we bet he wishes was undisclosed now that hundreds of anti-war protestors led by Gold Star Mother Cindy Sheehan have camped out there) President Bush announced his nominees for Secretary of the Air Force and Secretary of the Navy last week.
The envelope, please.
Michael W. Wynne, now a senior Pentagon acquisition official tasked with the contentious base-closing process, has been tapped as the new Air Force secretary.
Donald Winter, the head of Northrop Grumman's Mission Systems division, is Bush's pick as new Secretary of the Navy.
Wynne and Winter both ascend to these posts via a trip through the revolving door between the government and defense industry.
WINTER IN WASHINGTON
Donald Winter spent most of his career at TRW, which was bought by Northrop Grumman in 2002. He also spent two years working with DARPA-- the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency in the 1980s.
According to the Northrop Grumman press release congratulating Winter, the nominee is a 30-year veteran of the company, who has also held senior systems engineering and program management positions for a variety of space system programs. The release quotes Northrop Grumman CEO Ronald Sugar as saying ""If Don is confirmed, the expertise he has acquired during a 35-year career devoted to developing defense systems and supporting our military services will serve our nation very well."
Winter might serve our nation well, but as Secretary of the Navy he will definitely be in a position to serve Northrop Grumman well. The company has the contract to build the new DD(X) Destroyer ship for the Navy-at a whopping cost of $4.7 billion apiece warns the Congressional Budget Office. The Navy wants eight to 12 of the gold plated ships, and the company plans to split the work with General Dynamics.
The ships are controversial, in large part because of their hefty-hefty price tag, and CEO Ronald Sugar and others have to be hoping that having a Northrop Grumman man at the helm of the Navy might make for smoother sailing for their DD (X) and their profit margins.
WYNNE/WIN SITUATION
Michael Wynne, up for the post as Secretary of the Air Force, is a former Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics executive who has served as the Pentagon's top acting weapons buyer since 2003. At the Pentagon, Wynne has been the official tasked with overseeing the contentious military base closings process. If confirmed by the Senate, he will be jumping into a whole new set of controversies as Secretary of the Air Force.
The Air Force is having a tough time these days amid allegations of rape and sexual harassment at its Air Force Academy and charges of a hostile climate at the school against those who are not evangelical Christians.
BOEING BOONDOGGLE CONTINUES
These two charges, against the backdrop of the Boeing lease scandal, led Secretary of the Air Force James Roche to quit in January. The Air Force recently jettisoned the whooping $23.5 billion plan to lease Boeing jets as refueling tankers amid a scandal that sent a Boeing Chief Financial Officer and a top Air Force official to prison. Wynne was not unscathed by this impropriety. In fact, as the head of the Pentagon's Acquisitions Office, he pushed the deal, telling the White House Budget Office that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld approved the lease idea "after comprehensive and deliberative review by the Leasing Review Panel" even though the panel had not finished its deliberations or made recommendations. Ooops. The Pentagon's Inspector General report on the leasing scandal faulted Wynne for not requiring the Air Force to follow proper procedures.
The base closings make Congress mad and they might take it out on Wynne in the nominations process. But is he gets stuck in committee, he won't be the first. According to an August 18, 2005 USA Today article, the armed forces Secretaries have all had a hard time holding on to their jobs:
* Former Enron executive THOMAS WHITE was forced to quit as Army secretary in April 2003 after clashing with Rumsfeld over the Crusader mobile artillery system. Rumsfeld canceled the program, saying the big gun was too heavy, slow and expensive.
* JAMES ROCHE was Bush's first pick to replace White, but he withdrew from consideration in March 2004 after it became clear the Senate would not confirm him.
* Navy Secretary GORDON ENGLAND has been waiting for months to be confirmed as Rumsfeld's top deputy. England is in his second tour as civilian head of the Navy, having returned in 2003 after eight months at the Department of Homeland Security when his nominated successor committed suicide.
And, according to an August 12 New York Times article by business reporter Leslie Wayne, nearly one-fourth of the people nominated to the top civilian Pentagon jobs that require Senate approval are trapped in the confirmation pipeline. The article quotes Loren Thompson, a military analyst at the Lexington Institute" as saying "We are a nation at war and two of the three services don't have a head and the third has a head, but no deputy. This is a major problem. For longtime observers, this is the worst confirmation logjam that we've seen."
MORE ON THE BOEING TANKER LEASING DEAL
Project on Government Oversight's Boeing Page
http://pogo.org/p/contracts/TankerLeasingDeal.html
II. THE DUKE OF FAVORS
Randy "Duke" Cunningham has been on Capitol Hill since 1990. But the former "Top Gun" pilot announced recently that he will not run for reelection amid allegations that he accepted improper favors from defense contractors. The companies -- ADCS, Inc and MZM, Inc-- have both benefited from Cunningham's advocacy and intervention in his position as a Senior member of the House Appropriations Committee.
The fact that Cunningham is not running for reelection will have a big impact on companies in the San Diego area he represents. As Tim Ransdell, executive director of the nonpartisan California Institute for Federal Policy Research, notes, "all members of Congress are not created equal, and losing a member of the Appropriations Committee can deal a significant blow to an area*.. There are few positions in Congress where it's easier to bring in special projects for your home district than the Appropriations Committee."
ADCS, Inc.
This company specializes in converting documents into digital form using proprietary software, a task the Department of Defense needs as it modernizes it information services. Since 1999, the company has received $80 million in Pentagon contracts.
Brent Wilkes, the company's CEO, was one of President Bush's "Pioneers" in 2004, an elite group that pledged to gather $100,000 in contributions for the President's reelection bid. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Wilkes and his wife Regina have donated $139,806 to state and federal law makers and "Political Action Committees" between 2001 and 2004.
The contributions seem to have paid off. On August 5th, the San Diego Union Tribune reported that in the past eight years, the Duke's "the defense appropriations subcommittee has repeatedly added funding for ADCS-related projects to the defense budget, even criticizing the Defense Department for not requesting the money itself."
The Duke has used his influence in other ways as well. When the Pentagon's Inspector General froze ADCS' contracts while the office looked into complaints from ADCS competitors alleging favoritism and inappropriate actions, Cunningham called Louis A. Kratz, an assistant deputy undersecretary of defense, asking that the funds be released. Wilkes also felt entitled enough to call and complain. The IG concluded that "irregular procedures" had been used, according to an August 18 Washington Post article and quoted Kratz as saying he had never before experienced anything close to their "meddling" and "arrogance." Wilkes "implied that it was his money," said the Undersecretary, even though the funding was earmarked for a program, not a company.
Wilkes and the Duke are right outside of DC too. In 2002, the San Diego-based Wilkes Foundation, chaired by Brent and Regina, honored Cunningham as someone who "dedicates their lives and careers to serving our country."
The Congressman got more than a plaque from Wilkes. Group W Advisors, a lobbying firm owned by Wilkes, has provided personal air transportation Representative Cunningham and other high-profile passengers like House Majority Leader Tom Delay. These flights are what investigators are looking closely at now. The San Diego Union Tribune points out that the flights may be legal, but they serve as prime examples of how federal contractors and lobbyists use travel and other perks to make friends on Capitol Hill. Senator Russ Feingold, a long time advocate of campaign finance reform, describes the dynamic: "making a corporate jet available for key members of Congress to use for their personal or business travel is a nice way to curry favor with people who can get earmarked appropriations included in massive spending bills, not to mention the chance to put your lobbyist on a five hour flight in the next seat."
MZM, Inc.
Federal investigators are also looking into the Duke's relationships with Mitchell J. Wade, the founder of MZM, a defense contractor specializing in "solving enigmatic" problems for the government and the private sector. Wade stepped down in June, and Veritas Capital, a private equity firm, is buying the company.
As a member of the Appropriations Committee, Cunningham pushed for funding for MZM's classified programs. The company has had $160 million in Pentagon contracts since 2002. The trouble surfaced in June when the Pentagon cut off new work for the firm through its most lucrative contract because a draft Inspector General report found that it had no been competitively awarded under current rules.
News reports of shady favors for the Duke surfaced soon after. It turns out that Wade and Cunningham are pretty close. Wade bought Cunningham's home near San Diego in late 2003, reselling it 3 months later at a $700,000 loss. The home had not been listed with a realtor, leading investigators to wonder if Wade inflated the initial price to gain favor with Cunningham. It's a tidy profit for the Representative, who bought the house with his wife for $400,000 in the 1980s. The Cunningham's new home was a sprawling estate in the upscale Santa Fe community of New Rancho which they bought for more than $2 million. Under the heat lamp of investigation, the pair says they will sell the house and donate the proceeds to charity.
While in Washington, Cunningham lived rent free on Wade's yacht on the Potomac River, paying only the maintenance fees. Cunningham continues to deny wrongdoing, but he has asked his financial contributors to donate to his legal support.
As Gary Jacobsen, a political scientist at the University of California, San Diego, notes that Cunningham is not the only one being lured by defense contractor perks. "Its got to be tempting to allow yourself to be flattered, buttered up, helped, given favors and so forth. It's hard to refuse them unless you very consciously recognize that it is one of the permanent ethical challenges of that life."
III. LOCKHEED MARTIN PROFILE
Frida Berrigan, Printed in the July/August 2005 issue of the Nonviolent Activist
http://www.warresisters.org/nva0705-5.htm
Lockheed Martin, the world's largest weapons contractor, profits spectacularly from Washington's killer preoccupation with nuclear hegemony. The company received $20.7 billion in contracts from the Pentagon in fiscal year 2004. While the Bethesda, MD-based company's position as the United States' preeminent Merchant of Death is well-known, its role in every phase of the nuclear chain is less familiar.
Nuclear Monopolies
Lockheed Martin manages Sandia Laboratories near Albuquerque, NM, where scientists design, manufacture and maintain nuclear weapons. With an annual budget of $2.3 billion, the lab employs more than 7,000 people. Last year, the federal government rewarded Lockheed Martin's "outstanding" performance, extending its $12-million-a-year contract through 2009.
The company is currently bidding on a $60 million contract to manage Los Alamos Laboratory, where nuclear bombs are designed. (Los Alamos and Livermore scientists have designed 71 different warheads for 116 nuclear-weapons systems.) Additionally, Lockheed Martin and Bechtel Corporation are partners in Bechtel Nevada, which manages the 1,375-square-mile Nevada Test Site for the Energy Department.
More than 1,000 Lockheed employees in Sunnyvale, CA, design, assemble and test elements of National Missile Defense. But they're not in it for the money. Rather, as Linda Reiners, Vice President of Missile Defense Program says, National Missile Defense is "a passion, if you will."
The company is the prime contractor for at least five missile defense components, including the Theater High Altitude Area Defense system and the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System. With missile defense funding running about $9 billion for 2005, Lockheed Martin is sitting pretty for more contracts, despite the fact that the missile defense system has never been proven to work.
Lockheed Martin also makes delivery systems for nuclear weapons like the Trident D-5 missile, ten of which are on every Trident submarine. The D-5 missile carries eight 300-475 kilotons of weapons, each the equivalent of 29 Hiroshimas.
But it is not all roses in Lockheed Martin's nuclear monopoly. In November 2004, the company was fined $110 million for failing to clean up a one-acre nuclear wasteland in Idaho Falls. In a 100-page ruling closing a six-year battle, the presiding judge remarked that Lockheed Martin "failed to progress with the work, failed to give adequate assurances that it would perform in the future, and failed to adequately explain its failure to progress."
In many ways, Lockheed Martin, a collection of 17 Cold War-era companies like the Glenn L. Martin Company, American-Marietta and Loral, continues to reap the benefits of the nuclear age while simultaneously prospering from the 21st-century "Global War on Terrorism."
F-117 stealth attack fighters, built by the company in Forth Worth, TX, launched the dramatic opening salvo of "Operation Iraqi Freedom" in Baghdad in March 2003. The company's Paveway II bomb saw its first widespread use in this war. Raytheon and Lockheed Martin shared a $280 million order to produce hundreds more Paveways right before the war started. In March 2003, the Army granted Lockheed Martin a $100 million contract for 212 PAC-3 Patriot missiles for use in Iraq. The company boasted a 27 percent jump in first-quarter earnings for 2005.
Lockheed Martin also benefits from increased spending on "homeland security." The 2006 budget for the Department is $34.2 billion, an almost 7 percent increase over 2005. Already, the company has won billions in Homeland Security contracts, including:
* A $591 million Air Force contract to provide classified and unclassified [information technology] services to Defense Department users; and
* A $600 million-plus Army Information Technology contract to supply services and systems support to the Army's enterprise infrastructure
Who You Know
Is the company reaping contracts by competence alone? Maybe not. President Bush recently appointed former Lockheed Martin lobbyist Philip J. Perry as General Consul for the Department of Homeland Security.
Perry helped the company secure coveted liability insurance after September 11, 2001, to protect itself from lawsuits stemming from the attacks (only eight companies got such insurance). Perry was also a partner at Latham and Watkins, a law firm that represented Lockheed Martin in dealings with the Department.
To top it off, Perry is married to Elizabeth Cheney, the vice president's daughter. The Pittsburgh Post Gazette called the appointment "a pure form of nepotism not usually seen in American government."
Finally, in case nepotism doesn't achieve enough for the company, it also buys influence for cash. It has spent $12.6 million in campaign contributions since 1990 and similar amounts-$11 million-plus in 2000, for example-in fees to lobbying firms.
IV. RESOURCES FOR RESEARCHING THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
1. Top Ten List
Every year, the Department of Defense publishes information on its contractors. The list, which provides details on the "Pentagon's Top 100 Contractors," should be your first stop in research.
From it you can ascertain which companies are receiving the largest contracts, how much contracts have increased or decreased from the past year, and get a more detailed picture on what sort of contracts a company and their subsidiaries are receiving. http://web1.whs.osd.mil/peidhome/procstat/p01/fy2004/top100.htm
2. Military Contracts Information
The Defense Department posts contracts valued at $5 million or more each business day at 5 p.m. and archives them on its site. http://www.defenselink.mil/contracts/
At http://www.defenselink.mil/search/ you can search contracts by company or weapons system.
3. News Searches
Most public or university libraries have Lexus Nexus, ProQuest, or other databases to search newspaper articles for information on companies. Sites like Google News have a "clipping service" function that will send articles with certain key words into your email inbox.
Visit Google News Alerts http://www.google.com/alerts?hl=en to set up a clipping service for your company there.
4. Once you have basic information on what sort of contracts your company is getting and have a sense of the big issues facing them (i.e.: one of their unions is on strike, they are under investigation for selling prohibited technology to Iran or China, one of their heavily subsidized golden programs failed another test or crashed because of a malfunction, the new CEO brought in to "clean house and restore integrity" has been forced to resign because of an adulterous affair with a subordinate, a new Board Member just left the White House or the Senate) you can round out the picture with the money factor: Who gets? Who gives? Who is asking for what?
Take a trip to The Center for Responsive Politics' Open Secrets site where you can search for your company's campaign contributions to elected officials (and lots more). http://www.opensecrets.org/
5. Finally, The National Priorities Project's website has a lot of tools to help you make arguments about how military spending is stripping your community of needed resources. http://www.nationalpriorities.org/
Tools like the "Federal Budget Trade-Offs will help answer questions like: "Could your tax dollars be better spent?"
http://database.nationalpriorities.org/cgi-bin/WebObjects/NPP.woa/wa/tradeoff
Reports
  |  Recent News Coverage  
|  Updates
|