Congressman John Murtha’s mystery earmark sounds familiar. I got one ten years ago when I was assigned to the Defense Logistics Agency.
I was overseeing several R&D projects for improving distribution when my boss handed me a single sheet of paper with a short paragraph stating I had a million dollars for an additional “R&D” study. I was to investigate the feasibility of using third party logistics providers for DLA. The topic was strange for a reason I’ll get to, but the strangest part was I had to make sure the study was completed by a “not-for-profit trucking research institute engaged exclusively in motor-carrier R&D”. Apparently the one-legged, left-handed, harpsichordist was other-wise engaged.
“Does the person who sent this requirement know DLA already makes extensive use of third party logistics?” I asked my boss. It was a little late to ask if using third party logistics providers was feasible; clearly it was. His wasn’t to reason why, however. He did tell me the requirement came from Headquarters and gave me a name of a contact.
Several phone calls later I traced the requirement to DLA’s legislative liaison office. They told me the requirement came from the House Appropriations committee. They thought John Murtha was the one responsible for generating it. Anyway they didn’t know it was in the conference report (104-863) until a one-legged harpsichord playing lobbyist asked when DLA was going to spend that money.
“Well I would like to talk to the House staffers about the requirement” I said. I was informed they didn’t usually make themselves available to the little people. Or something to that effect. “Well it’s important because we will be wasting a million dollars asking a question we already have an answer for”. My new liaison friend told me he would see what he could do.
A week later I got a call from the Headquarters requirements office. The fellow told me they had a congressional inquiry about my new feasibility study. “Great!” I thought, “The little people have been heard!” It was a short lived thought because the staffer continued “We need to know why you are conducting this study”
“Uh, that’s my question” I said as I entered the logistics version of Abbot and Costello’s routine Who’s on first? “I have no idea why I’m supposed to do this study”.
Abbott asked “Then why are you doing it?”
I ended this see-saw by asking Abbott who gave him the congressional inquiry. He got it from my week-old buddy in the legislative liaison office. “They got an inquiry from a congressional constituent down in Richmond”
“Uh, I happen to be that constituent down in Richmond”
“Damn it!, you know how much work you’ve caused us”
The headquarters folks eventually gave me the riot act about how “mine wasn’t to reason why” either. They weren’t going to make an issue of the waste. They weren’t going to make waves. I was to spend the money on the study.
Needless to say I was ticked with the spineless folks at DLA in 1997. So my respect goes to Anne Kolton, the DoE spokesman and those within DoE who put John Murtha on the spot:
DoE spokeswoman Anne Kolton said yesterday the earmark is not a program that meets the department’s “mission critical” threshold, noting it was “inconsistent” with the department’s 2008 budget.
More to come…
An online credit card should be used more cautiously. A creditcard is meant to help you in spending, not accentuate it. To start investing, you need more desperate measures than an insurance. AN insurance quote cannot save you from impending doom.
Posted by Dave Calder on July 23, 2007 9:58 PM
| Permalink
