italco's Place

Government information blog with an Anti-Corruption agenda.

  • Country First

    • While we don't fault all his positions, but we do reject his positions on the Federal Land Initiatives,... fb.me/1eaDt0rB4Demand Ethics and Accountability 1 year ago
    • Great example of unity...walk into enemy territory and find common ground. Well done Madam President! fb.me/4Y1pMUj9dDemand Ethics and Accountability 1 year ago
    • This is ridiculous for our political leaders to be so heavily involved in this issue. Having Militia groups... fb.me/2AcjoDMPfDemand Ethics and Accountability 1 year ago
    • Trump has lost control of the hatred he inspires and the Republicans have lost control of the Candidate they... fb.me/5d01fuWnqDemand Ethics and Accountability 1 year ago

Another Government Agency Mis-managed…The Pentagon?

Posted by italco on June 4, 2009

pentagonWIKIPEDIA

The Pentagon spent more than $2.7 billion on “miscellaneous items” in 2008 for which the contractor was listed as “not available” — a rare omission for Defense Department documentation — according to an Aerospace DAILY analysis of an independent national database of government contracting data.

Altogether, Pentagon miscellaneous-item expenses tallied about $7 billion in 2008, making that the eighth highest Defense Departure expenditure item for the year, the Aerospace DAILY analysis showed. (See charts pp. 6-8.) This marks the first time that “miscellaneous items” has cracked the list of top 20 Pentagon expenses this decade.

Not only did the “not available” contractors account for 38 percent of the total amount of money the Pentagon designated for miscellaneous-item expenses, but the unnamed companies also accounted for 85 percent of the 7,590 category transactions.

There is little doubt the omission was intentional. In dozens of cases, the contractor listing was misspelled as “availiable.” Also, the “Dunn’s number” — a corporate identification number — provided for all of the “not available” contractors is 01234567, and the vendor’s name is listed as the General Services Administration, which is the federal government’s general purchasing agent. http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/CONTRACT052209.xml

I realize the Pentagon is going to have secrete expenses in order to operate effectively. I also realize “we” shouldn’t know everything they do. That being said, I smell a huge fishy odor with this kind of accounting practice in one of our “TOP” and most respected government agencies. I would expect this from HUD over the melt down of the housing market or even the Treasury Dept. since they were trying to CYA over the collapse of our economy, but “The Pentagon”….why? They shouldn’t have any reason to hide their spending. We were/are at war, it could easily be explained away. It is the obvious attempt to CYA that makes them look suspicious.

It is time to do an “AUDIT” on all of our government agencies and let the truth erase the past.

 

“Beat The Drum”

(go here to get info on your representatives)  https://italco.wordpress.com/politics-anti-government-corruption/ 

Advertisements

8 Responses to “Another Government Agency Mis-managed…The Pentagon?”

  1. Lette said

    I find it so hard to believe that the Federal Government would be so relaxed on GAAP! They should be forced to update their Chart of Accounts and give these items names… reclassifying entries! This is BS!

  2. Auntiebjw said

    Some of those no bid contracts no doubt resulted from the “clean up” after 911. They moved things so fast that there was no way they could place the work out for bid.

    • italco said

      and these are just the “miscellaneous items” we are talking about here…2.7 Billion in Misc…completely out of line.

  3. ctlss said

    Thanks, italco. I couldn’t agree more. There is no reason for this type of accounting practices. They need to open the books and show where, what, why, when, and who these monies were disbursed to. It is ridiuclous that any agency in OUR government is allowed to use OUR money and be unable, or unwilling, to account for what they did.

    • italco said

      The problem there ctlss, this is the Pentagon. Not so easy to open books here…I think this is where a good deal of the missing money was hiden though.

  4. Thank you Italco, although now I’m fuming. Take a deep breath…there must be legitimate reasons for such generalizations in accounting. Oh, wait a second, I can’t think of any!! grrrrr

    • italco said

      YNB – I understand the irritation but find it curious how all of it occurred as the past admin was leaving with all those no bid contracts that were awarded. I hope it is investgated and that all of the recipient contractors, of the no bid contracts during that time, get audited by the IRS and have to, at the very least, pay taxes on the tax dollars they received.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: