More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Howie Klein

Howie Klein

Posted: October 6, 2009 08:42 PM

Senate Passes Amendment To Prevent KBR and Halliburton From Getting Away With Raping Employees (Literally)

What's Your Reaction?

Today the Senate "debated" the Department of Defense appropriations bill passed by the House (H.R. 3326) for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010. Republicans added frivolous amendments all day, that were defeated one after the other. The amendment du jour, however, came from Al Franken D-MN.

And what a doozy it is! S. Amend. 2588 simply prohibits "the use of funds for any Federal contract with Halliburton Company, KBR, Inc., any of their subsidiaries or affiliates, or any other contracting party if such contractor or a subcontractor at any tier under such contract requires that employees or independent contractors sign mandatory arbitration clauses regarding certain claims." The "certain claims" have to do with sexual assault.

I might have phrased it differently myself -- like "prohibits any member of the executive team and Board of Directors of Halliburton and KBR from ever getting out of prison for any reason whatsoever" or something like that. But my amendment probably wouldn't have gotten many votes, unlike Franken's which passed 68-30, every Democrat being joined by 9 Republicans. (Does anyone know if LeMieux has to call Charlie Crist and get his OK before he votes?)

Franken offered the amendment because a KBR employee, Jamie Leigh Jones, age 19, was raped by a bunch of KBR workers in Iraq and then locked up in a crate when she tried reporting them. After she was rescued and returned to America she was informed that she couldn't take KBR to court because there was some fine print in her -- and everyone else's -- contracts that don't permit any such thing. [See the video below.]

Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, an especially corrupt member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, was the key spokesperson for the GOP against the legislation which he called unfair to Halliburton, one of the biggest Republican Party contributors in history.

 

Follow Howie Klein on Twitter: www.twitter.com/downwithtyranny

Today the Senate "debated" the Department of Defense appropriations bill passed by the House (H.R. 3326) for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010. Republicans added frivolous amendments all day, ...
Today the Senate "debated" the Department of Defense appropriations bill passed by the House (H.R. 3326) for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010. Republicans added frivolous amendments all day, ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 300
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (10 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AmeriGus
Wore On Terror
10:16 PM on 10/08/2009
Everyone should hear what Bush said when confronted in a student symposium about the need for oversight and accountability because crimes were being committed in a lawless atmosphere in Iraq by private contractors.

It's really kind of sad how completely ignorant of the entire issue the President was at the time. I mean completely speechless for any answer at all and ironically, the same student had asked Rumsfeld the same question weeks before and Rumsfeld said she should ask the President - so she did!.....check it out.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_gustav_w_071215_bush_startlingly_ine.htm
03:06 PM on 10/09/2009
Wow....an awkward flashback...just when I had convinced myself his presidency was a tragic-comic nightmare. That's a really doozy of an audiotape.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
edgarcaycedoc
06:33 PM on 10/08/2009
Where "man" can rape to his heart's content? Oh to be employed by KBR now that fall is here! This should be aggressively prosecuted--not only the rapists, but the company (KBR) that enabled and practically recruited the rapists.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
stepper
Lord of the Realm
12:27 AM on 10/09/2009
...and locked the victim in a shipping container for several days.
CarmanK
democrat, retired tax acct
01:27 AM on 10/08/2009
How can such a clause in a contract be legal and/or enforceable??? But Halliburtan is the leader in self preservation and individual perversion. It is a company corrupt from bottom-up, top to bottom.
I don't understand how the so called MEN who are supposed to respect women, were so compelled to vote against this amendment. It really is a wake up call for all women, who think that repugs value women and families far beyond those of the dems. Sorry, but s**t floats and no republicans voted for the bill to protect women against sexual assault/harrassment in the work place. Gee, working for Halliburtan must be a real privilege. NOT..Halliburtan is in DuBai now, perhaps they are no longer an american company and should not be receiving american government contracts anyway. This comapny has committed fraud against the US in war time. At what point does their miscreant behavior rise to the level of treason??? Hillary get rid of Halliburtan and Blackwater or whatever they call themselves these days.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BobEvansZombie
01:11 AM on 10/08/2009
Al Franken for pres in 2016? That'd be interesting.
12:11 AM on 10/08/2009
So many trolls on the ACORN stories, but so few trolls on the Haliburton and KBR stories. More importantly, I wonder why so many GOP senators were gung-ho about de-fudning ACORN as quickly as possible, yet much less gung-ho about de-funding groups that try to cover up violent felonies.

Curious behavior, if you ask me...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ohsnap
01:12 AM on 10/08/2009
Because the Rethuglicans are EVIL.
10:05 PM on 10/07/2009
amazing part is that anyone would vote against this amendment...it's time to continue calling out the rethug party for what it really is...a party for corporate interests and the rich...unfortunately as long as there are ignorant and uneducated people there will always be a base for the rethug party...
07:58 PM on 10/07/2009
I can understand why some Senators didn't vote for this amendment, it explicitly names Halliburton and KBR when it they could have been left out. Each would still be covered by the "any other contracting" statement, seems like a gift to someone. I'm assuming the mandatory arbitration was only for civil claims, which getting rid of makes a lot of money for the trail lawyers, not the plaintiffs. And "certain claims" is not defined in this blog, I wonder why? Seeing the whole amendment would be helpful but I don't think that will happen.
12:57 AM on 10/08/2009
So you're "assuming the mandatory arbitration was only for civil claims....." It took me maybe 1 minute of research time to learn that, in fact, the clause at issue covered “any and all claims that you might have against Employer related to your employment, including your termination, and any and all personal injury claims(s) arising in the workplace.” Clearly your assumption was wrong.

It took another minute or so to find the text of the amendment you're so anxious to see: "Sec. 8104. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used for any existing or new Federal contract if the contractor or a subcontractor at any tier requires that an employee or independent contractor, as a condition of employment, sign a contract that mandates that the employee or independent contractor performing work under the contract or subcontract resolve through arbitration any claim under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or any tort related to or arising out of sexual assault or harassment, including assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment, or negligent hiring, supervision, or retention."

Why you, like so many others, quickly jump to erroneous conclusions without lifting a finger to learn the facts is beyond me. Next time, a little homework would go a long way.
01:55 AM on 10/08/2009
Thank you for your post. It was not on line when I posted, I see that it is now. Funny, I used the same Google I used earlier and got very different results.

And your post and my Google confirm that the amendment only dealt with civil not criminal actions. Thanks once again.
06:06 PM on 10/07/2009
Impeach Sessions
Can you impeach a Senator?
12:54 AM on 10/08/2009
If he has a blue shirt with a stain on it I believe we can impeach.
05:57 PM on 10/07/2009
Does this apply to the Senate also?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Matt Osborne
04:07 PM on 10/07/2009
I just watched Franken's part of the hearing on YouTube. Thank goodness this man is in the Senate. He's easily the most erudite and articulate Senator since Barack Obama left that body.
03:39 PM on 10/07/2009
mccain, vitter and enisgn did not vote for this. they think women who are raped at the workplace should get no legal redress. they also think if a woman gets pregnant after being raped, she should be denied abortion.

compassionate conservatism on display.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
yesIcan
Elvis and GOP common sense have left the building
04:19 PM on 10/07/2009
And once this product of r a. p. e is born....both innocent baby and r a. p .e victim are on their own . It's how the conservatives operate.”
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
yesIcan
Elvis and GOP common sense have left the building
04:33 PM on 10/07/2009
And once this child of r a. p. e is born....both baby and victim are on their own . It's how the conservatives operate.
03:36 PM on 10/07/2009
I hope the women in Jeff Sessions' state of Alabama remember to vote him out of his senate seat. Also, the other 29 senators need to be voted out too.
I wonder how they will defend their "No" vote on this amendment during their campaign.

Here are the Senators who are okay with Rape.

Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kyl (R-AZ)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)
07:32 PM on 10/07/2009
There's actually a Senator Crapo?

Oh man, am I really reading this right? Tell me that's a typo.
photo
StevenKeirstead
Photographer and Biologist who happens to be gay.
10:08 AM on 10/19/2009
It's not surprising that these "pro-rape" Senators are also mostly in the anti-gay rights contingent in the Senate.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chariotdrvr14
03:32 PM on 10/07/2009
"Unfair to Halliburton"???....unfreakin'believeable... what primordial swamp did Jeff Sessions crawl out from?
That out of partisan interest and loyalty to corporate robber barons they'd dismiss the rights of women under KBR's employ viciously gangraped by fellow KBR employees...is unbelieveable

This as conservatives have been trying all week to tie the misdeed of director Roman Polanski to the whole of the liberal establishment. As though members of the GOP would be beyond that sort of thing.
In their collective chronic selective amnesia they conveniently forget the numerous rapes both connected to KBR and those also inflicted upon female military personnel serving in Iraq and Afghanistan; -and the efforts by both the Bush White House and the Pentagon to suppress those cases.
03:31 PM on 10/07/2009
The political polarization between sane and Republican has devolved to the point where the R's simply stand up and declare that legislation is harmful to Halliburton, or Big Pharma, or Aetna, Cigna, et al. They don't even feign allegiance to the the citizens, the Constitution, their own constituents, ethical or intellectual integrity or anything worthy. They simply declare that they've abdicated and sold their souls and their credibility for good bucks to the moneyed interests. Screw the people. No wonder politicians in DC get a bad rap. They deserve it.
04:42 PM on 10/07/2009
Ayup. With great "statesmen" like these, who needs paid corporate shills?
03:21 PM on 10/07/2009
Can someone explain something to me?: The reason for allowing contractors to do the work that the military used to do was to save money and allow more soldiers to do the combat operations (and not just scoop slop in the mess hall, or do construction).....Right? Well, there are currently more contractors in Iraq than there are soldiers. The contractors are making more than our soldiers (In some cases, 10X more). If we are paying all those people more than we are paying our soldiers, how are we saving money, and why do we need Blackwater contractors doing combat operations? Especially if they have proven themselves to be corrupt, non-transparent, and unaccountable for 9 years straight. WTF??