Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: No change in marijuana laws coming, White House says [View all]RainDog
(28,784 posts)39. Senate Sub-committee report: The war on drugs is a racket
A U.S. Senate subcommittee report (released Dec. 2011) called into question efforts to curb drug exports from Latin America, suggesting that billions in tax dollars had been wasted in no-bid contracts with no oversight on how the money was being spent or whether efforts were succeeding.
"It's becoming increasingly clear that our efforts to rein in the narcotics trade in Latin America, especially as it relates to the government's use of contractors, have largely failed," Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO), chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight, said in a media advisory. "Without adequate oversight and management we are wasting tax dollars and throwing money at a problem without even knowing what we're getting in return."
The McCaskill report indicates that U.S. taxpayers have shelled out over $3 billion for work and equipment related to the drug war in Latin America from 2005-2009, and most of that money went to private contractors.
McCaskill launched the inquiry after looking into counternarcotics efforts underway in Afghanistan. However, neither the Department of Defense nor the State Dept. were able to provide adequate documentation on their contracts and in many cases could not even identify firms that were given millions in tax dollars.
"It's becoming increasingly clear that our efforts to rein in the narcotics trade in Latin America, especially as it relates to the government's use of contractors, have largely failed," Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO), chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight, said in a media advisory. "Without adequate oversight and management we are wasting tax dollars and throwing money at a problem without even knowing what we're getting in return."
The McCaskill report indicates that U.S. taxpayers have shelled out over $3 billion for work and equipment related to the drug war in Latin America from 2005-2009, and most of that money went to private contractors.
McCaskill launched the inquiry after looking into counternarcotics efforts underway in Afghanistan. However, neither the Department of Defense nor the State Dept. were able to provide adequate documentation on their contracts and in many cases could not even identify firms that were given millions in tax dollars.
Five major defense contractors received the bulk of drug war contract spending: Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, DynCorp, ARINC and ITT. Out of all the firms, DynCorp benefitted most, winning $1.1 billion.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117026
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
180 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Yep, same with the "War on Terror" used to justify the shredding of the 4th amendment. n/t
Daniel537
Aug 2013
#21
Barack Obama is wrong about this, and he deserves scorn for his continued position.
DisgustipatedinCA
Aug 2013
#2
I'm so pissed off right now, I can't even think of anything to say except cuss words.
liberal_at_heart
Aug 2013
#11
What the Christ is the matter with the Jews, Bob, what is the matter with them?
RainDog
Aug 2013
#151
And talk about Catch 22, having to get the NIDA's approval before you can do medical research...
AmyStrange
Aug 2013
#130
The thousands of legally operating dispensaries with no Fed intervention at all.
tridim
Aug 2013
#139
Sure it does, that's why it's persecuting all of the largest, best run, and most transparent
Egalitarian Thug
Aug 2013
#84
Nothing at all. To even suggest such a thing would be be so cynical as to border on traitorous.
Egalitarian Thug
Aug 2013
#125
it does NOT. That is a complete falsehood. you have a lot of nerve to say that shit.
cali
Aug 2013
#133
So the thousands of legally operating dispensaries with no fed intervention at all aren't real?
tridim
Aug 2013
#144
Do we really need to give you a dictionary definition of "supports"?
DisgustipatedinCA
Aug 2013
#156
the feds might consider not throwing terminally ill people in prison for smoking pot, for now
Warren DeMontague
Aug 2013
#128
Polis is complaining that Holder has failed to provide legislators information
RainDog
Aug 2013
#146
I'm not falling for that after the elections crap again. Obama can't be re-elected and Holder is
liberal_at_heart
Aug 2013
#86
I believe I read this poster post exactly that about exactly this. After 2012... be patient! n/t
cherokeeprogressive
Aug 2013
#117
It only allows nonnarcotic industrial hemp, and it does not appear to be going anywhere.
SunSeeker
Aug 2013
#88
I agree. We all know this medicine helps people. If Obama doesn't know that by now he is
liberal_at_heart
Aug 2013
#120
He may as well have. that promise would have been as good as any of the others. nt
NorthCarolina
Aug 2013
#78
Obama never "wanted to keep the troops in Iraq." He was always against the war.
SunSeeker
Aug 2013
#116
Legalization reduces highway traffic fatalities. Why would we want that? Nt.
Warren Stupidity
Aug 2013
#96
A really good "investigative reporter" would track down EVERY member of "The Choom Gang" and
cherokeeprogressive
Aug 2013
#118
Vast bureaucracies and billions of dollars don't or didn't depend on keeping gay marriage illegal
Fumesucker
Aug 2013
#137
I've long ran out of reasons to defend the corporate wing of the Democratic Party.
livingwagenow
Aug 2013
#171