However, what has received very little media attention is the decision made by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to award Boeing a $2.5 billion contract to manage its high-tech border initiative on September 21, 2006. The contract is known as SBINet, one of DHS’ largest and most important Homeland Security projects. After an intense face-off among nation’s largest military contractors, Boeing Company was picked by the Homeland Security. According to the Washington Post, Boeing’s border security plan for SBINet is to erect a network of 1,800 towers equipped with sensors, cameras, and heat and motion detectors to secure the US border.

“Boeing’s proposal relied heavily on a network of 1,800 towers, most of which would need to be erected along the borders with Mexico and Canada. Each tower would be equipped with a variety of sensors, including cameras and heat and motion detectors,”

Boeing plans to deploy the system along both the northern and southern borders within three years.

Earlier this year, when Homeland Security announced it was seeking bids to secure US borders, only five companies submitted proposals DHS, they were – Boeing, Ericsson, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon. DHS Deputy Secretary Michael Jackson who oversees SBINet said that DHS choose Boeing because their plan relied less on the use of unmanned aerial vehicles than competing proposals submitted by Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and Ericsson.

Conflicting Information
Before the DHS formally announced their decision to award the Boeing Company, on Sept 20, 2006, the Washington Post and the New York Times was first to report that Boeing had won the SBINet bid based on information they received from their “congressional sources” who happened to be briefed on the decision the day before, Sept 19, 2006. From the WaPO:

Aerospace and defense giant Boeing Co. has won a multibillion-dollar contract to revamp how the United States guards about 6,000 miles of border in an attempt to curb illegal immigration, congressional sources said yesterday.

And from the NY Times:

After a face-off among large military contractors, the Boeing Company was picked by the Homeland Security Department to lead a high-tech effort to secure borders, Congressional officials who were briefed on the decision said Tuesday.

However, there seems to be some conflicting information regarding the amounts Boeing is being awarded. The Post and most media are reporting Boeing received a multi-billion dollar contract, whereas, the Times came close to the amount DHS awarded Boeing, which far less that what the Post reported. The Times writes:

“The contract will at least initially be much more limited than some industry officials had expected, valued at $80 million instead of the $2 billion estimate given for the six-year deal,”

As a possible explanation for the conflicting information, GovExec.com notes that the information regarding the award had been “leaked” by Congressional sources to the Post and the Times before DHS made their official announcement.

Homeland Security Department officials on Thursday formally announced that they have entered into a $67 million contract with Boeing Co. to construct a series of towers monitoring a 28-mile stretch of the Arizona-Mexico border. Congressional sources briefed on the decision already had leaked word of the deal.

However, it seems the “leaked” information has created a problem because during the briefing, DHS denied that the department awarded Boeing a multibillion-dollar deal. DHS Deputy Secretary Michael Jackson told reporters on Sept 21, 2006, that the department only awarded Boeing a total of $67 million contract for the next three years. Jackson also said that DHS had the right to discontinue the contract, if Boeing failed to might the program’s goals, therefore downplaying DHS’ 3-year “exclusive commitment” with Boeing.

The Hot Seat
What is also not reported is that DHS has been in the hot seat with Congressional members ever since July’s House Government Reform Committee hearing revealed how DHS continues to manage their procurement process poorly.

In a recent committee report (Waste, Abuse, and Mismanagemen in Department of Homeland Security Contracts [pdf]) requested by House Government Reform Committee chair Tom Davis, R-VA, and ranking member Henry Waxman, D-CA, it identified 32 contracts, worth $34.3 billion, as having “significant overcharges, wasteful spending or mismanagement.” To be honest, I was not surprised by the reports findings considering the people that were appointed by Bush and Michael Chertoff, which I mentioned previously (here, here and here).

When it came to securing the borders, the report found that DHS has yet to implement DHS’ $10 billion US VISIT program.However, the committee was more concern on how Deputy Secretary Michael Jackson’s was handling DHS’ procurement procedures for the Secure Border Initiative for not spelling out the department’s specific needs to their bidders.

“That’s not governing,” Waxman said. “That’s not planning. It’s utter incompetence, and it’s going to cost the taxpayers billions.”

What is most troubling is how David Zavada, assistant inspector general in DHS’ Office of Audits, described DHS section process for SBINet’s prime contractor. Zavada told committee members the “selection of a prime contractor, appears to be at the intersection of accelerated scheduling, broad requirements and still-emerging technologies — giving it ‘tremendous risks.’”

The fact that DHS failed to spell out SBINet’s mission during DHS’ procurement process back in April of this year, explain the vagueness in Boeing’s press release, which did not mention the amount they were awarded nor any information on the type of services they will be providing.

Boeing’s consortium
Although Boeing’s press release may be vague, it does provide information who will be working with Boeing in securing the nation’s border.

The Boeing SBInet core team includes:

• Centech – Arlington, Va.
• DRS Surveillance and Reconnaissance Group – Palm Bay, Fla.
• Kollsman Inc. (an Elbit Systems of America company) – Merrimack, N.H.
• L-3 Government Services Inc. – Washington, D.C.
• L-3 Communication Systems West – Salt Lake City, Utah
• Lucent Technologies – Murray Hill, N.J.
• Perot Systems – Plano, Texas
• Unisys Global Public Sector – Reston, Va.
• USIS – Washington, D.C.

According to Government Computer News, most people were not expecting Boeing to win and some bidders are not happy with the decision.

Back in February, there were concerns of that foreign entity, Dubai Ports World, would be providing security. One of the arguments against Dubai Ports World was that port security should remain in the hands of American firms under American control at the very least. It seems Boeing’s team members have found a loophole in that argument. One of the companies in Boeing’s team is an Israeli owned company, Elbit Systems. Elbit serves as a member of the consortium through it’s Merrimack, NH-based surveillance technology firm, Kollsman Inc, the American arm of the Israeli global defense firm Elbit Systems – the company that currently handles Israel’s border security surveillance system that is integrated with sensors, radars, a “smart fence” and cameras, as well as sophisticated points of entry.

The irony is all this regarding the concerns of a foreign entity providing security for this nation’s border and ports, in the end it doesn’t matter, people forget about their fears and the Bush administration will do what ever it pleases just to line the pockets of his buddies. Six months ago, the nation was in an uproar about Dubai Ports World deal, forcing the company to make promise that it will sell its North American operations to appease critics in Congress. The same critics did not want foreigners running US ports and demanded that Dubai Ports find a buyer for its US facilities. Six months later, the company still owns those ports and it continues to say it will sell soon and Boeing found a loophole by going through an American subsidiary.

But one thing is for certain, Congress sure loves its smoke and mirrors just to get re-elected. With all there rhetoric on national security, has yet to devote the funds to hire the 2,000 new Border Patrol agents during the next five years it. And in the end, all they muster up is a plan that is merely symbolic because the government lacks the estimated $2 billion to $5 billion to build it.

As we know, DHS Deputy Secretary is [tag]Michael P. Jackson[/tag] will oversee the [tag]Secure Border Initiative[/tag] ([tag]SBI[/tag]) program, however there are other major players in the overall functionality of the program. According to GovExec.com, these players are

[tag]Greg Giddens[/tag], the SBI program’s executive director … [tag]Julie Myers[/tag], new head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, on interior enforcement and [tag]Emilio Gonzalez[/tag], the new director of Citizenship and Immigration Services, on the guest worker program.

SBI Program Director Greg Giddens

Giddens was appointed [tag]Michael Chertoff[/tag] in December and before his appointment, he was the former Coast Guard [tag]Deepwater[/tag] program official. He wasn’t any program official, according to a Aug 2002 GovExec.com artcle, Giddens was the deputy program executive officer.

Giddens, the deputy program executive officer for the Coast Guard’s Deepwater project, is largely responsible for navigating the 20-year, $17 billion deal. Capping off six years of hard work, the Coast Guard on June 25 awarded the project to a joint venture between [tag]Lockheed Martin[/tag] and [tag]Northrop Grumman[/tag].

The acquisition represents a major shift in the way the Coast Guard buys ships and aircraft. Rather than specifying the exact mix of assets for the revamped fleet, the agency took an innovative approach, allowing three competing private sector bidders unprecedented freedom to design an entire system of ships, small boats, aircraft, satellites and robotic unmanned aerial vehicles.

It would seem appropriate for Giddens to be tapped by DHS to become SBI’s program director considering his program experience. However, Giddens performance as the deputy program executive officer is pretty telling to what would be expected in his new role as SBI’s program director. But then again, this is a BushCo government and one shouldn’t expect much to change.

In a post-9/11 world, all seemed well for the Coast Guard considering they have always had limited resources. Since 2002, Congress has increased the Coast Guard’s budget and also provided them an additional $1.5 billion to develop Deepwater, the Coast Guard’s integrated system of ships, aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, and computer and surveillance logistics. In 2003, the GAO was asked to investigate into the Deepwater program to see if it had been managed effectively and to see how effective the Coast Guard was at overseeing their contractors. The [tag]GAO[/tag] found

…the Coast Guard has neither measured the extent of competition among suppliers of Deepwater assets nor held the system integrator accountable for taking steps to achieve competition. Deepwater’s acquisition structure is such that the two first-tier subcontractors have sole responsibility for determining whether to hold competitions for assets or to provide these assets themselves. The Coast Guard has taken a hands-off approach to “make or buy” decisions made at the subcontractor level. As a result, questions remain about whether the government will be able to control costs.

In regards how the Coast Guard’s oversaw their subcontractors, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman – the same two who are submitting proposals for the SBI contract – the GAO wasn’t pleased with the Coast Guard’s performance either. According to the GAO Report, it seems the Coast Guard has no knowledge about Lockheed Martin’s and Northrop’s activity’s when it comes to managing Deepwater’s assets, nor do they know if their subcontractors will keep the funds to themselves or hold a competition for bids. And even if they do have a bids competition, it most likely will go to one of Lockheed Martin’s and Northrop’s subsidiaries.

The acquisition structure of the Deepwater program is such that the two first-tier subcontractors, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman – the companies that formed ICGS and that developed the Deepwater solution — have sole responsibility for determining whether to hold competitions for Deepwater assets or to provide these assets themselves. Over 40 percent of the funds obligated to Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman have either remained with those companies or been awarded to their subsidiaries.

So what should we expect from Giddons and [tag]SBInet[/tag]? Giddons’ vision for SBInet will be modeled after the Deepwater program; which would mean – SBInet will also have a lack of oversight and will be a doomed program.

Evidence of this could be found during the last House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee hearing meeting. According to an April GovExec.com article, Appropriators skeptical of promised secure border initiative, senior members of the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee began questioning the whole program.

Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member Martin Olav Sabo, D-Minn., added, “I’m worried that DHS thinks that the solution is to hire a private technology company to run the SBI, and then sit back and watch.”

During a hearing, Rogers had demanded that the department submit the strategic plan for SBInet and at the time Giddens assured Rogers, he would submit it at the end of April. It is now June and the Homeland Security as yet to cough up the plan.

The department will continue to move forward with its scheduled plans to award a prime contractor in September, regardless being $97 million less than what the administration had requested from the subcommittee.

Once a prime contractor is awarded, BushCo can rest assure that the no competitive contract bidding policy will continue to flourish on Homeland Secretary Chertoff and SBI Program Director Greg Giddens watch. Chertoff’s appointment of Greg Giddens is additional proof that the border wall construction project in another one of BushCo’s money making scheme.

“Recess Appointment” Assistant Secretary for Immigration and Customs Enforcement Julie Myers

Last year, many questioned Dudya’s decision to nominate Julie Myers to head up Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Myers is not only the niece of General Richard Myers, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but she is recently married to [tag]John F. Wood[/tag], Secretary Michael Chertoff’s Chief of Staff.

As Myers continues to receive the onslaught of intense questioning by both sides of the political aisle, one thing is over looked, her marriage to John Wood. As Chief of Staff, Wood will oversee the Department’s policy, planning and operations responsibilities, which will include the new SBInet program. After a closer look, Wood’s background should shed some light as to why BushCo is so adamant in having Myers as ICE Queen. According to a Feb 2005 Press Release:

From 1998 to 2001, Wood was an Associate in the law firm of Kirkland and Ellis. He clerked at the U.S. Supreme Court for Justice Clarence Thomas from 1997 to 1998 and for Judge J. Michael Luttig on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit from 1996 to 1997. Previously, he served on the staff of Senator John C. Danforth (R-Missouri).

Kirkland and Ellis is famous for one of its most well-known lawyer, Kenneth Starr – which Myers happened to be an Associate Independent Counsel when Kenneth Starr was Independent Counsel. But what does Kirkland and Ellis have to do with Wood and the “border wall?” A lot.

According to their website, one of their major clients is Raytheon, one of the defense contractors who is also bidding for the lucrative SBInet prize. Considering Raytheon has brought in a revenue of 20,245 million to Kirkland and Ellis, I highly doubt that Raytheon is a recent client.

Currently, there hasn’t been any journalistic investigation to cause suspicions about the obvious conflict of interest. But I do have to admit, it was a nice Rovian parlor trick by sending out a sacrificial lamb to distract the people from looking into BushCo’s “border profiteering” buddies. However, the real question remains, is all this too late for current and future immigrants as evidence shows that the Customs and Border Protection agency have been working in overtime to detainee a large level of immigrants.

The Customs and Border Protection agency is considering a variety of methods to accommodate what is expected to be a surge in illegal immigrants detained, including holding those arrested on ships to await trial, a source within the agency said.

If so, we can no longer sit idly by as this country continues to suffer. It is time to make noise and sound the alarms.

NOW IS THE TIME TO TAKE BACK THIS COUNTRY FROM THE CORPORATE PROFITEERS!!!

Back in November of last year, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced a new plan, the Secure Border Initiative (SBI) or SBInet, in dealing with the immigration issue. This initiative is to replace the Customs and Border Protection’s two programs, Integrated Surveillance Intelligence System and America’s Shield Initiative.

The initiative will replace and expand upon previous efforts that failed to materialize, namely the Integrated Surveillance Intelligence System and America’s Shield Initiative. The difference this time is that DHS plans to develop a comprehensive border security approach that integrates surveillance technology, physical infrastructure, personnel and processes…

It was not until January of this year, DHS unveiled it to the public and realize SBI is not front initiative to line the pockets of BushCo.

Answer.com defines cronyism as: favoritism shown to friends and associates (as by appointing them to positions without regard for their qualifications); in fact, cronyism is associated with the phrase “to the victor goes the spoils.” Its no secret Bush has appointed a number of his friends in key positions and SBI is no exception.

Major Players
DHS Deputy Secretary – Michael P. Jackson: Jackson previously served as chief operating officer of Lockheed Martin IMS’s Transportation Systems and Services, and as SVP and counselor to the president for the American Trucking Associations. Jackson was recruited by DHS for “his management prowess” according to GovExec.com.

Recruited to Homeland Security for his management prowess, Jackson, 51, is effectively its chief operating officer. “It’s one of the best jobs in the whole U.S. government,” he says. He’s been the daily manager of the secretary’s “Second Stage Review” of the department. He also spends a great deal of time working with other agencies, Congress, and the White House on policy questions. He draws on his years of management experience at companies like Lockheed Martin.

Turning to Wikipedia to get a good starting point to understand what are the functions of a chief operating officer, a COO is:.

a corporate officer responsible for managing the day-to-day activities of the corporation. The COO is one of the highest ranking members of an organization, monitoring the daily operations of the company and reporting to the chief executive officer directly. The COO in some companies is also the president, but he or she is usually an executive or senior vice president. … The duties of the COO may reside in certain organizations with a Vice President of Operations.

So in other words, a COO runs the place.

Before he became DHS’ Deputy Secretary, he was deputy secretary of Transportation from May 2001 to August 2003. At that position he also served as DOT’s COO. During his tenure, Jackson helped create DOT’s Transportation Security Administration (TSA). So far, TSA is been riddled with problems and most of it occurred during his tenure at DOT.

According to an OIG report (PDF), in 2005, acting DHS’ Inspector General Richard Skinner reported that the Transportation Security Administration was involved in 14 different data transfers totaling more than 20 million records in 2002 and 2003.

And according to Wired News:

The report describes an array of data dumps from airlines to TSA contractors and paints a picture of an agency unable to keep track of its own operations, leading to false denials of data transfers to the media and inaccurate sworn testimony to the Senate.
…
Delta Air Lines, JetBlue Airways and American, Frontier, Continental and America West airlines — along with three airline record processing firms, all secretly turned over data directly to the TSA and government contractors.

The data included names, addresses, dates of birth, itineraries and credit card numbers.

The data dumps occurred in 2003 and was first reported by Wired News when JetBlue violated its privacy policy by turning over 5 million records to Torch Concepts, an Alabama-based an Army subcontractor.

In 2004, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs that the problem was much worse.

American Airlines has now indicated that it provided over one million passenger itineraries at TSA’s request, which raises the question of why agency officials told GAO that it did not have access to such data.

According to press reports, American Airlines authorized its vendor, Airline Automation, to provide TSA with one week’s worth of PNR data on its customers. The vendor then reportedly provided the data to four companies competing for contracts with TSA – HNC Software, Infoglide Software, Ascent Technology, and Lockheed Martin.

Yet, the same four competing companies for CAPPS II testing also happens to be TSA’s subcontractors.

Anyone who flew American Airlines during June of 2002 should assume that all information given by them to American Airlines, including credit card numbers, is in the possession of both the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the following TSA subcontractors: HNC Software; Infoglide Software; Ascent Technology; and Lockheed Martin. Furthermore, as the passenger records were used to test the CAPPS II passenger profiling system, it should be assumed that the Social Security number, date of birth, as well as the associated credit histories and law enforcement records of many of the 1.2 million customers affected were combined into a single file and are now in the possession of the above-named companies as well as the Department of Homeland Security.

CAPPS II (Computer Assisted Passenger Profiling System) is nothing less than a Soviet-style system of internal border controls. The deployment of the CAPPS II Internal Border Controls, the Department of Homeland Security is slowly turning our country more into Communist East Germany circa 1974.

In 2004, Sherrie Gossett from the conservative media watchdog group Accuracy In Media wrote:

Michael P. Jackson, who also comes from Lockheed Martin, became the Deputy Secretary of Transportation. A Lockheed Martin spokesman had nothing to say about whether …[if] Jackson would give the company any advantage in securing contracts with Transportation.

It looks like it did and it will again in Jackson’s new position as DHS’ COO, opps, as Deputy Security.

If Deputy Secretary Jackson was recruited by DHS for his prowess in management performance as COO at DOT, it sure wasn’t for public accountability, but rather being accountable for lining the pocket of his former employer.