Firm employs large number of Pentagon mentors, paid by tax dollars working for defense contractors

[happy_liberal]

In a marketplace awash in consulting firms that help defense companies sell to the Pentagon, the Durango Group has a unique advantage. The Colorado-based firm has become a base of operations for retired officers who also are handsomely paid by the military for their advice...

As Durango associates, the retired officers are paid to help private companies win and administer Pentagon contracts. As mentors, the retirees are paid by the military to help run war games, which also gives them access to classified strategies and weapons systems. Durango cites these mentoring assignments on its Web site as signs of its associates’ unique connections.

Along with their work for Durango and the military, these retired officers, mostly from the Air Force, are paid advisers, consultants and corporate directors on the boards of at least 20 companies, according to public records. Three of them work for private equity firms to help them identify, buy and then run defense contractors....

Durango’s ability to mix mentoring and consulting work illustrates how closely the private interests of some mentors overlap with their military advisory jobs. The firms’ mentors move seamlessly between roles as paid advisers to the services and paid consultants to defense companies in the same subject areas, USA Today found.

As a result, Durango and the mentors it employs draw income from multiple sources. Both get paid by the military for advice and by defense contractors who want consulting help. The firm also benefits from having its mentors serve as corporate directors or advisers for other companies.

That kind of overlap is not illegal. But some analysts say it should be.
‘Working for two masters’

“That is an amazing conflict of interest,” said Craig Holman, of the non-partisan watchdog group Public Citizen. “They are working for two masters. Are they pursuing the public interest, or are they pursuing the contractors’ interests? ... The conflict of interest law ought to be expanded to cover this.”

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/12/gns_mentors_firm_122909/

[jody]

1. How can there be a "conflict of interest" when a government retiree is hired by private firm to work...

on government contracts?

If that's bad, it's even more immoral for a senator or congressperson or member of their staff or member of a White House staff to retire or leave their job to be hired by a private firm to solicit government contracts and grants.
:puke:

[peacetalksforall]

2. E-mail to Gates, copy Obama. Top-down to the Pentagon. This needs

kicks and follow-up. We are fools for allowing this Pentagon to dominate the world. It's disgustinly heartbreaking that our country is such a cheating pit. They think we will pay for all their personal profiteering.

[jody]

4. Did you mean your reply to the OP and not my post? n/t

[peacetalksforall]

9. Reply to OP - sorry.

[jody]

11. :hi:

:hi:

[peacetalksforall]

10. Meant to reply to the OP..

[happy_liberal]

5. "it's even more immoral for a senator or congressperson"

They are all immoral! Being on the take has become systemic. There is something terribly wrong with this country.

[happy_liberal]

3. more

In the 2007 news release, Fogleman said the war game was helpful in “developing national space policy.” The news release identified Fogleman as a retired general and senior mentor but didn’t make reference to his work for several private companies who have an interest in national space policy. One of Fogleman’s clients, Boeing, had a particular stake in the 2007 exercise.

The company is one of the nation’s largest defense contractors and a major seller of military aircraft and satellites.

According to the Army Space Journal, a key aspect of the games was to examine “operational concepts” related to a high-tech drone, known as High Altitude Long Endurance, or HALE — an unmanned aircraft that flies high and stays aloft for long periods.

In May 2007, two months after the war games concluded, Boeing said it was developing such an aircraft for military uses, according to Jane’s Defence Weekly.

There was no connection with Fogleman, Boeing said in a statement to USA Today. Fogleman participated in the war games as a retired general officer, not as a Boeing consultant, the statement released by company spokesman Douglas Kennett said.

“No government information learned in these exercises was shared, and to do so would have been contrary to government and Boeing policies,” the statement said. “Therefore, any timing between an announcement by Boeing about a program under development and attendance at a war game ... is totally unrelated.”

[jody]

6. Since the 1970s, DOD has outsourced more and more work while reducing active duty strength. Just

where does any intelligent person expect contractors to get experienced senior leaders of all ranks to manage contracts?

Pre A-76 flood of contracts, graybeards from sergeant to flag officer were on active duty and performed the duties cited in the article.

IMO some/most of the alleged misuse is caused by DOD's contracting out under congressional pressure.

[happy_liberal]

7. kick

:kick:

[happy_liberal]

8. another

:kick:

[jody]

12. kick n/t

[happy_liberal]

13. thanks

:hi: