Why hasn't Jamie Lee Jones' story made a bigger dent in our national consciousness? Why haven't the employment practices of certain defense contractors who receive fat federal contracts been more thoroughly scrutinized by the press and the public? What? Who's Jamie Lee Jones, you say?
Exactly my point.
Most listeners who tuned in to "Frederick 's Forum" Oct. 24 on 930 WFMD had never heard of the 23-year-old Texan. Now that they have, they will certainly not forget her horrific ordeal at the hands of co-workers and her employer, KBR, a former subsidiary of Halliburton, while on assignment in Iraq.
While the mainstream media had a field day exploiting videos of ACORN employees encouraging "criminals" to lie to get subsidized housing, Jones' story got scant play. Many were eager to repudiate ACORN's explanation that a few bad apples in the organization don't add up to rampant corruption and exaggerate their federal funding. Yet those same news-hounds weren't the least bit concerned that federal contracts worth millions and millions were handed out to a contractor who locked an employee in a shipping container after she was drugged and gang raped by fellow employees. Or that crucial evidence was "lost." Or that she was denied redress in the courts because of a fine print clause in her contract that prohibited her, and many like her, from suing the company. Instead, she was told she'd have to find "justice" in secret arbitration.
She subsequently spent four years trying to have her day in court. Jones found out she wasn't alone, that thousands had suffered similar fates. She determined that if these women, who were also sexually assaulted, also working in hostile conditions, had their day in court, she would have known the working conditions at KBR before she signed on to work for them. And she wouldn't be permanently disfigured and emotionally scarred from the experience.
Freshman Sen. Al Franken of Minnesota listened and understood. His amendment to a defense appropriations bill aims to protect defense contract employees from sexual assault, discrimination and false imprisonment and keep taxpayer money away from defense contractors who don't comply.
Big business went bonkers, spreading misinformation that the amendment will result in costly lawsuits over trivial issues. That's a lie. The wording is specific to the most egregious violations by defense contractors.
The 30 Republican senators who voted against the amendment couldn't give a sound justification for their positions other than some mumbo jumbo about the value of arbitration and that the Defense Department opposed it. A Washington Post columnist tried to spin their votes because they weren't doing a good job of spinning for themselves. She stated that the amendment would be difficult to enforce.
Another lie. Franken's amendment was reviewed by three constitutional lawyers. These same lawyers are referenced by the likes of Justices Scalia and Roberts. Government has plenty of power to dictate the conditions of its own contracts. A clause in all government contracts allows the government to end an agreement under a clause called "Termination for the convenience of the government."
While Franken's bill passed the Senate 68- 30 and has majority support in the House, Sen. Daniel Inouye of Hawaii is in a prime position to strip the amendment or dilute it before it gets to the House. Word is that he's being pressured by big campaign contributors from the defense industry.
What a surprise. Money talks. Common decency walks.
kheerbrandt@yahoo.com
|
