Wednesday, June 20, 2007

POAC XV: Cheney and Halliburton (Oh, my!)

Fifteenth in a continuing series putting a stop to the spin at the POAC (Project for the Old American Century) counterspin page.

Cheney has severed his ties to Halliburton


That refers to the reported arrangement whereby Cheney continues to receive benefits from his former employment at Halliburton, where Cheney gains nothing if Halliburton prospers and loses nothing if Halliburton falters. More on this later.

The POAC spin:

Cheney's Halliburton Ties Remain


The URL leads us to CBS News.
(CBS/AP) A report by the Congressional Research Service undermines Vice President Dick Cheney's denial of a continuing relationship with Halliburton Co., the energy company he once led, Sen. Frank Lautenberg said Thursday.

The report says a public official's unexercised stock options and deferred salary fall within the definition of "retained ties" to his former company.
(CBS)
Lautenberg is a noted objective observer ... no wait, he's a Democratic Senator from New Jersey. The Congressional Research Service is Laughtenberg's authority for asserting ties, but before we move on to that, what exactly is Laughtenberg trying to say? That Cheney is unduly influenced in the office of vice president by Halliburton?

It turns out there's no need for me to do the research on this one. The normally reliable Annenberg fact-checkers are all over this one with a rather long entry.

Perhaps the choicest bit:


Shortly after that, Democratic Sen. Frank Lautenberg released a legal analysis he'd requested from the Congressional Research Service. Without naming Cheney, the memo concluded a federal official in his position -- with deferred compensation covered by insurance, and stock options whose after-tax profits had been assigned to charity -- would still retain an "interest" that must be reported on an official's annual disclosure forms. And in fact, Cheney does report his options and deferred salary each year.

But the memo reached no firm conclusion as to whether such options or salary constitute an "interest" that would pose a legal conflict. It said "it is not clear" whether assigning option profits to charity would theoretically remove a potential conflict, adding, "no specific published rulings were found on the subject." And it said that insuring deferred compensation "might" remove it as a problem under conflict of interest laws.

Actually, the plain language of the Office of Government Ethics regulations on this matter seems clear enough. The regulations state: "The term financial interest means the potential for gain or loss to the employee . . . as a result of governmental action on the particular matter." So by removing the "potential for gain or loss" Cheney has solid grounds to argue that he has removed any "financial interest" that would pose a conflict under federal regulations.

Fine work at FactCheck.org. Worth reading in its entirety.

In summary, the so-called "ties" between Cheney and Halliburton do not appear to constitute any legal or ethical problem. The POAC spin intimates otherwise.

No comments: