What: All Issues : Corporate Subsidies : Oil & Gas Industry : H.R. 3289. Fiscal 2004 Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan/Vote to Reduce Money Available to Halliburton for Oil Purchases In Response to Alleged Price-Gouging by the Oil Company.
 Who: All Members
[POW!]
 

To find out how your Members of Congress voted on this bill, use the form on the right.

H.R. 3289. Fiscal 2004 Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan/Vote to Reduce Money Available to Halliburton for Oil Purchases In Response to Alleged Price-Gouging by the Oil Company.
house Roll Call 548     Oct 16, 2003
Y = Conservative
N = Progressive
Winning Side:
Conservative

In January 2003, the Bush Administration awarded a no-bid, $500 million contract to Halliburton to restore damages to Iraq's oil fields (Vice President Cheney was formerly Halliburton's CEO and, though no longer employed by the company, he continues to receive financial compensation from Halliburton). By October 1, 2003, the value of Halliburton's contract had nearly tripled to $1.4 billion. In response to the tripling of Halliburton's contract, Representative Waxman (D-CA) initiated several inquiries to determine how exactly the additional money was being spent. After a round of fact-finding, it became clear to Waxman and others that Halliburton was overcharging the federal government to import gasoline into Iraq. According to an analysis by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service-a federal agency that provides lawmakers with policy research upon request-the average price of gasoline in the Middle East was approximately seventy-one cents. However, according to Waxman, Halliburton was charging the U.S. government $1.70 per gallon of gasoline. Waxman and other Progressives characterized Halliburton's actions as price-gouging and presented evidence that the oil company had fleeced U.S. taxpayers out of $250 million. In an effort to penalize Halliburton for gasoline overcharges, Waxman introduced an amendment to the 2004 supplemental spending request for Iraq and Afghanistan which would have stripped $250 million from the bill which Halliburton intended to use for future imports and sales of oil and gasoline. Conservatives defended Halliburton and argued that the increased value of Halliburton's contract resulted from unanticipated costs in repairing the worse-than-expected condition of Iraq's oil infrastructure. On a vote of 197-224, the Waxman amendment was defeated and Halliburton was not punished for its charges to the U.S. government in providing gasoline in Iraq.

Issue Areas:

Find your Member of
Congress' votes

Select by Name