Pentagon Cracks Down on Abuse of Gov't Credit Cards

Interesting post. A few little-known facts about this program:

the use of the credit card is mandatory.
If you are traveling on government business and you use any other card, they can and sometimes do refuse to reimburse you.
This is even if the mission requires and orders properly authorise expenses beyond the limit on the card (most cards have a $500 limit!)
This is even in the very common case where the clerks have bungled one's card activation, and you get to Bufugliland or Nofunistan and your double-damned card isn't working.
This is even if no one takes the particular card in your AO, but they require a different card.
The reason for the insistence on using the issue card is that the USG gets in effect, a kickback on the cards (like the points on one's personal Discover card).
The service member who uses the card must pay immediately.
Sometimes the service member is not back from the deployment for several months. He can't pay.
Sometimes the service member is back and ready to pay. But the Government itself is extremely slow in paying the service members back on these bills. Many of them need to clear their travel vouchers to have the money to pay the bill. How long? Six months is not unusual, three months is extraordinarily quick.
Late fees and credit damage are incurred by the service member, not the USG. Even in the verycommon case where the government's default has caused the soldier's default.
There are no consequences ever for government clerks who stall, deny, or delay these payments, and damage the soldier's credit.

Let me illustrate with an example: $11,000 for hired vehicles used by a certain unit in a friendly foreign country. This was authorised and required by orders. The USG took over a year to clear that receipt. Fortunately the serviceman involved had independent income, and was able to pay the bill.

So what this is, in other words, is a way for the oily Zakheim (one of Bush's worst choices -- along with White) and his green-eyeshade goons to get a bunch of junior officers and enlisted guys who travel on government business to finance the US DOD.

When Zakheim took this job on, the lying POS said that he would crack down on abusers (good) and fix the problems (great, right?) but he has done nothing but grandstand about abusers, and sweep the problems under the rug.

When you put people in Dov Zakheim's chair who never wore a uniform, you get people who don't give a hoot about those wearing the uniforms.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

Amazing. I do a of work in the corporate credit card business. These programs are used by corporate American because they help contol spending, enforce compliance with company policies, and keep procurement costs way down.

These programs are almost always implemented in conjunction with robust expense management software that is capable of setting strict spending limits on individual cards, and rendering them invalid for purchases outside of defined parameters.

Often, these cards are of the "individual liability" type, where the cardholder is personally responsible for paying the bill and must fill out an automated expense report to get reimbursed.

Leave it to the US Government to implement a card program and somehow end up with massive cardholder fraud.

green-eyeshade goons

I happen to have been a "green-eyeshade goon" for about 14 years now in private industry. I have been in internal audit, and now a controller in charge of, among other departments, accounts payable. Many of our employees travel for long periods of time & even live overseas.

The way you describe the facts of card program is similar to policies established in private industry.

As Maceman describes, these programs run smoothly all the time in the corporate world. I would say the main differences are probably in enforcement & accountability. In my company no manager would approve the expense account or purchases of personal items. If the manager did, when the invoice or expense account was submitted to the accounts payable department the charges would be reviewed & if deemed not appropriate, not paid. The approving manager would be contacted & questioned. If the manager's answers didn't sound right, his boss would be questioned. Unapproved charges - you're in trouble & then you have to reimburse the company, usually on your the way out the door.

Another review of the expenses would come at the end of the month when actual to budget numbers are compared & any variance needs to be explained to senior management. You don't meet your budget you are in trouble.

Another review would be done periodically by internal audit. If they find you are approving charges in violation of the company policy, you are in trouble & you have to reimburse the company.

The bottom line is policy enforcement and accountability. When your raise &/or bonus, and keeping your job is based on meeting budget then you are a lot more responsible. The problem w/ the Gov't is, their attitude is "when it is the taxpayers' money - then who cares?"

Good points. My beef with Zakheim (apart from him being a citizen in two nations and having dodged wartime service in both of them!) and his report, is that his remedy is very limited accountability, and (at least from where I sit), it is targeted at the wrong people.

Accountability should not only zap the little cheeses like a colonel who flies first-class instead of coach, and the sergeant who charges supplies and then pawns them. It should light a fire under the sclerotic bureaucracy. Frankly if I were SECDEF or a service chief and I heard that a young captain was forced to "lend" $11k to the USDOD through the mal- or non-feasance of the clerical staff my fury would have no bounds. This fury would be quickly transmitted through the undersecretary for whatever Dov's undersecretary for, until it lodged in the very marrow of those who (1) should have been handling this and (2) should have been CHECKING on the ones who should have been handling this.

Several things keep the military from achieving civilian levels of efficiency. One is the numerous Congressional and departmental mandates (ironically, many of these were put in place to kerb petty fraud and abuse, but they wind up sapping more time, money and effort than the corruption ever did). Another is that, while incompetent clerks stay on and on, the commanders who have power rotate in an endlessly spinning carousel of confusion.

In the military there is a personnel issue as well, that has no equivalent in the private sector. Personnel and finance clerks are selected from the very bottom of the barrel in terms of intelligence and motivation. They often are led by officers and NCOs who are a disgrace to the nation (let alone the uniform). The Army would save millions and please tens of thousands if it contracted these programmes out to ADP or another similar contractor. But then we run into the roadblock of the warehouse-fulls of regulations, laws, and requirements.

I am sure that there is a regulation somewhere that mandates that reviews similar to those youy describe are performed at DOD. I am also sure that among 1,001 other regulations it is honoured... sometimes!

Just kind of brainstorming while we all have our green eyeshades on...

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

Make em use their own cards and this problem does away right now.

Then the USDOD doesn't get it's 3% kickback (or whatever it is. Since the same bozos that run this thing negotiated it, probably 0.003%)

When it's your own money you do things differently.

The irony is that this system, Tom, is the worst of three worlds -- it allows those that game the system to rip off the People of the USA, it starves defence of needed resources, and then it cheats those that try to play fair of their honestly due reimbursements.

You would think it could be improved, eh? But the best that Dr Zakheim can come up with is to make an extra effort to hang the cheaters high. It's a superficial responce to a multidimensional problem. I don't care for cheaters; I'd tie the knots myself. If he would only address the other problems.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.