$908K for Vehicles for Biden's World Cup Trip--On Top of $2.2M for Hotels

    Vice President Biden's trip to Brazil in mid-June for the USA versus Ghana World Cup game and meetings the following day with the president and vice president of Brazil required rental of vehicles for Biden and his entourage costing over $900,000.  Added to the $2.2 million cost of hotels we reported a few weeks ago, the total costs of local lodging and transportation for the trip topped $3.1 million.
    The documents indicate two companies were used for vehicles and drivers:

    The $908,147 estimate far outstrips the $321,665 spent in February 2013 for a vice presidential trip to Paris. The documents for the World Cup trip do not contain enough details to explain why the cost for this trip is comparatively high, but asserts that the "anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable" and that the rates are comparable to "the rates charged for similar services during this season." The documents that accompanied the Brazil hotel contract posting noted that due to the World Cup, hotel rates were up anywhere from 75 to 365 percent, but a similar statement is not included in the vehicle documents.
    The State Department, the agency that handles arrangements for VIP trips, explained the reasons for the short notice and lack of full competition in awarding the contracts:

Security and logistics are the Department of State’s primary considerations when procuring vehicles rental. The Department of State must be able to provide a safe and secure vendor for VIP visitors. Frequently VIP visits are not announced or confirmed in sufficient time to conduct a competition, creating an urgent and compelling need.

    The two companies chosen were able to handle communications requirements and were accommodating to the security needs of the vice president's entourage.


Note: A version of this post first appeared at The Weekly Standard.

Drawstrings and the Nanny State

    On Tuesday, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) issued a recall of some children's hooded sweatshirts due to "strangulation hazard."  The danger?  Drawstrings.

    As noted on the CPSC website, "Federal law bars any person from selling products subject to a publicly-announced voluntary recall by a manufacturer or a mandatory recall ordered by the Commission," and also, "It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product."

    Lest anyone misunderstand, I get that it is possible for such drawstrings to cause harm.  And yet the bottom line is that the federal government has criminalized a piece of clothing, or at least its sale or resale.  Are not warnings enough anymore? Is caveat emptor obsolete?  Must our government continually save us from ourselves?

    While pondering these questions, I decided to tweet the link and see if anyone else was pondering what I was pondering: "So, did everyone know that it is *illegal* to sell children's hoodies that have drawstrings?"  Much to my surprise, within minutes I received a reply from the CPSC:

    Whether the Twitter account of the CPSC is monitored or somehow generates automated tweets I do not know.  But the article to which the CPSC linked reads in part as follows:

Drawstrings can catch on items such as playground equipment or vehicle doors. CPSC has received 26 reports of children who have died when drawstrings in their clothes got tangled on playground slides, school bus doors and other objects. Waist and bottom drawstrings that were caught in cars and buses resulted in dragging incidents. 

CPSC first issued guidelines on drawstrings in February 1996. These were then incorporated into a voluntary standard in 1997. Since the clothing industry started following the voluntary standard, deaths involving neck or hood drawstrings  decreased by 75 percent and there have been no deaths associated with waist or bottom drawstrings. 

Still, we continue to see jackets, sweatshirts, and sweaters made with drawstrings that are dangerous. CPSC has issued more than 130 recalls involving clothes with drawstrings including 8 recalls between November 2011 and May 8, 2012. Here are some recalls from  just the past month (as of publication of this blog). So, check your child’s upper outerwear and make sure to follow the instructions on these recalls.

    So even after voluntary steps by the industry resulted in a 75% reduction in fatalities, the CPSC took the more drastic step of an outright ban.  But, one might argue, if it prevents the death of one child, it's worth it.  But isn't it possible our reliance on government to manage our safety in such minute ways has resulted in a more careless, less responsible society?

    Since the CPSC responded to my initial tweet, I attempted to continue the dialogue with a follow up. Having four children myself, I believe there is a clothing accessory that has endangered my children far more often than any drawstring: shoelaces.  I cannot find reliable statistics, but any parent could testify of the hazards of untied shoes.  So I asked the CPSC:

    So far, I have not received a reply.  Hopefully I haven't given them any ideas.  But just in case, I'm putting all my investment dollars into Velcro.

Feds Sign $6M Helicopter Contract for 'Wild Horse and Burro' Program

    As the sequester bore down on Washington, the dire warnings from the Obama administration gave the impression that wild horses couldn't drag another dime out of the treasury for a whole host of vital government services.  Aircraft carrier refueling, the Head Start program, and White House tours were among the high profile victims.  However, as it turned out, wild horses, with a little help from burros, managed to drag $6,000,000 out of the taxpayers' wallets for Helicopter Flight Services two weeks after the sequester went into effect.  The same government website that posted the contracts for Vice President Biden's London and Paris hotel costs and Paris limo costs has the details:

    Related documents show that the purpose of the contract is to provide

on call helicopter flight services to support transportation of personnel and/or cargo in support of natural resource missions along with other administrative and related activities as directed by the Government in support of the Wild Horse and Burro (WHB).

When asked for clarification on the contract, Joshua Carter of the Interior Department replied via email:

The contract awarded to Skyhawk Helicopter Services is an indefinite delivery indefinite quantity type contract, which means that while the Government knows they will need these services at some point over the course of the next year, we don't know exactly when we'll need them nor do we know exactly how much of the service.  Actual services will be ordered via the issuance of task orders for specific amounts and timeframe.  The $6M figure is the contract ceiling meaning that the total of all orders issued over the life of the contract will not exceed $6M.  So while the contract is considered a $6M contract, the likelihood of the actual workload reaching that amount is minimal.

    According to a Bureau of Land Management budget document, a total of $76,758,000 was included for the National Wild Horse and Burro Program in the Fiscal Year 2012 continuing resolution passed by Congress and signed by the president.

    Days after the sequester took effect, a two-day Wild Horse & Burro Advisory Board Meeting was held at the Sheraton Oklahoma City Hotel in Oklahoma and included discussions on Population Growth Suppression, Ecotourism, and Herd Area Repopulation.

Note: This article first appeared at The Weekly Standard (minus the photo.)