Recently the House had a brilliant idea….that is to find more oversight over the funds that is spent on continuing the war in Ukraine.
An idea that met with my approval (so that meant it would go nowhere) and now it looks like the buckets of cash from lobbyists has return a dividend.
The Senate on Tuesday night voted down an amendment to create a special inspector general to oversee the over $113 billion that the US has authorized to spend on the war in Ukraine.
The amendment, which was introduced by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), failed in a vote of 26-68, with 24 Republicans and only two Democrats voting in favor of more oversight for the billions in weapons that are being shipped to Ukraine.
Hawley tried to add the amendment to a bill to repeal the 1991 and 2002 Iraq Authorizations for the Use of Military Force (AUMFs). The legislation to repeal the AUMFs is expected to be voted on sometime this week.
Hawley’s idea was to create a position for Ukraine similar to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), which John Sopko has filled since 2012.
Sopko found tens of billions of dollars in waste in US aid to Afghanistan and issued scathing reports criticizing US policy in the country. Last month, Sopko said he fears the US will repeat the same mistakes in Ukraine.
“You’re bound to get corrupt elements of not only the Ukrainian or the host government, but also of US government contractors or other third party contractors to try to steal the money. There’s just so much money going in, and it’s hard to keep track of,” Sopko told reporters.
Ahead of Tuesday’s vote, Hawley wrote in an op-ed published by Fox News: “Billions upon billions of American dollars are pouring into a war-torn country without any serious oversight.”
Hawley has been critical of US policy in Ukraine because he thinks the US should be focusing on building up in the Asia Pacific to face China instead. In December, he sent a letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken urging the Biden administration to prioritize arming Taiwan over Ukraine.
(antiwar.com)
No one in the industry wants oversight.
Why should the American people know where their tax dollars are going and how it is spent?
Just another in a long list of oversight proposals that die an agonizing death.
I Read, I Write, You Know
“lego ergo scribo”
In Saner Thought 
Send in the accountants! Let’s see where the billions have really gone.
Best wishes, Pete.
Exactly….and lobbyists spent millions to keep them away. chuq
I have no objections to oversight for the money being spent on Ukraine as long as it does not inhibit what Ukraine needs to press its battle on. But if it is a scheme to delay critical help to Ukraine for months while some committee or committees hassles about it, then I am dead set against it. I remember MTG bragging about seeing to it that not another dollar be spent on Ukraine and I believe that is the underlying reason for Hawley, of all people, wanting to create oversight … I am sure there is some motive other than oversight .. I would not trust a word that proceeds forth from the mouth of any right-wing extremist under any circumstance. There is always an ulterior motive to anything they propose and anything they ever propose is designed to undercut democracy.
THere is always a shadow subject….but it still needs oversight….I mean look at the cash we lost in Iraq….like I said before I agree min principle but not in their action. chuq
Chuq — that is fair.