Jamie Leigh Jones, KBR, and Senator Burr

Jamie Leigh Jones volunteered in 2005, when she was 19 years old, to work for KBR in Iraq. To secure the position she was required by the company to sign an agreement that any issues she might have with the corporation would be referred to binding arbitration. Shortly after arriving in Iraq she was drugged, gang-raped and beaten by her coworkers at KBR. She suffered serious injuries to her breasts and genitals, and obvious mental trauma. The KBR employees who had assaulted her then prevented her from receiving medical care and kept her locked her in a shipping container for more than a day following the assault. She was told by KBR that if she left Iraq for medical treatment she would lose her job. KBR claimed her assault was part of the job and therefore required to be resolved by arbitration and she could not sue in court. It should be noted from the start that if Ms. Jones had been serving in the United States military she would have had the entire resources of the Universal Code of Military Justice at her service. If she had been simply "visiting" she would have had other options. But because she was an employee of an American corporation serving the Defense Department, that corporation claimed that by signing the contract with KBR she could be denied the constitutional rights of an American citizen.

After 15 months of arbitration, Jones and her lawyers did sue KBR in District Court and the court ruled that the Jones assault was not related to her employment and therefore not required to be settled under arbitration and her lawsuit can go forward.

While this hearing was proceeding, Senator Franken introduced an amendment to the Defense Appropriations Bill in November, 2009, providing that defense companies attempting to deny American citizens working for them their legal rights in American courts should be denied access to defense expenditures or any other payment from U. S. taxpayer funds. The measure passed 68 to 30. All 30 senators voting against the amendment were members of the Republican Party, Senator Burr being one of the thirty.

I called Senator Burr four times asking him to respond in writing to me about this vote. What did it mean to him, why did he cast it, and what was his intention?

On November 16, 2009, Senator Burr wrote to defend his vote, claiming the amendment unfairly discriminates against American corporations, because employment arbitration agreements can not cover claims involving personal injury, assault, etc. to begin with, therefore Ms. Jones could have brought action against her employer in federal court. The fact that KBR had blocked Ms. Jones attempt to do this for over a year was not discussed by Senator Burr.

Senator Burr also refers to the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, which he says allows the federal government to prosecute crimes committed by U.S. military contractors working overseas. Senator Burr does not comment however, why the federal government did NOT prosecute these crimes which were committed by U. S. military contractors working overseas - these crimes against an American citizen. Senator Burr can probably still take action to see that the federal government does prosecute these crimes committed by U. S. military contractors working overseas. I hope he will.

Personally, I can’t believe that Senator Burr really wants to place the interests of corporations over justice for rape victims, but I have to read his vote as stating that while he thinks rape is serious of course, and so are some other crimes, still they are not THAT important in this war which has already cost so many lives and run about a trillion dollars. He seems to me to be saying that KBR, in this case, is too important to fail, and maybe we should not make them mad.

But at that point in his letter, Senator Burr - to my mind - rests his case. My question to him now is the same as it was back in November: Why can KBR, by virtue of the fact that it is a major defense contractor, deny access of any American citizen to the federal justice system? I really think the full impact of Senator Franken’s amendment will not fall upon Ms. Jones, but upon other victims who have not had the courage or resources to come forward until now.

This type of action allegedly carried out by KBR is not dissimilar to the attack on the United States on 9-11. It too is terrorism. It too is an attack against American citizens by an organization which is opposed to American principles.

Senator Burr’s vote is also a form of terrorism, an attack against American citizens by an individual who is opposed to American principles. Shame on you Senator Burr, may the shame you have brought to America by this vote find its final resting place on your shoulders.