Dems put protectionism ahead of defense
The perils of protectionism were on full display in Congress last week, as House Democrats busied themselves with trying to shoot down much-needed replacements for the Air Force's aging fleet of midair refueling tankers.The Democrats are pretty shameless when it comes to both defense and to protectionism these days. They would rather lose a war to win an election and they would rather give the troops inferior equipment if it helps their constituency groups and lines the pockets of their contributors.Their problem: Parts of the planes could be built in - gasp! - Europe.
The Dems, led by Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman John Murtha (D-Pa.), are peeved that the Air Force awarded the $40 billion contract to a partnership of Los Angeles-based Northrop Grumman and the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company - rather than to favored son Boeing, which has deployed its brigade of lobbyists to kill the deal.
Which is exactly, so it seems, what Murtha has in mind: "This committee funds this program, and all this committee has to do is stop the money and this program is not going to go forward," he threatened - unless Pentagon officials "explain" their decision.
It wouldn't be hard to do: The Northrop tankers are considerably bigger, needing fewer runs to complete their missions - despite being both less expensive and more reliable, according to Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne.
(Plus, the tankers' final assembly will create thousands of jobs right in Alabama and Mississippi - states that Murtha's members obviously care little about.)
Nevertheless, Boeing had a non-competitive lock on the contract only a few years ago - until the company was caught recruiting a top Air Force procurement officer for a job while she was heading up the tanker program. (The officer and a Boeing exec later went to jail.)
But one can hardly expect competition and transparency - to say nothing of getting the best possible equipment to America's fighting forces - to weigh much on the minds of Democrats in search of the latest faux-populist talking point.
...
Strategy Page has more on the Northrup advantage:
...Murtha is not a great steward of defense dollars so it is not surprising that he would object to the deal.
... The two big factors were superior performance (fewer of the AirBus aircraft were needed to get the job done) and more reliable performance of the suppliers. In this case, it's AirBus's U.S. partner, Northrup, that provided an edge. The air force examined recent project performance by Boeing and AirBus/Northrup, and found that the latter team was more likely to deliver the aircraft on time and at the agreed upon price. Boeing also lost points for providing questionable cost estimates. The air force crunched the numbers of the two proposals and determined that, while 49 of the AirBus tankers would be available by 2013, only 19 of the Boeing version would be ready.
...
One great American, Medal of Honor recipient Hershel "Woody" Williams, thinks the Pentagon snub of Boeing was a terrible decision, and I agree.
ReplyDeleteWhy? In part, because I trust Boeing employees -- including many friends and neighbors -- far more than I trust any individual, corporate or government interests in France or the European Union.
Congress needs to revisit and reverse this decision immediately.