DEI to blame for defense missile cost overrun?

 Federalist Wire:

...

A leading U.S. defense contractor, long celebrated for its commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), now finds itself under scrutiny for its role in a colossal government contract. The Air Force’s Sentinel program, a critical initiative to replace the aging Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), has spiraled into a financial and logistical quagmire, drawing sharp criticism and calls for reform from lawmakers, analysts, and advocates of Elon Musk’s DOGE cost-cutting initiative.

The Sentinel program, designed to secure the land-based component of America’s nuclear triad, has seen its costs skyrocket. Initially pegged at $96 billion, the program’s price tag has surged to at least $141 billion, with some Pentagon estimates suggesting it could climb as high as $264 billion over the coming decades, according to Bloomberg. Northrop Grumman, a first-time ICBM developer, secured a $13 billion contract in September 2020 to spearhead the project. However, the endeavor has been plagued by delays and setbacks, prompting the Pentagon to halt development earlier this year due to “evolving launch facility requirements,” according to Defense One.

Last year, Air & Space Forces Magazine reported that the program survived a Pentagon review, which revealed a staggering cost overrun escalation from 37% to 81%. These figures have fueled accusations of mismanagement and inefficiency, with critics pointing to the Sentinel program as a prime example of poorly planned defense spending.

“The massive expansion of costs for Northrop Grumman’s Minuteman III program is the case example for why poorly-scoped, blank check programs are a bad idea,” a senior Republican Congressional official specializing in defense policy told Fox News Digital. “This is bad for national security, bad for taxpayers, and Republicans will fix this mess that Biden’s team created.” 

The decision to award Northrop Grumman the Sentinel contract was contentious from the start. Boeing, a major competitor, withdrew from the bidding process, alleging that the selection was unfairly tilted against the company, as reported by Responsible Statecraft. This left Northrop as the sole contender, raising questions about the transparency and competitiveness of the process.

Beyond procedural concerns, some experts and former lawmakers have questioned the necessity of the Sentinel program itself. At a Congressional Nuclear Weapons and Arms Control Working Group press conference last year, former Democratic Congressman John Tierney argued that Sentinel “does not add to our security” and could “actually make us less safe.” He criticized the program’s escalating costs, asking, “When will the blank checks to cover spiraling costs end?”

Tierney went further, asserting that the “only value” of recent ICBM development lies in “to the defense contractors who line their fat pockets with large cost overruns at the expense of our taxpayers.” He urged an end to such practices, declaring, “It has got to stop.”
...

DEI is almost always a mistake, and it is especially so when it is tied to US defense and the safety of the country from enemy attacks.  In this case, it apparently ran into both cost overruns and questions about the competency of the program.