I don’t see how the US government can justify spending up to $100 billion taxpayer dollars ($40 billion procurement, and estimated $60 billion in support/maintenance) for a french product, when the US is perched on the edge of a recession. Furthermore, I don’t see the logic in having anyone other than a US company in charge of spare parts and services for something as strategic as an air tanker.
Airbus has offered to build a new plant in Mobile Alabama, which takes some of the sting out of the announcement, but US labor unions and policy makers should not get too excited yet about this. Even if the plant is built, it will build the 167 tankers over ten years or so and then what….rust away as employees that have relocated to Mobile go jobless? Mobile is a beautiful place with fine people, but its isolated small-town economy can’t easily handle the expansion and contraction that would come from a one-time manufacturing run of this magnitude.
Airbus may suggest that the plant will then be used to manufacture commercial plans, but this will never pass muster with european labor unions, which are among the strongest in the world. France is much more socialist than the United States, and the placement of Airbus manufacturing jobs in Mobile Alabama will generate significants complaints in their population long-term.
I think our US government has just handed Airbus a major leg-up in their competition with US airplane makers.
Sometimes I feel like we US taxpayers are already paying for the military defense of the entire world…. This latest decision now ensures that the French, not the US, get any resultant technological advantages from it.
Here is the story Be sure to read the “sound off” comments by readers at the end
P.S. I mentioned John McCain in the title because he scuttled Boeing’s tanker contract in 2001 after raising concerns about the bidding process. While I understood his concerns, and watched in bewilderment as a former Boeing and former Air force procurement officer went to prison for improper dealings, the time for punishing the other 250,000 hard-working Boeing employees is long over. Furthermore, this decision punishes US taxpayers by giving tens of billions to France as the US enters a recession. Yet even today, new sources are reporting that this deal validates McCain’s position.
The Blame Game . . . .
McCain makes an easy scapegoat because he scuttled the original–and somewhat suspect–award to Boeing. You mention it, the players actually went to prison!!
I think you can just as easily blame Sens Cantwell and Murray. Clearly, Alabama Senator(s) have more clout than ours.
It’s a sad day for Boeing but just as sad a day for the US. We can’t be really giving our defense contracts to out-of-country interests, can we?
This is an award from Congress–and remember which party now controls Congress.
There’s plenty of blame to go around. Now, let’s see who steps up to the plate to challenge this award.
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
Story from over a year ago:
Tanker deal may benefit McCain, Ala.
By Roxana Tiron
Posted: 11/01/06 12:00 AM [ET]
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) played a major role in ending the notorious Boeing Air Force mid-air refueling tanker deal several years ago.
McCain, who will become the chairman of the Armed Services panel next year should the GOP retain its majority in the Senate, is now stepping in again just as Air Force officials have declared the addition of a new tanker program to be their No. 1 priority.
This time, McCain’s reach and influence on the program could not only bring good fortunes to the state of Alabama, but could in some ways benefit his own 2008 presidential bid because Southern support will be essential for the GOP moderate.
Alabama has added appeal for 2008 presidential candidates because earlier this year the state legislature voted to move up the primaries to the spring. And McCain would bolster his candidacy with a strong showing in the early primaries.
Just last week, McCain appeared in Mobile, Ala. with GOP Gov. Bob Riley, who is up for reelection this year, to talk about an open competition in the tanker program. And Riley, along with the Alabama congressional delegation, worked out a deal with EADS, one of the defense giants competing for the contract. The Alabama lawmakers stand to gain from the open competition as they aim to make Mobile a magnet for aerospace business.
During his tenure on the Armed Services Committee, McCain has positioned himself as a relentless and effective Pentagon watchdog, ensuring that government acquisition practices are ethical and do not waste taxpayers’ money. In keeping with his watchdog reputation, McCain has called for a totally open competition in the Air Force’s new tanker program.
Story from “The Hill” 11/1/06
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
Nice retort. Allow me: McCain is not the Chair because the GOP did not retain the Senate. So, he may have won Alabama in the primary (did he? I’m too lazy to check), but he still didn’t control today’s award. The GOP are out of power.
Are you really trying to say that Cantwell, Murray or the Dems have nothing to do with this?
And I’m assuming you know who I am, so I’d love to continue this debate over a couple of beers!!
But back to both of our original comments: Those currently in power must work to make sure that our defense interests are not sold to foreign powers under any circumstances. That, my friend and colleague, is currently in the hands of the Demo majority of Washington State (federal and state).
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
Nice try. The Dems have only been “in power” in Congress since last year, and the seeds for this whole debacle were without question sowed *before* that change in power occurred.
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
late 2006, I meant.
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
You’re are correct Kevin, and the dems haven’t accomplished a thing since they’ve taken control. Oh wait, I’m wrong, they brought Roger Clemens in to defend himself against the accusation of using steroids. Now that is the most important thing I can think about that’s facing our country. Maybe we should get you in front of congress for being so ridiculously liberal. Lay off the koolaid, it’s going to make you sick.
Bidding process may have had flaws again
News reports are indicating the the bid process may have been flawed again…with the requirement that the airplane be a significant troop transport getting extra emphasis unfairly late in the competition.
The proposal/bidding process is closely guarded, and I know nothing more about it than I read in the papers, but it sounds like Boeing could have offered a larger airframe if that is what the government wanted from the beginning.
Can someone please convince me that this is not John McCain deciding that the United States of America is going to start buying its national defense systems from foreign countries because in 2001 someone from Boeing illegally offered someone from the Air Force a job. Because that would be a really unfortunate way to decide national security and economic matters in 2008, and it would amount to really shabby treatment of the other hundreds of thousands of us who did nothing wrong.
The Airbus plant in Mobile will assemble the airbus parts primarily brought in from overseas. It will not be the same as having home-grown engineering, fabrication, testing, spares, and support logistics. That will come largely from French employees, who will now have a great shot at avoiding recession thanks to US taxpayers (who are also paying for the war in Iraq.)
Lastly, I share the feeling that congress is wasting time deciding whether baseball players used steroids, when we are at war and the economy is about to tank.
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
Look, if you’re going to call me by name and insult me, you should have the decency to use your full name in your posts.
Keep on posting, though — you’re just making yourself look like an ass.
Kevin Poole
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
Is calling you a liberal an insult? Why is it that liberals hate to be called liberals? I don’t understand that. I’m not insulted when someone calls me a conservative.
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
Well, let’s see, I’ve never described myself as a “liberal” — that’s just your assumption and your label. So, yes, it’s insulting when you call me something I don’t even call myself. More than that, though, it’s the manner in which you say it (“you Libs”) that’s derogatory. Plus, your assumption that I drink from the communal Democratic party Kool-Aid pitcher is incorrect.
Why won’t you sign your name to your posts?
Kevin
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
Because of business. I don’t want to lose 50% of my customers due to my political beliefs. The next time I see you in person, I’ll introduce myself.
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
Kevin, I have read your posts for the past 3-4 months. You are indefinitely left of center. I would say that you are in line with Ted Kennedy, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid. There is no need to be ashamed for what you believe in. Just step up to the plate and admit that you are a full blown lib. It’s not that big of a deal. I am a full blown conservative and I am not ashamed, period. Let’s get that out of the way now, and debate the issues. Now don’t go getting all emotional on me now. Get a hold of yourself and settle down.
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
I meant definitely
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
You’ve got a lot of nerve but not much courage, Anonymous.
I’ll be the first person to stand up for what I believe in. I’m not about to get lumped in with the people you cited, however. They’re old school “Libs,” you as you like to say, over twice my age in most cases, whose political leanings and loyalties were shaped by such events as the Vietnam War, Watergate, and Reaganomics. While I agree with their views on many issues, I’m not going to assume responsibility for their “tax and spend” baggage. I don’t support the sort of pork barrel spending that they and other career politicians are known for, and I’m far more apt to encourage personal responsibility over government handouts. I will say one thing, though: I’d sure as hell rather be associated with old school liberals than with Jesse Helms, Rick Santorum, or Jim Inhofe… or Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, or James Dobson.
Reagan did a great job of making “liberal” a dirty word, but it sounds like you’re stuck in the ’80s. Time to get rid of those acid-washed jeans, shaker knit sweaters, and parachute pants, my friend. The new term for left-of-center is “Progressive.” And while that’s a label I wear proudly, I’ll always continue to think for myself and hold my own pragmatic political views, even if they conflict with those espoused on Air America or in The Stranger. You have no idea what I’m all about, Bucko.
Go ahead, take two minutes to create a Live Journal account for yourself.
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
No need to, you are just a lib and don’t want to admit it. I’m ok with that. Just stop your pretending and you’ll come out ok. There is no difference between a lib and a so called progressive.
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
I guess I was right about the acid-washed jeans.
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
Some Republicans are pissed:
“These are the same European governments who are unwilling to support us in the global war on terror and over the last few months refused to provide even an additional 100 soldiers apiece for Afghanistan operations,” said Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-California.
“Instead, we have to send 3,200 additional U.S. Marines to Afghanistan while they take $35 billion in American taxpayer contracts.”
…
Sounds like a perfect storm:
Boeing should have taken the project seriously and offered up something better than rewarmed 767’s.
Boeing shouldn’t have engaged in criminal behaviour.
Washington should have kept a decent senate delegation that can tie their own shoes.
And here’s the kicker: We, as a country, should have ensured that there were more than one decent large airplane manufacturer left in the US. Then the competition would be between Boeing and the other manufacturer.
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
The contract was given to Northup Grunman from what I understand. It is built on an Airbus frame. The 767 would be the last of that aircraft line going to the military and not the airline companies. The Airbus frame holds 45,000 lbs more fuel than the 767. This isn’t about the economy, it’s about what’s best for protecting our country. You libs need to wake up to reality and look at all the facts!
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
I’m well aware of the “facts” that may have been involved in the decision. I follow the aerospace industry very closely, and I understand the technical advantages that the Northrup/EADS (Airbus’ parent company) plane offered. However, those advantages aren’t so earth-shattering that they should have negated the economic and national security advantages of choosing an American-made aircraft from an American company — with a production line and actual flying examples already in place.
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
I agree that this is a monumental failure on our 2 senators parts. I heard Patty lament the announcement, but come on, somebody like Scoop Jackson, or Warren M. would never have let this happen. Face it, they have no clout, even in a democratic controlled senate.
I agree that McCain did us no favors, but I put this on our state leaders….
Slade would never have let this happen!
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
I agree our Senators should not have let this happen. They will be answering for it at the next election…the unions are pretty ticked. When the second-biggest government contract of all time is for large commercial-style airframes, and your state is the only one in the United States that builds them, it’s a failure for a senator to lose the contract.
Re: The Blame Game . . . .
I really don’t get it: how are our elected officials — other than John McCain — responsible for the Air Force’s decision? The Air Force officials have already stated that they made their decision without regard to American jobs or political pressure. Is there something our congressional contingent should have done to prevent this decision from happening? If so, what? Seriously, if there’s something more they should’ve done, then they need to be held accountable for their lack of concern. But I think this whole decision was basically the Air Force’s way of washing its hands of the earlier Boeing influence-peddling scandal.
Re: Bidding process may have had flaws again
Boeing got lazy…
Rumir was that Boeing thought they had this in the bag and acted like it – their price was higher and the capabilities were lower.
Randy, you harp on Mobile just being the final assembly point for a bunch of overseas modules – isn’t the 787 like that too?
Re: Bidding process may have had flaws again
True, but the 787 isn’t forming the basis of a military aircraft that taxpayers are funding.
Re: Bidding process may have had flaws again
I’m not sure what the extent of the “Mobile manufacturing plant” will be. From some of the reports I have read, it sound like the plant may just be a modification hanger, where completed Airbus Airplanes flown in from Europe are equipped with refueling booms (and painted with an American flag). This would amount to a glorified repair station more than a real manufacturing facility. As you know, 787 parts are being shipped in to the region by sea, rail, and air, and actually being assembled (and designed) in our area. So I think this is not really the same thing as what is being done with the 787.
But I would need more data to be sure. One clue is that the news says it creates 1000-1500 jobs in Mobile. By way of comparison, full-up final assembly lines for airliners usually employ five to ten times that many people. Our local aerospace employer has had up to 30,000 jobs in Renton while I have been on council.
Re: Bidding process may have had flaws again
I really wish that Boeing would have received the contract being an American company. I hope they didn’t become complacent and assume that they would get it because of that. I would have liked to see them meet our military’s needs. They may have had the impression through Cantwell, Murray and Gregoire that they would get it. I don’t know, just take a look at some of the recent statements by Gregoire regarding the subject.
McCain
I’m a life-long Republican in Florida, and I blame McMain for this nightmare. The $6 billion he so proudly claims to have saved the taxpayers is but a few days worth of our trade deficit.
He just lost my Florida vote.
Remember when President Chirac nixed Pratt & Whitney’s engines on the A400M, because they were not “European”? We have a P & W factory in Florida… Good luck Sen. McCain!
Re: McCain
Excellent comparison with the A400 engine issue!
Today tankers, tomorrow Air Force One?
Here is an article dated October 2007 suggesting USAF Air Mobility Command was looking at Airbus A380 as the next Air Force One.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/10/17/218681/exclusive-us-considers-airbus-a380-as-air-force-one-and-potentially-a-c-5-replacement.html
Not that the tanker deal is a precedent…here is an excerpt from this article:
“Recent acquisition contracts show that presidential aircraft fleets are not immune from transatlantic competition. In 2004, the US Navy selected an Italian-British helicopter design – the EH101 — offered by Lockheed for the next presidential helicopter.
The Lockheed product, which has since faced cost and technical problems, beat a rival bid from incumbent “Marine One” supplier Sikorsky.”