McCain Should Get Credit, Not Blame for Tanker Deal
By Alan Stewart Carl | Related entries in McCain, MilitaryBack in 2004/2005, as chairman of the Armed Services Committee, John McCain helped bust up a corrupt deal between Boeing and the U.S. Air Force that would have cost tax payers a bundle for what could have been an inferior tanker plane. Several people ended up in jail and there is no dispute that the deal was underhanded.
Now, McCain is getting blamed because the tanker deal recently went to Airbus, Boeing’s European competitor. Not only did McCain scuttle the earlier deal but he doggedly kept after the bidding procedures to ensure the American people got the best product for the best cost. He did not have any say as to which company won the bid and is not accused of influencing the Air Force’s decision.
However, because the plane won’t be built in America by American workers, McCain is being painted as the villain. The fact that a few of his advisors are former lobbyists for Airbus’ parent company EADS, doesn’t help McCain. But there is absolutely no evidence that McCain was looking to hurt Boeing or help Airbus. There are not many companies capable of making a military tanker plane and, by all accounts, McCain just wanted to keep corruption out of the bidding process so that the Air Force could get the best plane. The fact that a few former EADS lobbyists are now McCain advisors proves little – particularly when you consider how, in Washington, most advisors/consultants move freely between working for politicians and working for lobbying groups. That may be a problem in general but it doesn’t appear to be a problem in this specific case.
As long as we are going to allow foreign companies to bid on production of certain military vehicles, we should demand that the process is fair. McCain did the very hard work to achieve just that. Now he’s getting blamed because the Air Force decided that Airbus was able to design a better plane at a better cost than was Boeing. In my mind, McCain did the country a service by uncovering the corruption in the original deal and ensuring the final deal was the best one possible for the tax payer and the Air Force.
Blame our policy of allowing foreign companies to bid on our military projects. But don’t blame McCain for ensuring the current system is used fairly.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 11th, 2008 and is filed under McCain, Military. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 11th, 2008 at 11:43 am
McCain
“I’ll give it to you straight my friends..Those jobs won’t be coming back! We need to retrain our workforce in America to green technologies.. ‘off camera prompt’.. (pause) It’s the wave of the future, just like the hula-hoop of yesteryear!” ‘Grin’ …
“This process was fair and open. My letters did not influence the results here..
HEY! Get off my lawn you little JER*! ..’off camera prompt’ ..(pause) ..mumbling.. Let us strike that from the record if I may! ..(grin)..”
March 11th, 2008 at 11:50 am
“Blame our policy of allowing foreign companies to bid on our military projects. But don’t blame McCain for ensuring the current system is used fairly.”
Alan
You missed the part that this ‘policy’ was a McCain sponsored amendment.
March 11th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
However, because the plane won’t be built in America by American workers, McCain is being painted as the villain.
Actually, I believe the planes will be built (assembled) in Alabama. Also a lot of the parts will be supplied by American firms. Boeing has no one to blame but themselves.
And why shouldn’t Northrop Grumman be able to win this contract? So what if they partnered with Airbus? It is especially galling to see these Republican’s who push globalization/free trade thing all the time throwing a conniption about this. It reaches a level of hypocrisy that is very nearly offensive.
March 11th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
I also love how no one is focusing upon the performance of the product involved. If we are really interested in giving our troops the best equipment, and not decideding which program is the better pork barrell project for the home district(s), then performance should be the key question.
March 11th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
I’m willing to sound protectionist when it comes to manufacture and/or control of military equipment, communications and infrastruture.
March 11th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
I could maybe see refusing to buy military equipment from someone we thought might be an opponent in a shooting war at some point in the future. But claiming the EU is such a potential opponent is just daft.
March 11th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
First NAFTA, than a world trade and manufacturing imbalance that outsourced enough American jobs to create large portions of our population that can’t afford home mortgages and now we are going
to give away 44 thousand jobs to FRANCE! And we the tax payer are going to pay for it all!!!! wj, it is you, you blooming idiot, who is DAFT
and dangerous as well!!!!!! I guess you,ve got a job, so you can be very
tolerant of the EU and the hell with everybody else!
March 11th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
The Associated Press just broke a story a couple of hours ago, on March 11, (”McCain advisers lobbied for Airbus”) confirming McCain had a larger role than previously thought in pushing the A330 and sweeping the huge Airbus subsidy issue under the rug. He was lobbied heavily by EADS and now, incredibly, some of those same lobbyists are working as high level advisors in his Presidential campaign! When the press and Boeing unfold the details of this, it will be potent ammunition to have a redo of the competition, during which they may offer the 777.
The Democrats will have a field day with McCain’s “holier than thou” atitude. It just might turn Kansas into a blue state, having been sacrificed to Alabama. Airbus has never made a dime on the 770 or so, A330 airplanes they have built so far (recall that Airbus was started as a jobs program for France, Italy and Spain) and they ran Lockheed and McDonnell Douglas out of the commercial airplane business because of subsidies and by selling already built planes at a huge loss to various carriers. And now America just stands by while EADS/Airbus is fronted by Northrop Grumman and starts putting together Europe made airplane components in Alabama (there is little value added here, and who knows whether they can from a technical standpoint with a workforce that has yet to be hired and trained in a building that has yet to be built). This is just the start of the EADS recently announced plan to be in our front yard, as they eventually want to offer other defense products. Do you really think they would allow us to do the same in their respective countries and compete on a level playing field? America, what a country.
March 12th, 2008 at 6:51 am
[...] I wrote about John McCain’s involvement in a Air Force tanker deal that ultimately went to Airbus as partnered with Northrup-Grumman. McCain’s involvement aside, [...]
March 12th, 2008 at 6:51 am
[...] I wrote about John McCain’s involvement in a Air Force tanker deal that ultimately went to Airbus as partnered with Northrup-Grumman. McCain’s involvement aside, [...]