Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
Tampa Tribune
May 10, 2008 By Billy House and Amy Dominello
WASHINGTON - An influential Tampa Bay area member of Congress has asked the Air Force to consider splitting in two its controversial $35 billion contract for new refueling tankers.
"We've asked the Air Force for its opinion," said Rep. C.W. Bill Young, the ranking Republican on the House Defense Appropriations Committee.
The Solomonic request from Young, of Indian Shores, comes amid a "Buy American" backlash in Congress and elsewhere over the Air Force's awarding of the contract in February, handing a foreign company a role in the military project.
The winner was a consortium that includes Los Angeles-based Northrop Grumman and the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co., North America, a subsidiary of the Franco-German conglomerate and parent company of Airbus.
Chicago-based Boeing Co. was the competing bidder to replace 179 tankers that refuel military aircraft in midflight. The contract could grow to $100 billion.
Boeing says the contract was awarded improperly and has asked the Government Accountability Office to look into whether the bidding process was fair. Boeing also has mounted a campaign to sway support, saying the project will cost American jobs and put national security at risk.
The Air Force wants the GAO to deny Boeing's protest.
A Deal Breaker?
Congressional critics are threatening to kill the deal if evidence is found that Boeing was treated unfairly. House and Senate committees that set the budgets for the Defense Department and Air Force say they can turn off the funding spigot for the program.
Under the contract, parts of the plane will be made overseas, but Northrop has said 60 percent of the tanker will be American-made, through Northrop's U.S. suppliers in Florida, Alabama, and 47 other states.
In all, it says 230 U.S. companies and as many as 48,000 U.S. jobs will be involved in the work.
For instance, the new tankers, which may replace some of the 16 aging KC-135 tankers now flown out of MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, could mean $500 million a year for Florida companies. That includes four subcontractors in the Tampa Bay area. In all, it could create up to 2,000 new jobs in Florida.
How splitting the contract between two builders - if that is possible - might affect those jobs is uncertain.
Boeing had planned to do the bulk of its main tanker work at its facilities in Washington state and Kansas. Sen. Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington, a state where Boeing is the largest employer, has called the contract decision "shocking" and "an economic stimulus package for Europe."
Young's office said talks with the Air Force haven't progressed very far yet. Both Northrop and Boeing said Young's idea to divide the contract between them is not tenable.
Companies Oppose Split Contract
Bill Barksdale, a spokesman for Boeing, said the company has been, and continues to be, opposed to splitting the contract.
"It would really cost a lot more to put two contracts out there," he said. "... It doesn't make a lot of sense for the Air Force or the taxpayer."
Randy Belote, a spokesman for Northrop, said the Air Force considered choosing two companies to build the tankers early on, but quickly realized the tankers needed to be replaced as soon as possible.
"A split buy would only serve to slow down the process," he said.
Members of Alabama's congressional delegation are also opposed to idea. Northrop plans to assemble the tanker at a plant in Mobile, Ala., creating 2,000 jobs there.
"I don't think it should be split now just for political reasons," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala. "That would politicize the objective, fair criteria the Air Force set up."
Rep. Jo Bonner, R-Ala., said the idea is yet another attempt to derail the project.
GOP Rep. Todd Tiahrt of Kansas said splitting the contract might be "a political solution."
Tiahrt said such a move would not address the underlying concerns with how the contract was awarded, including, he asserted, the fact that the Northrop tanker does not fit the needs of the Air Force.
Northrop's Belote disagrees, stressing the Air Force vigorously vetted the contract.
"We won, so what we're suggesting is we need to get on with it," Belote said.
With controversy over the contract intensifying, Young said he and Democrat Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania first approached Air Force officials about their views on splitting the contract last month.
Their request of the Air Force was not made in writing, but Young said, "There's been some conversations and we have suggested that they consider that."
Murtha is the chairman of the House Defense Appropriations Committee. He is among lawmakers who have threatened to cut off funding for the contract if evidence is found Boeing was treated unfairly. The issue is expected to come up as Congress mulls funding requests.
Young said the Air Force isn't expected to answer, or even talk openly about the idea, until after the GAO issues its decision on Boeing's protest by June 19.
House is with The Tampa Tribune andDominello is withMedia General News Service.
May 10, 2008 By Billy House and Amy Dominello
WASHINGTON - An influential Tampa Bay area member of Congress has asked the Air Force to consider splitting in two its controversial $35 billion contract for new refueling tankers.
"We've asked the Air Force for its opinion," said Rep. C.W. Bill Young, the ranking Republican on the House Defense Appropriations Committee.
The Solomonic request from Young, of Indian Shores, comes amid a "Buy American" backlash in Congress and elsewhere over the Air Force's awarding of the contract in February, handing a foreign company a role in the military project.
The winner was a consortium that includes Los Angeles-based Northrop Grumman and the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co., North America, a subsidiary of the Franco-German conglomerate and parent company of Airbus.
Chicago-based Boeing Co. was the competing bidder to replace 179 tankers that refuel military aircraft in midflight. The contract could grow to $100 billion.
Boeing says the contract was awarded improperly and has asked the Government Accountability Office to look into whether the bidding process was fair. Boeing also has mounted a campaign to sway support, saying the project will cost American jobs and put national security at risk.
The Air Force wants the GAO to deny Boeing's protest.
A Deal Breaker?
Congressional critics are threatening to kill the deal if evidence is found that Boeing was treated unfairly. House and Senate committees that set the budgets for the Defense Department and Air Force say they can turn off the funding spigot for the program.
Under the contract, parts of the plane will be made overseas, but Northrop has said 60 percent of the tanker will be American-made, through Northrop's U.S. suppliers in Florida, Alabama, and 47 other states.
In all, it says 230 U.S. companies and as many as 48,000 U.S. jobs will be involved in the work.
For instance, the new tankers, which may replace some of the 16 aging KC-135 tankers now flown out of MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, could mean $500 million a year for Florida companies. That includes four subcontractors in the Tampa Bay area. In all, it could create up to 2,000 new jobs in Florida.
How splitting the contract between two builders - if that is possible - might affect those jobs is uncertain.
Boeing had planned to do the bulk of its main tanker work at its facilities in Washington state and Kansas. Sen. Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington, a state where Boeing is the largest employer, has called the contract decision "shocking" and "an economic stimulus package for Europe."
Young's office said talks with the Air Force haven't progressed very far yet. Both Northrop and Boeing said Young's idea to divide the contract between them is not tenable.
Companies Oppose Split Contract
Bill Barksdale, a spokesman for Boeing, said the company has been, and continues to be, opposed to splitting the contract.
"It would really cost a lot more to put two contracts out there," he said. "... It doesn't make a lot of sense for the Air Force or the taxpayer."
Randy Belote, a spokesman for Northrop, said the Air Force considered choosing two companies to build the tankers early on, but quickly realized the tankers needed to be replaced as soon as possible.
"A split buy would only serve to slow down the process," he said.
Members of Alabama's congressional delegation are also opposed to idea. Northrop plans to assemble the tanker at a plant in Mobile, Ala., creating 2,000 jobs there.
"I don't think it should be split now just for political reasons," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala. "That would politicize the objective, fair criteria the Air Force set up."
Rep. Jo Bonner, R-Ala., said the idea is yet another attempt to derail the project.
GOP Rep. Todd Tiahrt of Kansas said splitting the contract might be "a political solution."
Tiahrt said such a move would not address the underlying concerns with how the contract was awarded, including, he asserted, the fact that the Northrop tanker does not fit the needs of the Air Force.
Northrop's Belote disagrees, stressing the Air Force vigorously vetted the contract.
"We won, so what we're suggesting is we need to get on with it," Belote said.
With controversy over the contract intensifying, Young said he and Democrat Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania first approached Air Force officials about their views on splitting the contract last month.
Their request of the Air Force was not made in writing, but Young said, "There's been some conversations and we have suggested that they consider that."
Murtha is the chairman of the House Defense Appropriations Committee. He is among lawmakers who have threatened to cut off funding for the contract if evidence is found Boeing was treated unfairly. The issue is expected to come up as Congress mulls funding requests.
Young said the Air Force isn't expected to answer, or even talk openly about the idea, until after the GAO issues its decision on Boeing's protest by June 19.
House is with The Tampa Tribune andDominello is withMedia General News Service.