What Happened to the F-22?
Travis | Jul 31, 2009 |
0 
Respect the dome
Recent Senate and House votes to stop buying additional F-22 Raptor aircraft have been heralded as huge wins for President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates in the battle to reform the Pentagon. Certainly the votes were major political victories. Yet this year is not the first time Congress has attempted to stop the F-22. During the 1990s, legislators in both the House and Senate tried – unsuccessfully – to cut funding for the program. Why did Congress deliver the Obama administration’s preferred policy outcome this time around?
House Strips F-22 Funds
Travis | Jul 30, 2009 | 0 The House just passed Rep. John Murtha’s amendment to remove $368.8 million in unrequested advance procurement funding for more F-22 aircraft from the fiscal year 2010 Defense Appropriations bill. Here’s where the F-22 funding battle now stands:
House Authorization: $368.8 million in advance procurement funding
Senate Authorization: No $
House Appropriations: No $
Senate Appropriations: Yet to act
With each chamber having now rejected F-22 funds, there is an expectation that the rejections will be upheld during conference committee negotiations. I would expect Sen. Daniel Inouye not to include F-22 money in his Senate Appropriations markup because the full Senate already opposed the money once and is likely to do so again.
The House vote today is another nail in the F-22’s coffin.
A Look at the FY 2010 House Defense Appropriations Bill
Travis | Jul 28, 2009 | 0 This morning I posted my analysis of the legislation, which is scheduled to be considered by the House this week. Below are the highlights.
Here are the Center’s other analyses of fiscal year 2010 budget action:
February “Topline” Request
May “Full” Request
House Defense Authorization
Senate Defense Authorization
House Defense Appropriations Highlights…
Security Matters, Iraq & Afghanistan, Nukes on a Blog, Congress, F-22, Missile Defense (all tags)
Read This on the F-22
Travis | Jul 24, 2009 | 0 In this piece, freelance journalist Jonah Engle balances the systemic arguments against the F-22 Raptor (from analysts like me) against the concerns of workers whose livelihoods depend on the program. The resulting reportage, which includes interviews with Pratt & Whitney employees in Connecticut, captures both sides of the story better than anything else I have read this spring.
Not surprisingly, the article won the prize for financial reporting at the Columbia J School this spring. Congrats, Jonah, and keep up the good work!
Hill Appropriators Kick F-22 When It's Down
Travis | Jul 23, 2009 | 0 
Unhappy face
The F-22 Raptor’s bad week continues.
First, the Senate voted Tuesday to strip out $1.75 billion in funding.
Then, House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee chairman John Murtha added insult to injury by announcing yesterday that even though his subcommittee included $369 million for the F-22, he would remove the funds during floor consideration and redirect them toward F-22 spare parts and other maintenance activities. Sayeth Murtha:
The Senate's 58-40 vote July 21 to strip its fiscal 2010 defense authorization bill (S 1390) of $1.75 billion to buy seven more F-22s rendered the House's F-22 funding effort futile, Murtha said.
"That ended the debate," he said.
Murtha’s counterpart, Daniel Inouye, suggested earlier this week that he too would respect Obama-Gates-Levin-McCain’s gangster and not add F-22 funds to his Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee’s bill.
Where does that leave us? Is the F-22 really dead?
The answer is no, though it did get a stake driven through its heart this week.
Since the House included advanced procurement funds for the F-22 in its version of the Defense Authorization bill, in theory the House’s preference could be upheld during conference negotiations with the Senate. Is this likely? No. Is it possible? Yes.
Also, as charming as it may be that Murtha and Inouye have pledged not to allow F-22 funds into their appropriations bills, the bills still have to survive floor consideration (House) and both committee and floor consideration (Senate). There will therefore be opportunities for F-22 supporters in both chambers to offer amendments that would add money for more Raptors.
After this week’s events, however, I would predict with a moderate-to-high level of confidence that as long as Murtha and Inouye don’t renege on their pledges, any future attempts to add money for the F-22 will fail. If I’m wrong, rest assured that I will delete this post and pretend like I never predicted such a thing.
Am I Happy the Senate Rejected F-22 Funds?
Travis | Jul 22, 2009 | 0 "I could not accept the assumption that Senators were all such idiots that they deserved admiring applause every time they could be persuaded...to do something sensible."
- George F. Kennan, Memoirs: 1925-1950
The Significance of the F-22 Vote
John Isaacs | Jul 21, 2009 | 0 The Senate today voted 58 to 40 to approve a Levin (D-MI) – McCain (R-AZ) amendment to eliminate $1.75 billion for seven F-22s that was added by the Senate Armed Services Committee.
The vote was significant because if those supporting more aircraft had prevailed even though the plane has no utility in Iraq or Afghanistan, is egregiously expensive, is strenuously opposed by Secretary of Defense Gates, and elicited a veto threat from President Obama, it would have been widely interpreted by the media as a crushing defeat for the Obama administration.
The administration is already facing great challenges over the still faltering economy and difficult bills dealing with health care legislation and climate change.
The F-22 vote was also significant because it provided an opportunity for DOD and Armed Services Committee chairman Levin to rev up their vote counting operations. They set up procedures to count noses, persuade the undecideds, and win over those who started out supporting the F-22.
This vote counting operation, co-operated with Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman John Kerry (D-MA), will be vital when the Senate gets to later votes on a Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) follow-on agreement and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).
The administration has already proved adept at winning close Senate votes on the economic stimulus package and the children’s health care bill. Now it has proved adept in the first significant national security test in the Senate.
The F-22 battle is a long way from over. The House approved funds in its authorization bill and congressional appropriators look sympathetic to the F-22.
Nevertheless, this victory is important both for the Obama administration and for those interested in winning Senate approval for arms control treaties in the near future.
F-22 Debate Heats Up
Andrew | Jul 16, 2009 | 0 This week, the Senate began debating an amendment, backed by Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin and Ranking Member John McCain, which would strip $1.75 billion for seven additional F-22s from the 2010 Defense Authorization bill.
A vote on the Levin-McCain amendment was delayed yesterday because of alleged procedural wrangling, although one suspects that the sponsors may have had a bad feeling about their prospects and decided to delay the vote and twist some more arms. Levin vowed to bring it back up for a vote, however, as soon as next week.
A number of prominent figures have come out against further F-22 production, including President Barack Obama, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and several top Air Force officials.
On Monday, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz and Air Force Secretary Michael Donley issued a letter (h/t POGO) calling for an end to F-22 production. An excerpt reads:
In summary, we assessed the F-22 decision from all angles, taking into account competing strategic priorities and complementary programs and alternatives, all balanced within the context of available resources. We did not and do not recommend F-22s be included in the FY10 defense budget. This is a difficult decision but one with which we are comfortable. Most importantly, in this and other budget decisions, we believe it is important for Air Force leaders to make clear choices, balancing requirements across a range of Air Force contributions to joint capabilities.
Given that Obama promised to veto any legislation containing funding for more F-22s, it will be interesting to see where this debate leads over the next week or so.
Putting a Price on National Security
Madeleine Foley | Jul 16, 2009 | 0 The Defense Authorization bill being considered by the Senate this week would buy taxpayers seven shiny new F-22 Raptors for the paltry sum of $1.75 billion. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has shed doubt on the utility of the F-22s in security terms and suggested a cap of 187 stealth jets. Yet Senators Carl Levin and John McCain, who introduced an amendment to strip the F-22 funds, are up against the formidable will of the oldest of American institutions: the Military Industrial Complex.
The appeal of the F-22 lies not in its much-hyped stealth capabilities or its combat-tested credentials. Indeed, it has not been used in Iraq or Afghanistan. The appeal of the F-22 lies in the fact that it is manufactured in 44 states by Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and an army of lesser subcontractors. Senators have lashed out because of their concern that ending F-22 production will mean the loss of skilled manufacturing jobs.
Lo and behold, the Center for Responsive Politics published a list of Boeing and Lockheed’s PAC contributions to members of Congress for the 2009-2010 election cycle. You don’t have to look too closely to see that members representing key production sites for the F-22 - like Georgia Senator Saxby Chambliss - are among the top recipients of campaign dollars. Members who serve on the Armed Services and Defense Appropriations committees are also top beneficiaries of defense contractors’ limitless generosity.
Thanks to CRP for this timely airing of dirty laundry.
