Buy American creates hurdles for Pentagon’s business plans

The Hill ^ | 29 Nov 2006 | Roxana Tiron

[Mase]

Who'd have thought that the Buy America legislation could impede innovation and possibly deny the best products possible to our troops?

[FLOutdoorsman]

It's more than that. I think the idea was not to be depending on foreign products that they could be used against us. ie not supply important electronic products for us.

I think it's only like 55% or some absurd low percentage of the products have to be made in America.

[samadams2000]

Our troops can use these////

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&content=11001

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=SWHC&t=2y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

[Mase]

I truly believe that Congress would like the Department to access the best technology and innovation for the war fighter,” he said.

I want this too. What happens if the best technology is from a foreign company? Limiting the profit motive, outside of what constitutes legitimate national security, always inhibits innovation. Providing our military with what they need to remain the best fighting force in the world depends heavily on the success of our economy.

Politicians don't always act in a manner that ensures a healthy economy filled with innovation.

[Mase]

Heck, I'd like on of those for myself.

[rbg81]

Like its civilian counterparts, the Defense Industry is just itching to outsource jobs. If they were allowed they would not hesitate to ship critical production, engineering and R&D to China and the Third World. National security be damned--all these guys really care about is making a buck.

[mr_hammer]

"Who'd have thought that the Buy America legislation could impede innovation and possibly deny the best products possible to our troops?"

Yes or No, do you believe that the US is capable of designing and manufacturing the best military hardware bar none?

[Mase]

Yes or No, do you believe that the US is capable of designing and manufacturing the best military hardware bar none?

Capable? Sure. But if there's a better technology available from a manufacturer in Japan, Sweden or Switzerland, I want the military to have access to it without any restraints. I also want our domestic industry to be able to sell to whom they choose as long as it doesn't constitute a legitimate threat to national security.

[mr_hammer]

"But if there's a better technology available from a manufacturer in Japan, Sweden or Switzerland, I want the military to have access to it"

By what you have just stated you believe the US is incapable of making the best equipment bar none. If we made the best there would be no reason to purchase from another country, correct? That is why I asked for a simple yes or no answer.

Now, if we cannot design and manufacture the best equipment in the world that is where the debate must take place.

[Mase]

By what you have just stated you believe the US is incapable of making the best equipment bar none. If we made the best there would be no reason to purchase from another country, correct? That is why I asked for a simple yes or no answer.

Your logic escapes me. You asked if we were capable. I said we were. I also think we're capable of making the best cars in the world although I haven't owned an American made car since the lemon I bought in the early 90's.

Capability and availability are two separate things. Do you want the American military to be able to supply our fighting forces with the best technology and equipment available? If so, why would you place limitations on where they can purchase that technology and equipment? Does competition help or hinder innovation?

[Paul Ross]

Who'd have thought that the Buy America legislation could impede innovation and possibly deny the best products possible to our troops?

Only an IDIOT.

I.e., such as Jack Spencer of the Heritage Foundation...who admits he has a scant plurality of support inside the organization! Yet he baldly acts as if they have complete control.

Anyways...since we aren't even living up to the existing 50% domestic-content legal requirement...rather obviously this is a phony argument by the phony free traders...who refuse to Enforce the Rules of Trade. Which should be a slam-dunk for real, honest conservatives.

Because No One is Above the Law!

No ifs. No buts.

Note: This position being touted is also an interesting reversal of field by the free traders...a contradiction really... because they always contend our manufacturing and R&D and innovation is doing just fine!!!!

[Paul Ross]

One of the arguments was that companies could no longer keep track of every nut and bolt from their suppliers.

A non-argument for our highly "advanced"...and very healthy... manufacturering industry, surely.

Computers developing amnesia lately...or is it the phoney free trade weasels running them?

[Paul Ross]

That is why I asked for a simple yes or no answer.

Which is the correct way to deal with the La-La-land crew. But don't hold your breath. Their dogma is far more important to them than reality.

Now, if we cannot design and manufacture the best equipment in the world that is where the debate must take place.

Correct. It should prove interesting to see if he will completely duck this, or try and squirm on the hook...

[Paul Ross]

I want the military to have access to it without any restraints.

You can't have your fairy-land trade utopia...and a unique American advantage in technology. The whole globalization creed is to "flatten out the concentrations" and "spread them uniformly" across the Globe. Hence, the END of American supremacy. That is what is being preached by your apostles...whether you will admit it or not.

I also want our domestic industry to be able to sell to whom they choose as long as it doesn't constitute a legitimate threat to national security.

Legitimate according to who? You??!?

Political appointees in the State, Treasury and Commerce Departments whose only objective is to keep papering over the devastating truths with disinformation etc. and get through their terms without the inevitable SHTF?

The proverbial Foxes Guarding the Hen House!

This is why the Defense Dept. needs to be restored to control of the U.S. Bureau of Industry and Security. And given real teeth again.

'Nuff said.

[Paul Ross]

Like its civilian counterparts, the Defense Industry is just itching to outsource jobs. If they were allowed they would not hesitate to ship critical production, engineering and R&D to China and the Third World. National security be damned.

Bump!

And if we make exceptions for small contractors...the majors would be well-positioned to demand the same exceptions too.

The proverbial "camel-nose-in-the-tent" has already really happened with the reducing of the 75% requirement that Reagan believed in...to the 50% domestic content requirement of Bill Clinton....

[mr_hammer]

"Do you want the American military to be able to supply our fighting forces with the best technology and equipment available?"

Yes, I most defiently want them to have the best.

Again, I ask you. Is US capable of designing & manufacturing the best military equipment? If it is, there is no reason to go overseas for said purchases is there?

Let's cut to the chase. The US government is incapable of paying for said weapons systems made in the USA and suport the soon to be socialist state we are headed for.

Right now it has nothing to do with quality or delivery (those are givens) or even the best whatever given piece of equipment is. It is about being the lowest world wide bidder. Plain and simple and to hell with being self sufficient.

I say no, we cannot afford to build state of the art weapons systems state side and also funnel a lot more dollars into keeping granny in perscription drugs further jeapodizing our long term security. That is the truth.

[streetpreacher]

Are those rifles for sale to the general public?

[1rudeboy]

This domestic-content requirement has its costs and benefits. If EADS/Airbus wins that Air Force refueler-contract, then it will locate a plant in the U.S. to build it (Alabama, I think).

[streetpreacher]

Capable? Sure. But if there's a better cheaper technology available from a manufacturer in Japan, Sweden or Switzerland India, China or Pakistan, I want the military to have access to it...

Now you're being a realist.