Posted on 02/29/2008 7:13:12 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. Air Force decision awarding a $35 billion aircraft contract to a team including the European parent of Airbus landed like a bomb in Congress on Friday, drawing howls of protest from lawmakers aligned with the loser, America's Boeing Co.The Congressional delegation from the Seattle area said they were "outraged." Kansas Republican Rep. Todd Tiahrt vowed to seek a review of the decision "at the highest levels of the Pentagon and Congress" in hopes of reversing it.
Boeing has big facilities in both Seattle and Wichita, which stood to gain from the long-term project to build up to 179 aerial refueling tankers. Although Boeing was favored to win the contract, the Air Force awarded it to a partnership between Northrop Grumman and Europe's EADS.
Conventional wisdom was running so strongly against Northrop-EADS in some corners of Capitol Hill that Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison's office issued a statement late on Friday declaring Boeing the winner. It was swiftly retracted.
Lawmakers from Alabama, where Northrop and EADS plan to do some tanker work, were effusive in praising the Air Force.
"I thought all along that the Northrop Grumman-EADS proposal was the best," Sen. Richard Shelby, an Alabama Republican, told reporters. He said the contract would bring nearly 7,000 jobs to the state.
On the disappointment of Chicago-based Boeing's allies, Shelby said he understood. "If Boeing had won this contract ... I would have been concerned about it."
As for Tiahrt's vow to seek a review, Shelby said, "The Pentagon and the Air Force have made their decision and I think it was for the right reasons and I'll stand by that."
The decision was sure to result in a debate, with a formal protest also possible, said defense consultant Jim McAleese.
The tanker deal will give EADS a huge boost in the U.S. defense market, making it the second biggest foreign supplier behind Britain's BAE Systems, analysts said.
"We are so very excited about having the opportunity to help the Air Force acquire the most modern and capable refueling tanker -- a tanker assembled in America -- by Americans," said Alabama Republican Rep. Jo Bonner.
Bonner represents Mobile, Alabama, where assembly work on the aircraft will be done, although it will largely be constructed in France at facilities of EADS' unit Airbus.
Airbus, with large facilities in Toulouse, is Boeing's arch-rival in the global commercial airliner business.
Wichita's Rep. Tiahrt said, "I am deeply troubled by the Air Force's decision to award the KC-X tanker to a French company that has never built a tanker in its history.
"We should have an American tanker built by an American company with American workers. I cannot believe we would create French jobs in place of Kansas jobs."
Tiahrt said he will seek to have the decision reviewed by both the Pentagon and Congress. "At the end of this laborious process, I hope the Air Force reverses its decision."
Washington Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, both Democrats, along with six other lawmakers from the state said in a joint statement: "We are outraged that this decision taps European Airbus and its foreign workers to provide a tanker to our American military.
"We will be asking tough questions about the decision to outsource this contract. We look forward to hearing the Air Force's justification."
(Additional reporting by Andrea Shalal-Esa, editing by Richard Chang)
The two tankers could deliver roughly the same amount of fuel, and the Boeing variant has a boom and three hoses.
Boeing's HQ is in Chi. I figured Illinois was one of the losers in the deal.
But if I'm wrong, that's fine.
Is it a good idea to have a foreign country deeply involved in a major defense project? My opinion is “No.” That is why, to me, it was a foolish - nay, very foolish - decision to give it to a partnership with EADS involved.
Thanks - I will be faxing the text of the “Buy American Act” to the President, my two Senators, and my Representative!
There you go confusing freepers with facts..
I hear Northrop is going to partnership with CAC (China Aircraft Corporation) to build the JSF. I hear due to the extremely cheap labor in Communist China, we can build the JSF for 1/3 the price. Will bring lots of jobs to AL too. Do you support the deal, after all your home state will get the jobs and the USAF will get their JSF at very low prices.
France lets us pay the price for Iraq (4000 dead) with no help; then they attack Microsoft and fine them 1.3 BILLION! dollars, so naturally we give them a $40 billion contract.
We are total fools/chumps. Politicians are ruining this nation.
It’s a miracle this country is still around.
Heck - I’m pretty freaked myself.
Thanks for the tech info. Post #48 really tells the story.
Is it possible that the Air Force did this on purpose, forcing congress to make the final decision???
SO the Air Force really wanted the Boeing product, but in order to circumvent the EADS lobby they awarded to them knowing that Congress will not go for it....
If my speculation is true, someone in the Air Force is pretty sharp.
Can you imagine a few years down the road when another Chirac is in charge of France and tells the US “no more tanker spare parts until you withdraw from ...”
****
I thought of that too. It will happen; it’s just a matter of time. Our independence is being destoyed by the Bush-Clinton-Bush virus.
I wonder what Reagan would think of this madness.
1) LOTS of US parts and components
2) LOTS of US jobs
3) more capable, larger airframe
4) the 767 is close to ready for replacement (altho UPS AND FEDEX ordered many last year)
5) an OLD American company puts it together in America with LOTS of US parts, labor and technology
6) seems a better fit of the future needs of our flying forces
Muslims in France building our tankers?
Yikes- that’s makes me feel safe.
I agree with you. This is not a simple bottom line deal. With the infusion of money from the USAF, Airbus will use it to strengthen their commercial development to take the commercial air business from Boeing. You do not see France buying US weapon systems for their military, when it is probably cheaper for them to tap into are larger production volumes (French military buys at lower volumes than larger US DoD). France understands that profits from the military side of a business can be applied to the commercial side also.
One company already has the tooling, the jigs, the plans, the machinery, the buildings, the resources, the management, and the employees ready to go to work tomorrow. The other company is all on paper and will take several years to fully man up.
I think it would create much greater tensions with the EU if the EADS KC-45 contract were cancelled and given to Boeing than if Boeing won it in the first place.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.