Posted on 03/15/2008 3:52:13 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
John McCain might be taking this maverick thing a bit far. I mean, sending good aviation jobs to France?At least that's the charge from Boeing backers, who accuse the Arizona senator of helping Airbus get a $35 billion Air Force tanker contract at the expense of American jobs, including hundreds of them right here in the Air Capital.
Boeing supporters, looking for a villain in this economic defeat, have put McCain in their crosshairs.
"I hope the voters of this state remember what John McCain has done to them and their jobs," said Rep. Norm Dicks, a Washington Democrat.
Many Republicans, too, are unhappy with McCain's role.
Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard, told The Eagle editorial board last week that he thought McCain was dead wrong on this issue.
"I'm going to learn to love him," Tiahrt said of his party's nominee, with as much conviction as he could muster.
But Tiahrt clearly wasn't feeling the love on this issue.
Take McCain's comment that creating jobs shouldn't be a factor in military procurement contracts.
Tiahrt begged to differ. "McCain needs to make a decision," he said. "I want him to come down on the side of American jobs."
For many Americans, it's that simple.
McCain, for his part, says he's simply worked hard to ensure a fair competition and the best weapons systems for our troops.
The attacks on McCain may backfire. After all, McCain was right back in 2004 to scuttle the previous tanker deal after he helped expose a bribery scandal involving an Air Force buyer and Boeing executives.
McCain's crusading arguably saved taxpayers billions of dollars and rooted out corruption in the procurement process.
Back then, Boeing's wounds were self-inflicted.
And it's possible the company simply lost on the merits this time around.
If so, that's not McCain's fault.
All sides perhaps should take a deep breath and wait for the General Accounting Office to review Boeing's formal protest -- a ruling is expected within 100 days.
Boeing's main objection seems to be that the Air Force allegedly switched criteria, telling Boeing that a smaller tanker would fit the mission and then rewarding Airbus for its larger plane.
If the Air Force has reasonable explanations for its criteria and evaluation process, then this will blow over.
Of more concern for McCain, though, are reports that he intervened to help Airbus in this latest tanker competition by persuading the Air Force not to disqualify or penalize Airbus for receiving subsidies from European governments.
Again, McCain says he wanted to ensure competition, but Boeing supporters rightly ask: How does ignoring Airbus' subsidies ensure a level playing field?
What could most hurt McCain, I think, are reports that several of his top campaign advisers worked as lobbyists for Airbus last year, during the height of the tanker competition.
Ouch.
Details of their lobbying haven't come out yet. There may be nothing improper in what they did.
But it again shows how McCain, who prides himself on independence and taking on lobbyists, has surrounded himself with staff members who seem to be embedded with the enemy.
That might be the biggest target on McCain's back.
Some have even asked whether McCain's bad publicity on the tanker deal could put Kansas in play this fall for a Democrat such as Barack Obama, who polls well here and has questioned the Airbus contract.
Obama might have a chance in Kansas, but I doubt that McCain's tanker role will be a major factor.
Chances are, the deal will have faded as a hot-button issue by the time the general election gets under way.
But it could return to haunt McCain here, if the perception persists that he helped tipped the scales in Airbus' favor.
Kansans like mavericks, but they also like jobs.
For now, though, the Democratic candidates are too busy mauling each other on issues of gender and race to turn their sights on McCain.
As Geraldine Ferraro might say, McCain's just lucky.
Senator comes to defense of McCain on tankers
ERIC ROSENBERG; Hearst Newspapers
Published: March 15th, 2008 01:00 AM
WASHINGTON – Sen. John Warner, R-Va., on Friday defended Sen. John McCain’s longstanding involvement in the Air Force tanker project, a multi-billion dollar contract won last month by an Airbus consortium.McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has become a favorite target among The Boeing Co. supporters since the company’s loss to the France-based Airbus team in the tanker competition.
McCain, R-Ariz., pressed the Pentagon in 2006 to ignore the issue of alleged foreign government subsidies to Airbus when the tanker contract was put up for competitive bidding. McCain said he did so to ensure competition in a program that was dogged by corruption, scandal and overpricing.
But Boeing proponents argue that those subsidies – which lowered the cost of the Airbus tanker – were one of the reasons Boeing ended up losing the $35 billion competition.
Warner, a respected voice on national security and defense issues who at the time was chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he supported McCain’s efforts.
Boeing is protesting the contract award to the Government Accountability Office.
McCain, a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, was an outspoken critic of a previous tanker deal that Chicago-based Boeing had with the Air Force.
McCain’s efforts scuttled that project in 2004 and helped uncover criminal wrongdoing on the part of a former Air Force official and a senior Boeing executive.
Both went to federal prison for conspiracy to violate conflict-of-interest rules after the former Air Force official admitted steering huge contracts to Boeing, including a $20 billion project for aerial tankers.
Boeing paid a record $615 million fine for its role in the tanker scandal and other procurement infractions.
McCain in trouble with conservatives as $35bn aircraft contract goes abroad
By Leonard Doyle in Washington
Friday, 14 March 2008
If you want on or off this aerospace ping list, please contact Paleo Conservative or phantomworker by Freep mail.
Lol, I see the point here, but there’s no way Hillary Rodham Clinton will ever win Kansas. Reporter’s dreaming again.
That plane looks more Braniff than DoD.
The defense industry is about defense. It’s not a jobs program. This is pretty cynical even for some Democrats.
“I don’t want my pilots having to depend on a “French” tanker for fuel!”
A French tanker will be fine, as long as its headed away from combat.
“The defense industry is about defense. It’s not a jobs program”
And jobs are crucial to our economy which in turn helps us stay strong. Theres also the factor of depending on foreign nations for our national defense. France didn’t seem too concerned with our national security just a few years ago. Imagine depending on them for some crucial part during a war.
If that was a real concern, then why did the Air Force allow them to submit a proposal in the first place? This is about domestic pork barrel politics, and the real agenda of a lot of so-called “conservatives” out there is showing.
She also won’t have to if Obama is the final POTUS choice for the Democrats.
And once brought up to mil spec, will never be allowed to enter French airapace.
McCain will lose his cool when questioned on these
things....Carville already is giving Clinton the word
on using the evil eye....buckle up ..folks. JK
“If that was a real concern, then why did the Air Force allow them to submit a proposal in the first place? This is about domestic pork barrel politics, and the real agenda of a lot of so-called “conservatives” out there is showing.”
Not so many years ago it was required that all military equipment and material be produced in the US, including uniforms. But that requirement was gradually and quietly abandoned by our free traders in Congress and the White House. I recall a brief spat a few years back when it was learned that a new Army beret would be produced in China.
I expect we’d be shocked to learn what critical equipment and material is now either made overseas, or is dependent on parts from foreign nations.
But it is accepted that the previous Boeing lease deal would have been a huge ripoff of the taxpayer, several involved lost their jobs and I think some were prosecuted.
I think we should return to having all military material and equipment produced in the US. But unless that happens, and since I live in Alabama, screw these whiners. Leave the deal as is. I understand the tanker is superior to that proposed by Boeing.
Kansas has voted for the Democrat for President once since 1936 (in LBJ’s landslide of 1964). If McCain has to worry about Kansas, the ‘Rats are heading for a 50-state sweep.
“The defense industry is about defense. It’s not a jobs program. This is pretty cynical even for some Democrats.”
You give the democrats fare too much credit when you accuse them of treating this as a jobs program. Jobs aren’t the democrat issue. The democrats would care less except for the fact that the jobs in Alabama are not union while the jobs at Boeing are union.
Sorry, I have a real problem with that. And I don't care how many assembly plants they set up here in the US.
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.
