TOPICS
TOPICS
Senators urge Obama to keep F-22 production lines open
Lawmakers are wasting no time urging the Obama administration to save the Air Force's F-22 Raptor fighter jet, a congressional favorite nearing the end of its production cycle.
In a Jan. 16 letter to President Obama, 44 senators implored the then-president-elect to continue production of the F-22, which they said provides $12 billion in economic activity annually in the United States. The program directly employs 25,000 workers at 1,000 suppliers in 44 states.
House lawmakers who support continuing the Lockheed Martin fighter program have drafted a similar letter to Obama and plan to finish obtaining signatures today so they can try to send it to the White House this week, congressional aides said.
Congress approved $2.9 billion to buy the last 20 F-22 Raptors this fiscal year and also added $523 million in advanced procurement money should incoming administration officials opt to buy 20 more of the fighters in fiscal 2010.
But the fiscal 2009 defense authorization bill limits the obligation of the advanced procurement money to $140 million until administration officials determine whether to continue the program or shut down the line.
The law requires a decision by March 1.
The politically sensitive decision on the fate of the F-22 program is a difficult one for an administration already trying to grapple with a federal budget hamstrung by the costs of addressing the economic downturn.
But the program's boosters on Capitol Hill have contended that, despite the cost, more F-22s are needed to deter and combat future threats.
"The F-22 is optimized to achieve the air dominance necessary to protect our joint fighting forces in any future conflict," the senators wrote. "However, a fleet of 183 aircraft, the current program of record, is insufficient to meet potential threats."
They warned of layoffs if the Obama administration opts to end F-22 production. It would be difficult and costly to reconstitute the work force if the military decides later to buy more of the fighters, the senators wrote.
"Furthermore, certifying continued production by March 2009 will enable production to continue while the Department [of Defense] undertakes a more in-depth analysis of the F-22 requirement in the 2009 Quadrennial Defense Review," they wrote.
Air Force officials have said they need as many as 381 F-22s, but Defense Secretary Robert Gates last year opted to defer any decision on the program to the next administration. Now since Obama tapped him to remain in charge of the Pentagon, Gates knows he must make a decision soon.
Bill Lynn, Obama's choice for the No. 2 civilian post at the Pentagon, last week told the Senate Armed Services Committee in a written response to questions that finding an "appropriate mix" between the F-22 and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is a critical question for the administration.
"If confirmed, I would expect this to be a key issue for the early strategy and program-budget reviews that the department will conduct over the next few months," Lynn wrote.
COMMENTS
- Planning for the security of its civilian population is the primary responsibility of any government. Economic security included. As previously stated, other countries are constantly upgrading their military capabilities. Why on earth would we not do the same? Oh I forgot, we're the new Roman Empire; no need to have guards at the citadel gates. Sound remotely familiar? No need to worry about what the future security issues may or may not be, we're Americans, we'll just do what we do best after bad decisions are made, play catch-up!! We need this program and yes for economic reasons too. Why?, because although small as it may be in comparison, this program and many more like it play a part in our economic security, which is every bit as important to our society's well being as national defense. Sadly enough we have allowed politics and politicians to become an ingrained part of this process, and unfortunately, subject to private sector influence. I agree that this should be completely eliminated from the process. I am so firmly committed to this concept that(even though I'm a member of the "bloated civilian bureaucracy") I recently put my money where my mouth is and helped to kill a huge money wasting cash cow for a well known private sector contractor that provided absolutely no benefit to the taxpayer. This program on the other hand, will provide benefit for several generations to come and well worth the investment in today’s dollars. To those of you who say we don't need this program, take a moment to think about 30 or 50 years down the road, when many of us here today won't be and our grandchildren or great grandchildren may potentially have to deal with a serious national security issue but find themselves unequipped to do so. Our decisions today will have an effect on future generations. Yes, UMAV's will be a factor in the future defense structure and we should invest in that technology now as well in order to provide for a full complement of options. It is a sure bet that future (global) security issues will be much more complex than they are today, so why shouldn't we try to give our future generations every advantage? The dynamics of situational complexity, on occasion, will call for a man or woman in the cockpit. Time to wake up, nap time is over. AMS 2 Doc Burger Posted March 31, 2009 3:10 PM
- Look, under Keynes, paying someone to dig ditches is a good way to get the economy rolling. Why not build F-22s? Seriously, right now, everything is cheap to procure because costs are down, and now would be a great time for the military to load up. All those scientists that blew off working for the defense industry to go to wall street suddenly need some work, and we could be buying all sorts of stuff. From a purely economic effect, we should be buying so many F-22s that there would be a new kind of weather - there would be sunny, there would be rainy, and then for people that piss off the USA, there would be F-22. How many to buy? How about, 2000? Todd Bandrowsky Posted February 16, 2009 9:04 PM
- I love all the arm chair quarterbacks who question the need. The problem with defense is you never know where the threat will come form next. The Chicoms are still there same with Iran and Russia. If we have a need to cut the military budget the first ax needs to fall on the bloated civilian bureaucracy. These land crabs add nothing to the defense of our country and need to be reduced overnight, that would free funding for the weapons we need today and into the future dan ketter Posted January 29, 2009 12:22 PM
