Effort to salvage helicopter program draws veto threat

The White House threatened on Tuesday to veto the fiscal 2010 Defense Appropriations bill if it includes any funding to continue the troubled VH-71 presidential helicopter program, whose skyrocketing cost and schedule delays made it a target for cancellation this year.

In a Statement of Administration Policy, the White House said it "strongly objects" to the House Appropriations Committee's decision to include $485 million in the bill to make five partially completed helicopters operational, arguing that doing so is unnecessary and too costly.

"These helicopters currently have no mission equipment and would require in excess of $2 billion to complete and to operate as presidential helicopters, yet would still not meet full operational requirements for that mission," according to the statement.

In April, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced plans to cancel the VH-71 after the program's costs soared from $6.1 billion to more than $13 billion for 28 aircraft designed to ferry the president and dignitaries on short trips, such as from the White House to Camp David or Andrews Air Force Base. The Navy formally terminated the four-year-old contract last month.

House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman John Murtha, D-Pa., has argued that the military should reap at least some benefits from the $3.2 billion it invested in the program instead of canceling the helicopter.

On Tuesday, Murtha signaled that he believes the military should complete five of the aircraft, built by Lockheed Martin Corp. at its Owego, N.Y., plant and by AgustaWestland, a European helicopter firm. But he acknowledged he will likely have to compromise with the White House.

"The White House doesn't like it and neither does the Defense Department," Murtha said. "In the end, we have to adhere to an agreement between the two of us. We're going to have to back off some; they're going to have to back off some."

As has become customary on all the defense bills moving through Congress this year, the White House said it would veto the spending measure if it includes any funding for more F-22 Raptor fighter jets.

Murtha plans to offer an amendment during floor debate that would eliminate a $369 million down payment in the bill for 12 of the stealthy fighters in fiscal 2011. The money would be used instead for spare parts for the 187 F-22s already on order, as well as for C-17 cargo planes.

Once a proponent of buying more F-22s, Murtha reversed course last week when the Senate voted, 58-40, to strip funding for the fighters from the fiscal 2010 defense authorization bill after a strong push from President Obama, Gates and other senior administration officials to end the program.

Murtha's amendment will likely draw opposition from many lawmakers, including Defense Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member C.W. (Bill) Young, R-Fla.

Meanwhile, the administration reiterated its concerns about funding for a second engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, and warned it would veto the bill and it "would seriously disrupt" the JSF procurement program. Both Obama and Gates have called a backup engine unnecessary and a waste of resources.

The House is expected to debate the bill on Thursday under a closed rule approved by the Rules Committee on Tuesday.

The Rules Committee allowed several amendments for debate, including eight from Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., that would eliminate specific earmarks in the spending measure. Under the rule, Flake, an outspoken opponent of congressional add-ons, may offer an en bloc package of more than 500 amendments targeting the bill's earmarks.