The U.S. Senate began debate on the 2011 defense budget Feb. 2 where debate left off on the 2010 budget last fall — on the C-17 cargo plane, the alternate F-35 engine and the F-22.
President Obama wants to end C-17 production and cancel the alternate engine, but a lot of senators want to keep the programs alive, just like last year.
And Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., wants to resuscitate the F-22 stealth fighter.
But Defense Secretary Robert Gates seems determined to force a different outcome this year.
“I’m fully aware of political pressure to continue building a C-17 and to proceed with an alternate engine for the F-35, so let me be clear,” he told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “I will strongly recommend that the president veto any legislation that sustains the unnecessary continuation of these two programs.”
Gates won praise from Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who said he is “encouraged” by the veto threat, but advised that it will have to be made early and repeatedly by Obama if the president hopes to get lawmakers to pay attention.
McCain added that if Obama is really serious about cutting wasteful spending, he should also vow to veto any appropriations bills that contain earmarks. McCain said the 2010 defense budget contained $4 billion worth of earmarks, lawmakers’ pet projects not requested by the Pentagon.
The earmarks, 10 unrequested C-17s and $560 million for the alternate engine, added $7 billion that the Defense Department will have “to eat” in unwanted programs this year, he said.
But an eclectic collection of senators pledged allegiance to the C-17 and the alternate engine.
Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., usually a budget watchdog, suggested that Congress let the Air Force retire its C-5A cargo planes, which need expensive upgrades. Retiring the planes would create a need for more C-17s.
Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., told Gates, “We keep hearing that this is something the military doesn’t want and doesn’t need. But that’s not what we’re hearing when we go over” to Iraq and Afghanistan. There, troops complain about having to fly in aging C-130Es that have engine troubles, he said.
Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the Armed Services Committee chairman, said in a written statement that he is “disappointed, Secretary Gates, that you have announced that you will recommend a veto if the defense bills include funding for the F135 alternate engine.”
Levin said the engine, which would be an alternative to the F135 originally designed for the F-35, would create competition to improve technology, ensure better contractor performance and save money.
Senators asked about newly revealed problems in the F-35 program. A day earlier, Gates announced that he had fired the program director, Marine Corps Maj. Gen. David R. Heinz, and was withholding $614 million from F-35 builder Lockheed Martin.
“Progress and performance of the F-35 over the past two years has not been what it should, as a number of key goals and benchmarks were not met,” Gates said.
The F-35 is substantially over budget and behind schedule. But Gates said he still expects the plane to become operational for each service between 2011 and 2014. A training squadron is scheduled to begin operating at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., in 2011. The Marine Corps will begin flying F-35s in 2012, the Air Force in the second quarter of 2013 and the Navy late in 2014, he said.
Chambliss accused Gates of withholding bad news on the F-35 until after Congress had voted to end production of the F-22.
With the F-35 in trouble, will Gates reconsider the F-22 decision? Chambliss asked.
“No,” Gates said.
(source: http://www.federaltimes.com/article/20100203/DEPARTMENTS01/2030302/1009/ACQUISITION)
