Vol. VII No. 46
November
15, 2002
Jettison a Jet Fighter
The
grand prize in this year's congressional budget free-for-all
goes to Secretary Rumsfeld and all the four stars at the
Pentagon. While other federal agencies are bracing themselves
for major cuts in their budgets, the military brass should
be dancing a jig to celebrate a funding increase that
would make even Kenneth Lay blush.
Despite
this massive budget increase, the Defense Department and
Congress still need to figure out how to reduce the uncontrollable
growth of our nation's military spending if they expect
to be able to successfully protect our homeland and fight
the war on terrorism. Instead of symbolically tossing
out a few scraps of meat to save a million here or there,
it is time to start going after some of the big enchiladas
in the Pentagon's $355 billion annual budget.
Over
the next two decades, well over $300 billion is budgeted
to procure three major new aircraft fighter programs that
the country may not even need. The F/A-22 Raptor, F/A-18
Super Hornet and the Joint Strike Fighter will absorb
18% of the Pentagon's total procurement and development
budget.
Military
hawks and defense contractors argue that all three of
these new fighter planes are necessary to maintain our
air superiority and to fight against new threats. Yet,
any defense expert worth his or her salt will concur that
the U.S.'s fleet of 2800 combat aircraft is miles ahead
of even our biggest adversaries. Plus, a massive debate
is underway over whether or not these aircraft are even
capable of fighting the new wars of the 21st century.
The
F/A-22 Raptor was conceived and designed in the 1980's
to outrace the Russian's continued production of high-performance
aircraft and air-defense missiles. The fighter is built
by Lockheed Martin and Boeing, the engine by Pratt and
Whitney and the avionics by Hughes and an army of other
subcontractors. It will cost taxpayers about $43 billion
to pay for the 295 planes that the Congress is planning
to purchase. The Department of Defense recently announced
that there were $690 million in cost overruns for the
plane, so the price tag continues to grow.
The
F/A-18 Super Hornet, built by Boeing and Northrop Grumman,
is a larger and more up-to-date version of current F/A
18 fighter plane. The Pentagon wants to buy about 500
of these planes at a cost of about $50 billion.
The
procurement of 2,800 Joint Strike Fighters (JSF) was projected
to cost more than $220 billion dollars, but massive problems
with meeting development deadlines are likely to drive
the price up even more.
If
you are suffering from sticker shock, you are not alone.
The Defense Department's own figures show that over the
next decade these three programs alone will consume 40%
of the budget for its 20 most expensive weapon programs.
The Congressional Budget Office has concluded that these
fighters "may not be affordable and will probably
need to be scaled back." The General Accounting Office
(GAO) has strongly criticized these aircraft programs
for their cost overruns and reported that the current
plans for these fighters "appear to be unrealistic."
Almost
$12 billion is budgeted for these fighter planes next
year. With the war on terrorism and other major spending
demands, it is time the Pentagon start prioritizing the
weapons systems that it truly needs. The political obstacles
are high, especially with defense contractor factories
dotting congressional maps from California to Connecticut.
But, the Pentagon needs to show the political will to
stand up to members of Congress who have been bought off
by greedy military contractors. Cutting one of the three
main new jet fighter programs is an ambitious, but good
first step.
For
more information, contact Keith Ashdown at (202)-546-8500
ext. 110 or keith@taxpayer.net