Boeing vs. Airbus: Is ‘Buy America’ Right for the Military?
For the Air Force, replacing its current fleet of KC-135 refueling tankers—a model in service since 1957—is a top acquisition priority. The age of the planes has led to concerns that a structural failure could result in the grounding of every KC-135 at the same time.
Enter the so-called KC-X program, estimated to cost $35 billion. Originally, the Air Force had planned to “sole-source” the deal to Boeing, leasing planes for $30 billion. However, Sen. John McCain got the whiff of corruption, and through dogged investigation, it was determined that the deal was a racket. Indeed, the Air Force’s top acquisition chief at the time ended up going to jail.
So in 2004, the Air Force started the bidding process over again. Boeing, of course, made a bid, but so did a partnership between Northrop Grumman and Airbus, the European plane manufacturer. In spite of the earlier scandal, Boeing was widely expected to win the contract. They didn’t.
Politicians from Kansas and Washington state, the two places where most of Boeing’s production facilities are, led the “Buy America” charge. “I cannot believe that we would create French jobs in place of Kansas jobs,” said Rep. Todd Tiahrt. Boeing has formally protested the decision to the Government Accountability Office.
The appalling part of this is the tendency for Members of Congress to send military spending projects to their districts, rather than to the project which fits the needs of the military.
On the other hand, there is a strong argument for maintaining America’s industrial base for the sake of military production. Imagine, for instance, if a war cut off our supply lines to Europe and our other trading partners. In that instance, it would be absolutely essential to have a self-sufficient means of manufacturing weapons. And the industrial base can’t be created overnight.
Most experts do not think the tanker contract going to the Northrop Grumman/Airbus consortium will hurt the industrial base. But if there is an argument that it could—that’s the argument Boeing should be making, rather than talking about “Kansas jobs.”
Feds drop border fence suit against UT-Brownsville
This refers to something we have talked about at CR: the desire by Texans, as led by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, to have more dialog with DHS and create a workaround with regard to the Border Fence in certain special circumstances. I think this is reasonable, but the onus then goes upon the Texas border entity asking for a waiver on the fence, to support an alternative means of creating border security. We will be watching this carefully.
BROWNSVILLE — The U.S. government dismissed its border fence condemnation lawsuit against the University of Texas at Brownsville and Texas Southmost College on Wednesday and agreed to explore alternatives to a fence with school officials.
The agreement was reached just hours before a hearing was to begin in federal court.
It is no guarantee that the university's golf course and the rest of the threatened 160 acres of campus will not some day be on the Mexican side of a 15-foot fence, but the dismissal order requires the two sides work together.
The government has sued more than 50 South Texas landowners this year for temporary access to survey for the border fence. Many have complained that the access requested was overly broad and sought similar restrictions, but the university is the first to achieve it.
Upon signing the order, U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen said he hoped the agreement could be a model for other property owners, specifically the Rio Grande City Consolidated Independent School District, which shared similar concerns about disruptions to its campus and impact on its students during a hearing before Hanen on Monday. Read More…
Mexican truck drivers take English exam in Spanish
Senator Byron Dorgan caught CR's attention, by his intense questioning of DOT official, Mary Peters and Calvin Scovel. This has all the signs of another free pass for Mexico at the expense of American interests.
…at the Senate Commerce Committee oversight hearing Tuesday, [March 11, 2008], Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters and DOT Inspector General Calvin L. Scovel III reluctantly admitted under intense questioning from Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., that Mexican drivers were being designated at the border as "proficient in English" even though they could explain U.S. traffic signs only in Spanish.
In the tense hearing, Dorgan accused Peters of being "arrogant" and in reckless disregard of a congressional vote to stop the Mexican trucking demonstration project by taking away funds to continue the project. Toward the end, the senator asked if it were true Mexican truckers could explain U.S. traffic signs only in Spanish when given English proficiency tests at the border.
HERE IS SOME INCREDIBLE TESTIMONY:
"In other words the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is allowing Mexican drivers in the demonstration project to prove their proficiency in English by responding to the examiner's questions in Spanish"
Peters persisted: "But answering in Spanish, the drivers explain they understand the English-language highway signs."
Dorgan appeared astounded at the explanation.
"If you answer in Spanish, you're not English proficient," he insisted.
Here is the full testimony: Read More…
Next Meeting: Monday, March 31, 7:30 PM
At our next Citizen Reform meeting we will discuss:
- FISA: The Politics of National Security
We will have a special guest from Capitol Hill explain this complicated, but vitally important controversy.
- The Mexican Trucks Are Rolling!
And nothing, not you, not Congress, not safety considerations can stop them.
- Boeing vs. Airbus
Untangling another complicated issue that pits corruption vs. patriotism; national security and jobs vs. fiscal integrity.
- Has California Made it Illegal to Homeschool?
Are we next? Get the full report.
By Al Strong | 3/18/08 @ 9:44pm | Filed under: Events
Here is An Earlier Article
Further investigation has revealed that articles declaring Boeing's SBInet Project a failure can be found as early as August 2007.
___________________________
August 23rd, 2007
___________________________________________________________________________
CR Comment
DHS gave testimony in late February, 2008, that acknowledged the failure or delay, and that has led to the spate of stories — however, the actual facts of the problems of the virtual fence are not new.
CR's point is that as Citizens with little time to dig deep on these issues, we are constantly buffeted with inaccurate information which tends to mostly discourage us from caring. Let's learn to work through the sloppy reporting and the sensationalism, and keep our eye on the ball: we need a secure border and we can't let DHS or Congress off the hook.
VIRTUAL BORDER FENCE HAS FAILED! Oh Really?
Grassfire.org, a grassroots group I have liked, but seems to be increasingly reckless and desperate in its rhetoric. Note the dates in red.
 2/29/08
Dear Albert,
Breaking news has confirmed what Grassfire has been saying all along–the VIRTUAL BORDER FENCE HAS FAILED!
According to reports, Project 28 (twenty-eight miles of virtual border fence in Arizona), which the President has boasted is "the most technologically advanced border security initiative in American history" has failed.
Albert, this is just one more slap across the face of American citizens who are eager to see our borders secured!
As you know I have spent the last two CR meetings researching and rerporting to you my best and most honest assessment of the true state of the Border Fence.
This "failure" was in my research, I did not mention it because it was treated as an isolated failure not symptomatic of a full blown across the board failure. I am looking into it as to why this came out as a big story now. It is not new. It happened several months ago. Note the date of this excerpt from a news story on Project 28, the "failure" described by Grassfire as "breaking news",
![]()
Glitches delay virtual fence on border
By ELISE CASTELLI
October 31, 2007
Bugs in the Homeland Security Department's border surveillance system, SBInet, have been frustrating for Customs and Border Protection agents, congressional auditors say.
Stana interviewed Border Patrol agents as part of GAO's review of the prototype project, known as Project 28, a name that refers to the virtual fence installed in Arizona along 28 miles of the Mexican border.
“If you can’t beat them, shut them up”
This is reproduced from Numbers USA
Dear Friends:
"If you can't beat them, shut them up" seems to be the new motto of groups that have been continually losing in their attempts to pass an amnesty for illegal aliens.
"If you can't beat them, shut them up" seems to be the new motto of groups that have been continually losing in their attempts to pass an amnesty for illegal aliens.
(Here is an Associated Press story about this national censorship campaign.)
Led by the National Council of La Raza and the Anti-Defamation League, the open-borders groups have started a concerted campaign to persuade Cable TV executives to either bar me and our Director of Government Relations Rosemary Jenks from their shows, or to always introduce us as representing an "extremist" organization with ties to hate and racist groups.
Their characterization of NumbersUSA and our members is without any connection to reality, facts or even common decency. But if all of us remain silent in the face of this campaign of character assassination, we might indeed be silenced on TV and beyond.
Please consider sending an email to Cable TV executives urging them to resist the national censorship campaign. Read More…
Citizen Reform Meeting — Feb. 25, 2008 (cont.)
Special Guest Michael Rolince
Citizen Reform was privileged to have as a guest speaker, Michael Rolince, at our February 25th meeting. Michael is a neighbor and friend, who also is a renowned Counterrorism & Counterintelligence Expert currently consulting at Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc.
Michael is former FBI Special Agent with over 30 years experience. He is a recognized expert in counterterrorism and counterintelligence investigations and operations.
Michael provided a fascinating review of past terrorist events. In particular, he helped us appreciate how many incidents had occurred in the 1990’s prior to 9/11, which had led Al Q'aeda to presume we would be passive in the face of growing and more outrageous provocations; which, up until 9/11, we had failed to correctly perceive as acts of war. His comments also created in us an appreciation, to a greater degree than ever, the heroic and phenomenal work done by the FBI to protect us. He then took questions from those in attendance.
Citizen Reform Meeting — Feb. 25, 2008 (cont.)
Reforming Illegal Immigration — Other Strategies
Employer Sanctions
WE continued to discuss solutions to Illegal Immigration, and turned to Employer Sanctions. Both Arizona and Oklahoma have passed tough new laws that create severe sanctions/punishments for employers who persist in hiring illegals. In addition, an internet based tool, E-Verify, is finally enjoying wide use and is proving very effective in thwarting the use of fake id's. The articles below tell the story…
Arizona and Oklahoma Employer Sanctions
Prairie Pundit, Arizona
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Self deportation at work in Arizona
by Kris Kobach:
ON Jan. 1, Arizona became the first state to require all employers to confirm workers' legal status via the federal "E-Verify" system. Having survived a federal court challenge last Thursday, the law promises to transform the immigration crisis in America.
After just six weeks, Arizona's system is already working: Newspapers in the state report that illegals are self-deporting by the thousands. Apartment complexes in Phoenix and Tucson confirm that thousands of tenants have skipped town. Many are returning across the border to Mexico.
This success is proof that attrition through enforcement works. The premise is straightforward: The way to solve our illegal-immigration problem is to ratchet up enforcement while making it more difficult for employers to hire illegals.
Illegal aliens are rational people. If their chance of being able to work illegally goes down, while the chance of getting detained goes up, at some point the only sensible thing to do is go home. E-Verify is free and easy to use. The employer simply types in the employee's name, date of birth and Social Security number (or other work-authorization number). He gets an answer back from the government in seconds. Read More…
Citizen Reform Meeting — Feb. 25, 2008
The Border Fence — Part II
At his month’s meeting we continued our in depth look at the political dynamics of building the Border Fence. We recalled how many of us believed that the Secure Border Act of 2006, was a sincere attempt by the Bush Administration and Congress to respond to the will of the people and get serious about securing our southern border. A year later, in December, 2007, the news broke that Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison had placed an amendment into the Omnibus Appropriations Bill that seemed to undo much of the intent of the 2006 bill.
Grassfire, Talk Radio, and conservative pundits exploded with anger denouncing this seeming move done in “the dark of night”.
Grassfire published:
Special Report
Border Fence Funding Hoax of 2006 and 2007
How Congress And The President Are Working Behind-The-Scenes To Un-Do The Secure Fence Act
UPDATE 12/20–Last night Congress passed the omnibus Consolidated Appropriations bill — which includes the Hutchison Amendment that guts the Secure Fence Act.
World Net Daily's Jerome Corsi was the first in the media to tackle the issue. As a result, although the bill passed, the Border Fence Funding Hoax has been exposed.
Michelle Malkin railed: The Incredible Disappearing Border Fence
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Do you know the story of the Incredible Disappearing Border Fence? It's an object lesson in gesture politics and homeland insecurity. It's a tale of hollow rhetoric, meaningless legislation and bipartisan betrayal.
Yet, CR wanted to know more, for example:
Why would Sen Hutchison, normally a reliable conservative, be the one to offer this amendment?
Hutchison is not known as a “maverick” and has little record of turning against her fellow conservatives. It just didn’t ring true that her motivation was to “gut the fence” or that she was part of a hoax or a betrayal.
All politicians are one part sincere beliefs, one part responders to their constituents, and one part survivors of the next election, Senator Hutchison was the recipient of a determined coalition of Texas/Mexico border stake holders who demanded the fence not be built.
In her own words: “Throughout the process that led to passage of the Secure Fence Act, Sen. Cornyn and I were frustrated that local officials representing areas specifically cited in the act — particularly in the El Paso, Del Rio-to-Eagle Pass and Laredo-to-Brownville sectors — did not have the opportunity to participate in decisions regarding the location of fencing and other physical infrastructure near their communities.”
How is the Border Fence viewed and supported/opposed by people living on the Read More…
|
|
|
