Citizens Against Government Waste, a taxpayer watchdog group, is opposing attempts by Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard, and other lawmakers to reverse the Air Force tanker decision. “Any attempt by Congress now to overturn or undermine the Air Force’s tanker award would smack of . . . special-interest politics,†the group said. But Tiahrt responded in a letter to the group’s president that he is trying to protect taxpayers in opposing the contract to Northrop Grumman and the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. “An honest assessment of the KC-767 and the EADS’ KC-30 shows that the KC-30 will cost the American taxpayer at least $40 billion more than the American tanker,†Tiahrt wrote, adding that the contract “is bad for America’s war fighters and bad for America’s taxpayers.â€
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Monkeyhawk on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- JWink on Jail consultants straining patience
- Monkeyhawk on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Health care reform would save state money
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Health care reform would save state money
- XXX on Open thread 11/22
- JWink on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
25 Comments
It’s just a bad deal.
Airbus has already announced a price increase on their planes due to the falling dollar. Who actually believes there won’t be enormous price over runs?
What a joke. I received Tankerless Todd’s taxpayer-funded campaign literature a few days ago. Interesting to note that he was totally silent about Boeing’s culture of corruption that led to the bogus tanker lease proposal and its subsequent scrapping. Perhaps if Todd and his Boeing buddies spent more time developing a better proposal and less time trying to cheat the taxpayers Boeing would have that contract. Boeing is the problem and Todd Tiahrt is part of that problem.
Yeah, I got Todd’s glossy mailer on the tanker, too. He says he wrote a letter protesting the tanker deal. That’ll do it! Thanks, Todd.
But doesn’t he also blather on about not wanting politicians telling the generals what to do?
He can’t even use OUR money to print his propaganda on paper that is easily recycled. Count on Tiahrt to take anything bad and make it much worse! Just don’t ever count on him to think or be involved with anything that is good for Kansans. It took him less time to become entrenched in the corruption of politics since he had a head start at Boeing.
The players in the boeing scandal, Druyan and the boeing exec. were severly punished for their indiscretions. The employees, shareholders and the taxpayers should not continue to be punished for the actions of a few.
There’s more corruption at airbus than you’ll ever find at boeing. They just may not be punished, or it’ll not be taken in account when they bid on one of America’s contracts.
Phantom – their bosses and their culture still remain.
It would seem to me that the obvious question to be asked is if this contract was even necessary. What is wrong with the tanker planes the USAF has now? Secondly, if a need exist, it is my view that the contract should be put out to bid but if the bidding is close in price and one company is American and will provide jobs here and the other is European and won’t, the contract would go to the American company. If it isn’t close (within maybe 5%) then the taxpayers deserve to get their money’s worth.
Ben
You do not want Boeing to get the contract.
You do not want Todd Tiahrt to be successful in chanllenging the Airbus deal.
However, you do want to attack Tiahrt, politically, for not getting the Tanker deal.
Seems to me that you would sacrifice Boeing and Wichita and the taxpayers and the military, if that is what it took to hurt Tiahrt!
” If it isn’t close (within maybe 5%) then the taxpayers deserve to get their money’s worth.”
Hurray for outsourcing!!!!!
Or something like that
Paul – I would love to have seen Boeing WIN the contract. On the other hand I realize that since you hate my home region of the US you do not want them to get the work.
You are, as usual, full of **it.
Phantom
On this we agree!
What, exactly, is it that makes the Boeing workers and subcontractors responsible for the actions of a very few people at the top, who were already punished? What makes Boeing stockholders responsible, in the future, for the actions of those who have already been punished?
More to the point:
Why should Airbus be rewarded for the “sins” of a few Boeing executives?
Even more to the point:
What happens when the next scandal breaks at Airbus?
What makes Airbus “cleaner than the wind driven snow????”
Ben
Your “home region” would not really get much work.
The airplane, itself, will still be BUILT in Europe, under the Airbus deal.
We will see as the future unfolds as the EAD’s contract progresses, if Tiahrt’s assessment is correct:
“An honest assessment of the KC-767 and the EADS’ KC-30 shows that the KC-30 will cost the American taxpayer at least $40 billion more than the American tanker,” Tiahrt wrote, adding that the contract “is bad for America’s war fighters and bad for America’s taxpayers.”
Paul – and how much of the Boeing plane is built overseas? Last I saw the %s were about the same. And, with the rising Euro there is a lot of talk about Airbus outsourcing their mainframe work – to Alabama.
Rather than vent our rage on the winners of the competition perhaps we should be looking a bit more at the bosses of Druyen and Sears. Boeing has not done a very thorough job of cleaning house. We also should look at Boeing’s decision to NOT build a fueling prototype while their competition did.
Face it – Boeing LOST. Sadly, the executives in charge will get their bonuses while the workers will suffer.
If Tiahrt really wants to help american workers he could work on strengting the buy america act, the fact that a good % of the Boeing tanker was planned on being outsourced made me lose what ever sympathy I might have had for them.
Since when is Todd interested in protecting taxpayers who make less than 6 digit salaries? If he was interested in helping taxpayers then he’d oppose the tanker deal altogether and cut back on the wasteful military industrial complex.
Thankfully Boyda cut back on government waste by sending old, unflyable tankers, to the boneyards so taxpayers don’t have to pay over a million dollars on their upkeep.
Boeing “quality”:
http://www.kansas.com/wireupdates/story/381284.html
government is scrapping a $20 million prototype of its highly touted “virtual fence” on the Arizona-Mexico border because the system is failing to adequately alert border patrol agents to illegal crossings, officials said.
The move comes just two months after Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff announced his approval of the fence built by The Boeing Co.
Do we really want our military dependent on the French/European worker?
UPDATE 1-Four-hour strike hits Airbus France production
Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:09pm EDT Email | Print | Share| Reprints | Single Page| Recommend (0) [-] Text [+]
Related News
Apple buying microchip designer P.A. Semi
23 Apr 2008
IBM to unveil new computer for big data centers: report
23 Apr 2008
Acer Q1 business strong, boosts 2008 target
23 Apr 2008
Murdoch leaves door open to joint Yahoo bid
22 Apr 2008
Taiwan president-elect aims to lure tech investment
22 Apr 2008
powered by Sphere
Market News
Stocks extend gains; Nasdaq rises 1 percent
Oil falls towards $116 on dollar strength
More grim news on homes
More Business & Investing News… Featured Broker sponsored link
Free Practice Account from #1 FX Broker. (Adds union comment)
TOULOUSE, France, April 24 (Reuters) – Striking workers disrupted production at Airbus factories in France for four hours on Thursday in a dispute over restructuring, unions said.
The strike was called after Airbus, owned by European aerospace group EADS (EAD.PA: Quote, Profile, Research) dropped plans to sell some of its factories in Germany to an outside investor but pressed ahead with plans to sell two of its three factories in France.
French Unions say French and German plants should be treated equally and have asked to meet with Louis Gallois, EADS chairman, as soon as possible. They are also demanding that the plans to sell be withdrawn.
“Certain sites have been completely blocked. At others we only set up check-point barriers, and the employees are free to enter the factories,” said Marina Lensky, senior delegate of the CFTC union.
Airbus declined comment.
“We will let the strike speak for itself,” said Jacques Rocca, director of communication at Airbus France.
The four-hour strike started at 7:30 local time (0530 GMT) and was backed by five major unions.
Output was disrupted at Airbus headquarters in Toulouse as well as the two plants due to be sold to aerospace supplier Latecoere (LAEP.PA: Quote, Profile, Research) St Nazaire-Ville in western France and Meaulte
Phantom – and there have never been strikes at Boeing?
With all the holidays and other perks, how does one determine if a French factory is a victim of a strike? Too close to call?
Very few wildcat strikes, I’ve ever heard about.
The Europeans will oppose even selling any of their plants to outside investors, and yet we’ve no qualms of sending our military business over there. When Europe bid their transport program, EADS was given preferred bidder status from the outset, and yet we’re supposed to be sooo concerned with an impartial bid process.
Something stinks.
If Todd succeeds in getting this deal re-bid, or stopped, I’d say his re-election is almost assured. If he doesn’t, he better be burnishing his resume.
So Todd will be out. This way Boeing employees will be appeased enough to still vote for McCain in November. The question is, will he (Todd) be replaced by someone just like him or a dem?
Looks like the wrong manuf. was selected.
Boeing KC-767 Tanker: Less Risk for Warfighters, Taxpayers
Thursday April 24, 5:24 pm ET
ST. LOUIS, April 24 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — The Boeing (NYSE: BA – News) KC-767 would be a lower-risk aerial refueling tanker for the American military and taxpayers than the Airbus A330-based KC-30, and it would be superior in the areas of cost, production, schedule and capability.
ADVERTISEMENT
An analysis of the evaluation that led to the choice of the tanker proposed by the team of Northrop Grumman and the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS) reveals that numerous irregularities in the process resulted in a higher-risk, higher-cost aircraft being selected. Those irregularities form the basis of a protest Boeing filed with the Government Accountability Office following the contract award announced on Feb. 29.
“We offered a tanker that exceeded the mission requirements, kept the manufacturing risk as low as possible and offered an aircraft that saved billions of taxpayer dollars,” said Gregg Rusbarsky, director of Boeing’s U.S. Air Force Tanker Program. “Compare that with EADS-Northrop, who have never delivered the core technology for aerial refueling — a working air-to-air refueling boom.”
When calculating risk, the contract decision failed to account for multiple manufacturing challenges the A330-based tanker is likely to encounter. EADS and Northrop will need to integrate different corporate partners, numerous factory sites, different cultures and technical standards, all into a single enterprise that is expected to deliver aerial tankers on time and on budget.
KC-30 production would be managed by two companies on two continents in five countries, separated by one ocean. According to EADS-Northrop, the initial production plan will build the first six aircraft in five different ways. The first tanker will be assembled as a passenger plane by Airbus in Toulouse, France, converted to a freighter in Dresden, Germany, converted to a tanker in Madrid, Spain, and flown to Melbourne, Fla., for finishing. For aircraft 2 and 3, Madrid’s involvement will be eliminated, and Melbourne will do the tanker conversion — for the first time. By aircraft 4, Mobile, Ala., will replace Melbourne, and for the first time, begin the tanker conversion. Production will vastly change when the process converts from a modification to an in-line production system at the start of low-rate assembly. Finally, the basic aircraft will likely change from the passenger A330 to the A330 Freighter, so the aircraft would have a real cargo floor for the first time. This presents extreme challenges for configuration control and U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certification, yet this approach was rated equal in risk to the less risky, more efficient Boeing plan.
Not only has Boeing built or upgraded more than 2,000 operational tankers to include recent delivery of two KC-767s to Japan, the company has also delivered more than 100 commercially derived military aircraft to the U.S. military and all have passed rigorous FAA certification requirements. Boeing has also delivered five commercial derivatives of the initial 767 airplane.
Additionally, Boeing has met all the manufacturing requirements requested by the Air Force, including an independent analysis by The Rand Corp. that was commissioned by the U.S. Department of Defense. Rand had recommended an export-compliant in-line manufacturing approach for the new tanker.
A unit of The Boeing Company, Boeing Integrated Defense Systems (http://www.boeing.com/ids/) is one of the world’s largest space and defense businesses specializing in innovative and capabilities-driven customer solutions. Headquartered in St. Louis, Boeing Integrated Defense Systems is a $32.1 billion business with 71,000 employees worldwide.
One Trackback
Jack…
Thought provoking post. Very interesting items and have enjoyed immensely. Please visit my site also….