Congress Ignores WH Veto Challenge Over Fighter Jets
(U.S. Air Force/Kevin J. Gruenwald)
A Senate panel on Thursday approved $1.75 billion to build seven more F-22s and the House of Representatives voted in favor of a Defense Department funding bill that would allocate more funds for the planes, the New York Times reported. Both chambers are also asking for a report from the administration on possibly exporting the planes to Japan and other allies.
On Wednesday, the Obama administration made it clear it opposes the extra funding. The Office of Management and Budget said the funding for more F-22 fighters runs counter to the "collective judgment" of the military's top leaders. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said production of the jets should stop after 187 have been built. Last week, he called the funding boost a "big problem." He said the jet does not fit well into 21st century warfare.
Both the Senate and the House have also approved the development of an alternative engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, another program that the White House wants to get rid of.
While some politicians have argued the jets are necessary for national security, some also say reducing their production would result in more jobs lost, especially in Georgia, where the planes are produced. According to Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee, there are 95,000 jobs directly or indirectly tied to F-22 production, the Associated Press reports.
"It is regrettable that the administration needs to issue a veto threat for funding intended to meet a real national security requirement that has been consistently confirmed by our uniformed military leaders," Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) said in a statement.
Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and ranking member John McCain (R-Ariz.), who both voted against the funding, said Congress will ultimately side with the administration because of the high regard for Gates' opinion, according to the Hill.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 22 CommentsThe F 16 has proved over and over again that a larger number of the quicker "sports car" type fighter is the way to go not those ultra expensive "star wars" aircraft that we never really use.
B-1, B-2, F17, now the F 22. They have been proved no better than the B 52's (which we always use) or the F-16's ( which get more flight time per plane than any other in inventory).
Now we are going to export the F 22 so it can get in the hands of our enemies and they can easily defeat it with counter measures then we will have to build another ultra expensive white elephant and the industrialists who control our country can get even richer.
I can see a lot of people on these boards have never served in the military or they would know that a lot of less expensive capable aircraft are better than a fewer number of so called "advanced aircraft".
Remember when the Serbs easily shot down our stealth F 17?
Remember when Iraq shot down our F 17?
Stealth techonology is good but is now easily detected and you can't even leave the things in the rain.
185 F-22's is plenty.
I remember seeing photos of all those thousands of "super" aircraft built during the cold war that we never even used in Vietnam because we were afraid one might get shot down and they were too expensive to fly.
Here we go again.
What he lacked was the charisma (and guile) of Ronald Reagan. He took a beating from the press for canceling the B-1 Bomber (he knew about the B-2) and he took a hit for his lack of cheerleading (the infamous "malaise" comment).
He started the military build-up which Reagan accelerated and (to his credit) successfully promoted.
BTW he didn't start any wars in the desert for imaginary reasons (WMDs in Iraq - remember that??).
We're at war. However, do we need to fund EVERY military plan? Do we REALLY need the F22?
I don't know, but I do know that the REAL problem with our military is PEOPLE. We need more of them.
As the numbers dwindle, as a result of the Iraq war, and our proud military members being stretched too thin, more young people will be needed to join our military.
It doesn't clothe anyone. It doesn't feed anyone. It doesn't house anyone.
It doesn't educate anyone. It doesn't provide medical care for anyone.
And it doesn't ENSURE the future prosperity and/or domestic tranquility of anyone!
SO, WHY do this incredibly stupid and wasteful thing?
Primarily, so your Congressmen or Senator can get HIS CONTRIBUTIONS, DONATIONS, or GRATUITIES from some seedy lobbyist representing some corporation!
Tens of millions of American's lives are being infringed upon so a very few can become wealthy! Do you REALLY want to re-elect these "people",
and I use the term generously?!
I think that some pork to save the last American industry won't hurt anybody. Besides we may be in another Cold War with China in a few years anyway...
The United States was a lot more succesful, and a better neighbor, when we scared of the big bad Soviets.
I am concrned about the small production numbers - ultimately the real reason we won World War II was because we built good products in GREAT numbers. The Germans built technical masterpieces in very small numbers - we won they lost - it might be better to build 400 F18s than 178 F22s....
But of course if Obama was for the sale, you would then be against it, so arguing with you is like arguing with two magnets who are constantly pushing each other away. No matter what one says, you automatically go the other way.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 22 Comments