A
Anonymous
Guest
I watched the House Appropriations Committee hearing on this- and if GW as Commander and Chief of the Military- or the Congress don't overturn this decision it will be an American travesty...Giving $35 Billion of the US taxpayers money to fund the US Air Forces purchase of tankers to a French company- Airbus (who's manufacturing history is terrible)- to be built in France, Germany, and the UK, that is using Northrup Grumman as a facade US front is as wrong as 2 men playing Broken Back Mountain....
Every Congressman at the hearing was screaming about it - but the Air Force refused to answer hardly any question- claiming bidding secrecy rights.... :???:
Just saying that "industrial base" or "the US economy" did not figure into their bidding decision.... :???:
I can't believe when our economy is in as bad a shape as its in- and GW, Paulson, and crew are saying "buy American" to revitalize the economy-and the rest of the world has told us where to stick it with any military assistance, that it would even get this far....But then 9/10th's of what GW's leadership has done has totally confused me... :roll:
Every Congressman at the hearing was screaming about it - but the Air Force refused to answer hardly any question- claiming bidding secrecy rights.... :???:
I can't believe when our economy is in as bad a shape as its in- and GW, Paulson, and crew are saying "buy American" to revitalize the economy-and the rest of the world has told us where to stick it with any military assistance, that it would even get this far....But then 9/10th's of what GW's leadership has done has totally confused me... :roll:
Boeing says Air Force steered it to bid 767 tankerReuters, Thursday March 6 2008 (Recasts with Boeing executive's comments)
By Jim Wolf and Doug Palmer
WASHINGTON, March 6 (Reuters) - The U.S. Air Force steered Boeing Co to offer its smaller 767 aircraft as a refueling tanker, a company executive said ahead of a Friday meeting with the military on why the $35 billion program went to a bigger aircraft offered by Northrop Grumman and Europe's EADS.
The choice has enraged many U.S. lawmakers and labor unions who say it threatens to send high-paying aerospace jobs to Europe and rewards EADS' Airbus unit, the subject of a U.S. complaint to the World Trade Organization (WTO).
Mark McGraw, vice president of Boeing's aerial tanker program, told CNBC television on Thursday that Boeing bid its 767 aircraft based on what the military identified as its needs.
"To some extent, the requirements steered us to (offer) the 767," McGraw said, instead of Boeing's larger 777 aircraft.
When the Air Force announced its choice of the bigger Airbus A330-based tanker last Friday, it praised its greater capacity to carry fuel, cargo and passengers.
Boeing, which meets Air Force officials on Friday over why it lost, "probably" will decide over the weekend whether to file a formal protest, McGraw said.
After the briefing, Boeing has 10 calendar days to file a formal protest with the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress.
"We want to listen tomorrow," McGraw said. "We do not protest often. We take that decision very seriously because it could have an impact on the men and women of our military."
The Air Force plans to spend up to $35 billion for 179 modified Airbus A330 wide-bodied jets over the next 15 years. Boeing built the existing KC-135 U.S. tanker fleet, with planes that on average are now 47 years old.
Backers of the Northrop-Airbus tanker include lawmakers from Alabama, where assembly work will be done.
Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne this week described the Airbus-Northrop bid as "clearly" better than Boeing in the key criteria used to evaluate the planes.
U.S. TRADE CASE AGAINST AIRBUS
Lawmakers from Kansas and Washington state, where Boeing has large facilities, have bitterly criticized the Air Force decision and its impact on U.S. jobs and trade policy.
Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts said it defied common sense for one branch of the U.S. government to challenge Airbus subsidies at the WTO while another branch awards Airbus a big contract.
"This is an outrage," Roberts said at a Senate Finance Committee hearing. "It truly makes me question our trade agenda."
The EU and the United States are pursuing competing complaints with the WTO over tens of billions of euros and dollars in state support for Airbus and Boeing
.
The United States accuses Airbus of getting grants and loans at unfairly favorable rates in the form of "launch aid." Europe's trade case against Boeing hinges on the provision of research and development assistance from NASA and the U.S. Defense Department.
U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab told the Senate committee she had no role in the tanker program, saying the decision was made "solely by the Air Force."
She said the WTO could issue a confidential preliminary decision in April or May in the U.S. case against Airbus. If the United States wins its case, she said there would be "opportunities for settlement, opportunities for compensation and if necessary, opportunities for retaliation."
Retaliation could include higher tariffs on EU exports to the United States, such as aircraft and aircraft parts, which would raise the cost of making EADS tankers.
"U.S. taxpayers could potentially foot the bill for higher duties imposed on spare parts for the Airbus tanker being finished in the United States. That's quite a catch-22," Roberts said.
Jim Albaugh, chief executive of Boeing's integrated defense systems unit, told an investor conference Wednesday that U.S. tanker-related revenues would have amounted to just 1 percent of the company's sales over the next five years. (Editing by Tim Dobbyn, Toni Reinhold)