CQ TODAY ONLINE NEWS
– DEFENSE
Jan. 16, 2009 – 1:23 p.m.
Weapons Makers Use Jobs Pitch To Protect Their Projects
By John M. Donnelly, CQ Staff
When lobbyists for Lockheed Martin Corp. visited congressional offices in recent weeks to brief members or staff on the merits of their F-22 fighter, the top item on their agenda had nothing to do with the plane’s military attributes.
For the first time, “Economy/Jobs” topped the list of F-22 benefits. “F-22 Economic Impact is Significant,” said one briefing slide in the “F-22 Advocacy Briefing.” It cited the 95,000 jobs created by the program in 44 states and its more than $12 billion annual impact on the economy. Superimposed on that data was a faux newspaper clipping about the 159,000 jobs the U.S. economy had lost in September. The plane’s military benefits were now a secondary part of the case and jobs the primary focus — instead of the other way around.
The adjusted lobbying pitch for the F-22, known as the Raptor, could be a sign of things to come. The industry’s leading trade association and its allies in think tanks are highlighting the economic benefits of initiatives like the F-22. Other potentially at-risk defense programs are beginning to echo the theme, and still others soon will, experts say. And there are early signs that the jobs argument may be working with President-elect Barack Obama ’s new team and with Congress.
“The Obama administration understands that any major cuts to weapons spending would be a negative for the economy,” said Loren Thompson, a national-security analyst with the Lexington Institute who has consulted for defense contractors. “I think there are some programs, like the F-22 fighter, that might get a measure of protection because of the economic benefits they provide.”
Douglas Birkey, director of government relations for the Air Force Association, said a variety of defense programs will be making a similar case amid the recession.
“In some cases I think this will work,” he added, “especially if key committee leaders happen to represent states and districts in which the affected programs are located.”
On Jan. 16, 46 senators signed a letter to Obama, urging continuation of the F-22, citing the economic importance of the program and warning of layoffs.
“Over 25,000 Americans work for the 1,000+ suppliers in 44 states that manufacture the F-22,” the letter reads. “Moreover, it is estimated that another 70,000 additional Americans indirectly owe their jobs to this program. As we face one of the most trying economic times in recent history it is critical to preserve existing high paying, specialized jobs that are critical to our nation’s defense.”
A comparable letter to Obama is being circulated in the House and will have at least 170 signatures, supporters say.
‘Right Out of the Gate’
One industry executive said the arguments in Lockheed Martin’s new F-22 briefing for Congress are “not necessarily sequenced in order of importance.”
But several other F-22 proponents in industry and on Capitol Hill said the jobs argument’s placement in the briefing was no accident. They said they are putting new weight on the program’s importance to the country’s employment level as they look to secure continued production money this year.
Indeed, the F-22 will probably be the first top-dollar program to get a thorough review when the Obama administration builds its fiscal 2010 defense budget.
The Bush administration did not want to produce more than the 183 F-22s on order. Yet President George W. Bush and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates did not kill the program either, instead deferring a decision on its future to the next administration.
Gates, who will stay on at the Pentagon’s helm under Obama, has repeatedly criticized the F-22 as a costly plane ill-suited to the most likely 21st century conflicts. By multiple accounts, Gates was livid when Air Force brass delivered the opposite message to Capitol Hill. Today, sources say Air Force leaders are not allowed to speak to Congress about the plane.
The fiscal 2009 defense appropriations act (PL 110-329) provided the Air Force $523 million to buy parts for future F-22s. But the fiscal 2009 defense authorization law (PL 110-417) said only $140 million of that could be spent without Obama deciding by March 1 which option is “in the national interest of the United States:” building more F-22s or ending the program.
That deadline means the F-22 decision will be made “right out of the gate” in the new administration, according to Pentagon spokesman Geoffrey S. Morrell.
The F-22 is in competition for defense dollars with the F-35 Lightning multi-role fighter, a less expensive — and in some ways less capable — fighter being developed for all three military services and some allied air forces.
“A critical question is the appropriate mix between the F-22 and the F-35,” said William Lynn, Obama’s nominee to be Gates’s deputy, in written answers to questions ahead of his confirmation hearing on Jan. 15. “If confirmed, I would expect this to be a key issue for the early strategy and program-budget reviews that the department will conduct over the next few months.”
Other Targets
The F-22 is not the only program potentially in the crosshairs.
During the campaign, Obama suggested several initiatives would receive more than their share of scrutiny, including missile defense programs and the Army’s Future Combat Systems. Decisions also have to be made about whether to produce more C-17 transport planes and about funding levels for Navy warships.
Lynn suggested at his confirmation hearing that many decisions on major weapons might have to be delayed until the fiscal 2011 budget.
The economic crisis may make it easier for the Obama team to defer some of the tough calls. Paul Kaminski, a former Obama campaign adviser who served as one of President Bill Clinton’s Pentagon acquisition chiefs, told reporters this month that job worries could stay the budget ax for many programs. “The economy will factor,” Kaminski told reporters. “It pushes things into go-forward mode.”
Members of Congress, particularly those on the defense committees, are likely to be receptive to the contractors’ jobs argument and happy not to make cuts.
“The defense industrial base in this country provides hundreds of thousands of jobs,” said John M. McHugh of New York, the new ranking Republican on the House Armed Services Committee. “When you begin cutbacks in the name of so-called budget efficiencies, what you’re doing is laying people off.”
A senior committee aide said the jobs factor could be the “tipping point” in the 2009 debate on some weapons.
Lockheed Martin, the Pentagon’s top contractor, is not the only company that is pressing the jobs case as it advocates for its programs. The Aerospace Industries Association, which lobbies on behalf of most major defense and aerospace firms, has a $2 million ad campaign underway that urges the new administration and Congress “to support the programs and the people that can get America’s economy moving again.” The ads point out that the industry supports “over 2 million middle class jobs” and “over 30,000 suppliers from 50 states.”
A similar case is being made in a series of op-eds and other writings by commentators such as American Enterprise Institute defense analyst Tom Donnelly, economist Martin Feldstein and former National Economic Council director Lawrence Lindsey.
A spokesman for Boeing Co., the Pentagon’s No. 2 contractor, said its approach is to stress the security benefits of its weapons, not the economic boon. But Boeing commissions studies that tout the economic benefits of its programs. Last year, for instance, Boeing issued press releases about studies showing the millions of dollars and thousands of jobs the firm’s antimissile projects are pumping into Alaska, Alabama and Arizona.
Even if Obama avoids cutting defense programs in the near term because of the economic downturn, ultimately the pressures on the defense budget will probably make a scaling back of weapons plans inevitable, experts say.
“If current trends continue, it will be very difficult to sustain a force large enough to meet the demands associated with both near-term operations and the long-term defense strategy,” Lynn said in his written answers to Senate Armed Services Committee questions.
Adriel Bettelheim and Josh Rogin contributed to this story.
Comments
The recession that we have today has a great impact to every one of us. The economic crisis that we have today has been a big news. Right now, Alex Rodriguez has been making headlines, and this newest batch is about allegations of pitch tipping. Pitch tipping is a method of discovering what pitches a pitcher is going to throw, and it is illegal. As if he doesn't have enough credit repair to do over steroids and the whole Madonna debacle, reporter Selena Roberts purports in her book, The Many Lives of Alex Rodriguez, that he gave away pitches to opposing players for the same in return, in order to boost his batting stats. Alex Rodriguez is infamous (especially in Seattle – don't even mention his name there) but he'd doubtless give online payday loans to make it all go away.
POST A COMMENT
Oops! The following errors must be addressed: