In Washington lines are never clear. As we all know, the town constantly moves in the gray.
And that continues to be the case with the ongoing controversy over the Joint Strike Fighter jet engine - a battle that has taken on epic proportions for years.
As ABC News reports in its story
A $3 Billion Government Boondoggle?At issue is the engine for the aircraft known as the Joint Strike Fighter, an all-purpose military jet that is expected to become the backbone of American air supremacy for a generation. The fighter already has an engine – built by Pratt & Whitney and in use as the jet is being tested. Some members of Congress want to pay General Electric and Rolls-Royce to develop a second one….The money involved is not insubstantial. By some estimates, Congress has paid $3 billion to GE and Rolls-Royce since first setting aside money for a second engine in the mid-1990s, and it will take close to $3 billion more to have the engines tested, proven and in full production.
Congressional members are fighting tooth and nail on both sides, depending on their state’s economic dependency on the project, but there is also strong disagreement between non-profit organizations, Defense Secretary Gates and the Government Accountability Office (GAO), about which direction to take.
While Secretary Gates believes it is a colossal waste of money to continue down the current path spending billions more, the GAO -- which exists as a congressional watchdog to investigate how the federal government spends taxpayer dollars -- at a congressional hearing a year ago, testified that according to its analysis, “we remain confident that competitive pressures could yield enough savings to offset the costs of competition over the JSF program’s life.”
And that brings us to the non-profit organizations. Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW), a “good government” organization generally considered on the conservative end of the spectrum, is supposedly fighting for taxpayers like you and me. But, it has been working overtime against the second engine with all its might and resources.
If you live in DC, you may remember
CAGW ads plastered in every metro car you could find denigrating the possible GE project as wasteful.
Turns out, as Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington helpfully
points out, CAGW had an incentive to get the word out.
The conservative blog RedState.com has revealed that CAGW, which was apparently the source of information for ABC’s piece – secretly has been paid by Pratt & Whitney for its efforts. This certainly calls both CAGW’s credibility and the reliability of the ABC story into question.
Harper’s Ken Silverstein and former Congressman Bob Barr have both reported on another organization’s pay-for-play on the issue, this time it’s the Lexington Institute.
Barr explains the non-profit’s role in the debate in the
Politico this week.
…The Lexington Institute’s chief operating officer, Loren Thompson, cites as proof that his company’s advocacy supporting certain weapons systems (in this case, Pratt & Whitney’s single-engine proposal) is fair and honest the fact that it “received money from donors on both sides of the issue…”
The Project on Government Oversight reported this in a July 2009 article. Specifically, as reported in 2006, Thompson expressed concerns about Pratt & Whitney’s “monopoly” position as the developer of the only engine to be used in the multibillion-dollar F-35 program.
But now, Lexington vocally opposes Congress’s awarding funding for the development of a competing engine for the multirole fighter to Rolls-Royce and General Electric.
Thompson (incredulously) told Silverstein, "I'm not going to work on a project unless somebody, somewhere, is willing to pay. This is a business." Wow, so much for an independent voice.
The Lexington Institute’s mission, according to its website, reads “We believe a dynamic private sector is the greatest engine for social progress and economic prosperity.”
Well, you most certainly do, especially if that economic prosperity is your own.
Read More......