You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: WoT
Obama Considering Air Force Tanker Deal Delay
2009-03-12
The White House budget office has asked the Pentagon to consider delaying the purchase of aerial refueling tankers by five years, a move that reflects the constraints of drawing up a budget in the midst of a recession, according to two sources familiar with the administration's discussions.
Of course he is. $800 billion for 'stimulus' and another $410 billion for pork, but nothing for the Air Force. Anyone out there surprised?
The possible delay in one of the Pentagon's most expensive programs is one of a number of options the administration is weighing, the sources said. No final budget decisions have been made, officials said.

Delaying the purchase of the tankers, which would replace a fleet that dates to the Eisenhower administration, will draw fierce opposition from the defense industry and many members of Congress, whose districts have tens of thousands of jobs related to the program.

It comes as the administration is considering which programs to include in its 2010 defense spending request to Congress next month, and as it grapples with a broken Pentagon procurement system that has led to about $300 billion in cost overruns on 95 major weapons systems compared with initial estimates. President Obama last month unveiled a general budget calling for $534 billion in defense spending, $50 billion less than what the Joint Chiefs of Staff had argued was needed. The Pentagon and the White House's Office of Management and Budget now are figuring out which programs will survive.

"This is a zero sum game," said Lawrence J. Korb, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, who advised the Obama campaign on defense issues, describing the process of determining winners and losers.
The rest of the article has the usual liberal zingers about making the 'hard choices' that the Bush administration 'didn't make'. Funny how neither Bambi nor the Democratic-controlled Congress could make any hard choices about the stimulus and pork packages.
Posted by:Steve White

#7  The EADS bid was not "won", it was blatantly rigged to win. The GAO called the DoD and Pentagon on it and told them to have the parties re-bid and/or change the rules because by the AF's own contest rules the Boeing bid did as well or did better than what the Airbus offer was capable of providing.
Posted by: Valentine   2009-03-12 16:42  

#6  But $2B for Acorn is ok.....

Perhaps have Madame Speaker fly on one of these tankers on her next jaunt. Have a historian describe everything which has happened in the world since the plane was built.

As long as she flies in one of the tanks....
Posted by: CrazyFool   2009-03-12 13:46  

#5  Hard choice = kick the can to the next presidency.
Posted by: ed   2009-03-12 13:45  

#4  Do I detect the fine hand of Boeing?...
Posted by: mojo   2009-03-12 13:33  

#3  Perhaps have Madame Speaker fly on one of these tankers on her next jaunt. Have a historian describe everything which has happened in the world since the plane was built.

I would like to know how far out into space the tanker could have flown based on the number of miles racked up over the years.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2009-03-12 11:43  

#2  The Pentagon and the White House's Office of Management and Budget now are figuring out which programs will survive.

Suggestion... relook BRAC.
Posted by: Besoeker    2009-03-12 08:01  

#1  This will piss off the Euros, as EADS won the bid.

Besides refueling tankers won't be needed when solar powered planes arrive like the Greens promise.
Posted by: phil_b   2009-03-12 01:52  

00:00