Rick Klein is ABC News' Senior Political Reporter and author of The Note's morning look at the upcoming day in politics. Throughout the day, ABC News' political team contributes to The Note with the very latest news and analysis from the nation's capital.
To email Rick Klein, click here.
RECENT POSTS
- AARP Endorses Cloture Vote, Not Yet Reid's Bill
- McCain Targets Ben Nelson on Health Care Vote
- 'Top Line' -- Ambassador Oprah? Senator Oprah?
- Sen. Brown: Health Care Bill Needs More Subsidies
- GOP Leaders: Obama Has ‘Emboldened Our Enemies' with Afghanistan Deliberations
- Burris Cleared of Legal Wrongdoing -- But With Swipe from Ethics Committee
- Friends, in Need: Obama Faces Backlash on Jobs, Economy
- Doug Hampton: Ensign Knowingly Broke Ethics Rules on Lobbying
- The Note's Must-Reads for Friday, November 20, 2009
- Did Illinois Guv Nod Off at Health Care Debate?
THE NOTE CATEGORIES
- 2010
- Afghanistan
- Bill Clinton
- CIA
- Congress
- Democratic party
- Environment
- Financial Reform
- GOP
- Gov. Mark Sanford
- Gov. Sarah Palin
- Guantanamo
- Health Care
- Hillary Clinton
- Immigration
- Iran
- Iraq
- John McCain
- Mitt Romney
- North Korea
- Obama Agenda
- Politics Live
- President Obama
- Republican Party
- Ronald Reagan
- Sen. John Ensign
- Senate
- Sonia Sotomayor
- Stimulus
- Sunday Shows
- Supreme Court
- Ted Kennedy
- The Note
- The Note Must-Reads
- Top Line
- Vice President Biden
- Virginia
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Note: Is Pork More Popular Than the President? The Case of the F-22
July 15, 2009 11:48 AM
ABC’s Z. Byron Wolf reports:
What do President Obama, John McCain, former President Bush and the Pentagon all agree on?
The F-22. It’s your money. A ton of it. The government has spent more than $65 billion over all on the F-22.
And even though no one directly involved with national security seems to want to spend any more on the plane, Congress is on its way to allocating another $1.75 billion in order to keep the jobs of people who build it.
How’s that for a bailout?
The government has built 187 F-22s at a cost of $65 billion, even though the plane is not used in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said he doesn’t want any more of the planes. But that didn’t stop members of the Armed Services Committee, many of whom have F-22-reliant jobs in their states, from voting 13-11 to inserting some more funding in the defense policy bill.
Leading that charge has been Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-GA, who says the F-22 does in fact meet a real national security requirement, it’s just that the Pentagon is trying to trim its budget.
“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,” said Chambliss in a statement last month when he successfully inserted the funding into the bill.
President Obama said he’ll veto the bill if it includes money to build more of the planes. Both the Chairman, Sen. Carl Levin, and the ranking Republican, Sen. John McCain, on that committee agree. McCain has offered an amendment to strip the $1.75 billion that was added to the bill by other Senators.
But it is not at all clear that they have the votes to strip the funding.
Senators spent two days on the Senate floor considering the amendment before it was withdrawn by Majority Leader Harry Reid Wednesday morning.
Levin pledged to bring the amendment back after Senators vote on another contentious issue – enacting federal penalties for hate crimes against members of the LGBT community.
The F-22 vote was delayed because not all Senators would agree to vote on it. Instead, it seems likely that it will face a procedural cloture vote in the future.
In the mean time, Levin and McCain will look for more votes to strip the funding.
July 15, 2009 in Congress | Permalink | Share | User Comments (9)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Well, I'd rather spend the millions on the best fighter/bomber in the world instead of giving more to rich Wall Street bankers, community "organizers", or inefficient corporations! So if we have to spend money on stimulus and least let's get something that is useful! Remember Iraq/Afghanistan is not the real, potential, low-term threat. We shouldn't be building our military based on 14th century Muslim crazies but on potential threats from smart, rich countries like China, Russia, etc.
Posted by: Ed | Jul 15, 2009 11:59:56 AM
flashback Ed....this is a drill.. hide under the desk at school and wait for the big one
Posted by: watching | Jul 15, 2009 12:34:15 PM
"We shouldn't be building our military based on 14th century Muslim crazies but on potential threats from smart, rich countries like China, Russia"
Countries that would not be a threat except as spies. That's how they learned to build atomic weapons... its where they got their space tech... so better if we DON'T build the stuff, keeps them from having to "match us" in an arms race.
Posted by: DewyB | Jul 15, 2009 2:14:56 PM
Of course, "the other white meat" is more popular than the President, except among those who keep Kosher.
Was it Moses who said: "Just say 'no' to Pork"?
Posted by: Sammy | Jul 15, 2009 2:15:59 PM
7/16/09
I can't but agree with DewyB. I'm no pacifist but I think we're aiming at the wrong target. Let's forget about the "14th Crazies" & think about China & Russia.
And cost is a concern, too. After entitlements, 57% of the budget goes to Defense & defense-related (e.g., Veterans' benefits). Some of this is necc., but we shouldn't be trying to "police the world." Let's concentrate on our borders, the Coast Guard, etc.
Everything has its cost. I'm more concerned with how to pay for a better medical system than the cost of a plane we might never use!
docrrnm
Posted by: Dan O'Connell | Jul 16, 2009 3:00:02 PM
they should just spend the money on parts for the jets its a loop hole buils as many parts for the jets they want and put them together later
Posted by: Dan | Jul 21, 2009 7:47:49 AM
Is my math right?!?!
Do those things cost 350 million dollars a piece? I can see a small contingent of them. But, I think we could keep more jobs with that kind of money, than it takes to build super exotic jets.
Posted by: ray wilson | Jul 21, 2009 11:24:56 AM
Ouch, there goes Marietta Ga. and Phil Gingrey......(R).....
Posted by: Mike Jones | Jul 21, 2009 1:57:41 PM
Obama wasted $800B on porkulus packages and this idiot, Bryan Wolf, complains about us actually protecting a technology base, employees and using money to actually purchase something. If Mr. Wolf wants to talk about bailouts, just explain how the $800B in stimulus is helping anybody? Of course Lockheed is in Georgia and they are not going to vote for Obama anyway.
Posted by: Byron | Jul 21, 2009 2:52:44 PM
Post a comment
POLITICAL VIDEOS
THE NOTE BLOG ROLL
- ABC News -- George Stephanopoulos
- ABC News -- Jake Tapper
- ABC News Politics
- ABC News -- The Numbers
- ABC News -- The Blotter
- The American Prospect -- TAPPED
- The Atlantic -- Politics Channel
- The Boston Globe -- Political Intelligence
- Center for American Progress -- Think Progress
- Center for Responsive Politics
- The Chicago Sun-Times -- Lynn Sweet
- The Chicago Tribune -- The Swamp
- Drudge Report
- FactCheck.org
- FiveThirtyEight
- Heritage Foundation -- The Foundry
- The Hill -- Briefing Room
- The Hotline
- The Huffington Post
- The Los Angeles Times -- Top of the Ticket
- NPR -- Political Junkie
- National Review -- The Corner
- The New Republic -- The Plank
- The New York Times -- The Caucus
- Newsweek -- The Gaggle
- Political Wire -- Taegan Goddard
- Politico -- Ben Smith
- Politico -- Mike Allen’s Playbook
- PolitiFact
- Real Clear Politics
- Talking Points Memo
- Time -- The Page
- USA Today -- On Politics
- Variety -- Wilshire & Washington
- The Wall Street Journal -- Capital Journal
- The Washington Post -- The Fix
- The Washington Post -- 44
