Ignoring Obama’s veto threat, Congress approves more funding for Marietta’s F-22
Updated at 5:15 p.m. Thursday.
Congress moved to add more funding for the Marietta-made F-22 Raptor on Thursday, setting the stage for a bruising fight with the White House — which threatened only 24 hours earlier to veto a major defense funding bill over the issue.
In the Senate, the Armed Services Committee finished closed-door negotiations by accepting an amendment by U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss to add $1.75 billion for seven more of the Lockheed Martin stealth fighters. The measure now goes to the full chamber.
In a separate action, the U.S. House this afternoon passed a $550 billion defense bill with an added $369 million in additional spending on the F-22. The House measure also includes language that would permit the sale of a different, less potent version of the fighter to other countries such as Japan.
Both actions occurred less than a day after the White House issued a memo detailing its objections to the House bill. The additional F-22 spending — for parts — was first on the list:
The Administration strongly objects to the provisions in the bill authorizing $369 million in advanced procurement funds for F-22s in FY 2011. The collective judgment of the Service Chiefs and Secretaries of the military departments suggests that a final program of record of 187 F-22s is sufficient to meet operational requirements. If the final bill presented to the President contains this provision, the President’s senior advisors would recommend a veto.
The emphasis is in the original. The veto threat is the first of the Obama administration, and reflects a strategic shift backed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates away from expensive weapons designed for large-scale, conventional warfare and toward simpler systems geared for “assymetrical” conflicts like those in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The House bill includes $130 billion in funding to support operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere — which makes some wonder whether Obama would carry out his veto threat.
“Is he bluffing? I wish I was clairvoyant and could answer that question for you,” Gingrey said by phone, shortly before the House vote. “I would hope that he’s bluffing. But if he’s not, I think he’s making a bad mistake — let me put it that way — for the defense of this country. I think he’s making a huge mistake.
“If he vetoes this defense authorization program for 2010 on the basis of that, then he has got that wrapped around his neck and on his shoulders. He and no one else can take responsibility for killing that program,” the Marietta congressman said.
The fight is over spending, jobs and military philosophy.
“In the past several months, Air Force leaders have consistently stated before Congress and to the media that they have a requirement for additional F-22s beyond the 187 that have already been purchased. Repeatedly, military leaders have confirmed that the decision to limit funding to 187 planes is driven by budgetary decisions, not military requirements,” said Chambliss in a prepared statement.
“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.”
The same press release quotes U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson: “The federal government must tighten its belt in these tough economic times just as Americans have to do, but we must also maintain a strong national defense in order to protect our country. This plane is vital to 21st century American military superiority.”
The House could direct even more money toward the F-22, Gingrey said — perhaps for as many as 20 more planes in a second supplemental defense bill.
Democratic support for the F-22 in Congress is considered substantial, but not overwhelming. And remember that U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is one of those advocating a cap on the F-22 program.
This is posted at airforce-magazine.com:
House Appropriations defense subcommittee chairman John Murtha (D-Pa.) supports further buys of the F-22 and is optimistic that more will be bought, but he said that it will take some wheeling and dealing in Congress to make it happen.
Speaking with defense reporters Wednesday in Washington, D.C., Murtha said, “I think we can reach a compromise” on Capitol Hill that would allow the F-22 to go forward. Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee and its defense panel, “feels very strongly about it, and I do, too,” Murtha added.
Another defense blog, Chandler’s Watch, has this from the same meeting with Murtha:
Three of the most senior House appropriators are planning to discuss exporting Lockheed Martin’s F-22 Raptor fighter jet to the Japanese government, which wants badly to buy the stealth plane.
Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the chairman of the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee, said Wednesday that he intends to meet in the coming days with Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) and Rep. Bill Young (Fla.), Murtha’s GOP counterpart on the Defense subcommittee, to discuss lifting the export ban on the F-22.
The key player in that briefing will be Obey, who in 1998 wrote the legislation that bans the exports of the F-22 mainly to keep secret the aircraft’s radar-evading stealth technology. Obey has not budged since, and it’s unclear whether he is willing to relent.
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
119 comments Add your comment
Sherman
June 25th, 2009
2:42 pm
$100 million per aircraft!??!?!?!?! Are you serious??
KW
June 25th, 2009
2:43 pm
As a Cobb County resident of 20 years, and a voter who generally votes Republican (voted for Romney and then unfortunately had to vote for McCain), I agree with President Obama on this one. Don’t waste our (and when I say “our” I mean taxpayers, not the portion of our citizens who are leeches) tax dollars on something that’s not a part of the Pentagon’s long-term strategy just to save jobs for a small fraction of the population.
Hal
June 25th, 2009
2:45 pm
DontTreadOnMe: Where in the constitution does it call for a standing army (especially one that consumes half of all federal spending)? Where in the constitution does it specifically list the rights of the people to vote for president? Where in the constitution does it say there’s a right for the government to tell people they can’t kill themselves?
More importantly: Where does it say in the constitution that we cannot enact laws or provide people rights other than the ones listed in the constitution?
Education is incredibly important and to EVERYONE’S benefit, and you better thank your lucky stars for public education. I don’t want to live in a 3rd-world country even if I’m in the 1% on top, and you don’t either. You should be arguing about how to improve public education, not how to dismantle it. Or are you too blinded by your disdain for the poor to see how that would serve your interests?
Bo Chambliss LOBBYIST
June 25th, 2009
2:48 pm
Saxby’s plan to cut the cost of the F22.. build them with illegals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK5TprmkgRw&feature=related
Hankman
June 25th, 2009
2:48 pm
DontTreadOnMe try reading all of the “piece of paper” especially the Preamble. There something about the general welfare.
Sec Gates
June 25th, 2009
2:51 pm
, Lockheed’s chief executive, Robert J. Stevens, said in a memorandum to employees that while some of the recommendations were disappointing, “I embrace Secretary Gates’s call to put the interests of the United States first — above the interests of agencies, services and contractors — and I will support him in every way.”
The shift in thinking about the F-22 was detailed in an op-ed article on Monday in The Washington Post by Michael Donley, the Air Force secretary, and Gen. Norton Schwartz, the service’s chief of staff.
Before the announcement by Mr. Gates, both had fought hard for the F-22, saying the Air Force needed it as a hedge against Russia and China and even a possible war with Iran. They had advocated buying 60 more of the planes, which would have brought the Air Force’s fleet to 243. But in their essay, Mr. Donley and General Schwartz wrote that “the time has come to move on.”
DontTreadOnMe
June 25th, 2009
2:56 pm
Hal – I don’t disdain the poor at all, far from it if you knew me personally. I disdain the Federal Government playing nanny and caretaker. Our current public education system is an unmitigated disgrace.
Hankman – Two words in that preamble. It says “people” not Federal Government and it says “promote” not pay for.
TRUTH
June 25th, 2009
2:57 pm
You would think that with all the legitimate and expensive claims on the government pocketbook — including two wars, an economic crisis and desperately needed health care reform — Congress would be extra judicious about how it spends the taxpayers’ money. But no, at least not when it comes to the House Armed Services Committee and lucrative defense contracts.
The panel has proved again how the insatiable drive to keep fancy weapons systems alive can trump all good sense. With Representative Rob Bishop of Utah and other Republicans leading the charge, and with the support of six Democrats, the committee this week narrowly voted to keep producing the Air Force’s F-22 stealth fighter jet.
We adamantly opposed Defense Secretary Robert Gates’s proposal to buy four more F-22s in next year’s budget. But at least he wanted to cap the fleet at 187 planes. The House committee has voted to approve a $369 million down payment on 12 more. If all of those are bought, the total price tag would be about $2.8 billion.
The Pentagon budget must be more closely attuned to military and economic reality than the misdirected and undisciplined spending of the last eight years. Mr. Gates has made a compelling case for ending programs that significantly exceed their budgets or use limited tax dollars to buy “more capability than the nation needs.”
No weapons system fits that criteria better than the F-22. It is a cold war relic, designed for defense against the Soviet Union. It has never flown in combat, much less in the wars this country is actually fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Air Force’s new high-performance F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which begins production in 2012, uses stealth technology to elude enemy radar like the F-22, and should be sufficient.
Lockheed Martin and its partners parceled out work on the plane widely to ensure maximum political protection. And we deeply regret that jobs will be lost by phasing out the F-22. But the United States cannot keep paying for redundant and dubious systems. There are too many other compelling demands on the country’s battered budget — some of which will certainly create new jobs. It is up to House Democratic leaders to make this case to their members and ensure that the committee’s decision on the F-22 is overturned
JT
June 25th, 2009
2:58 pm
The military was forced to cut the program. They never said it wasn’t needed. Obama forced them to cut their budget so we can pay for other more important things like researching why pigs stink. Very short sighted, the F-22 was a great plane that kept us on top as far as air superiority. Now we can all be secure that the Russians have the best fighter aircraft in the world.
Bo Chambliss LOBBYIST
June 25th, 2009
3:04 pm
Saxby’s earmarks can help anyone just send your check, here’s what hed did for a privetly owned company. You do NOT need to be a resident of Georgia to apply. From the May 8,2009 AJC.
“Advanced lithium battery research/Alpharetta: Would provide funding to Excellatron Solid State LLC for scale-up and manufacturing of new batteries; $10 million; Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-GA “
Splavistic
June 25th, 2009
3:11 pm
Good job, President Obama. Keep up the good works! God help us if the GOP ever gets back into Washington with their old (outdated) ways of doing things.
RealityKing
June 25th, 2009
3:12 pm
Socialized countries don’t spend very much on the military.., according to Obama’s European model for America.
Obamoron
June 25th, 2009
3:13 pm
PAY GO!!
BPJ
June 25th, 2009
3:17 pm
Defense Secretary Gates, who was originally appointed to that post by President Bush, says we don’t need this plane. Other than its being built in Georgia, most of the posters here have no idea why they’re for it.
Hankman
June 25th, 2009
3:23 pm
If you don’t think the Government is ‘of the people’, ‘by the people’ and ‘for the people’ then go live somewhere else!
Ron N' Mexico
June 25th, 2009
3:23 pm
Give me an F-22 before health care insurance. Health care will be worthless when little Chinamen are invading this country.
Jim Martin
June 25th, 2009
3:24 pm
John Murtha and Saxby Chambliss, now that’s a pair of earmark lovers. Wonder what they are getting out of it?
The Snark
June 25th, 2009
3:26 pm
What is the big shock Jumbo G? Obama and his leftist buddies regret our military strength and think that way too much is spent on it anyway. You bet your sweet arse he is going to kill the F-22 or anything else military that he can get away with.
Truth
June 25th, 2009
3:27 pm
Ron N’ Mexico 3:23 pm
Why would China invade us when they can simply call in their note. We are wasting money that we don’t have. This is making us weaker not stronger but then that’s what you Democratic Liberals want.
DontTreadOnMe
June 25th, 2009
3:28 pm
Hankman if you think this current government and at least the past three administrations are ‘of the people’, ‘by the people’ and ‘for the people’ then give me some of those drugs your on because they must be good stuff.
findog
June 25th, 2009
3:30 pm
Let’s see, when the Speaker of the House resigned in 1998 the F22 was on the chopping block because it was a porker and divided government was reducing spending to the point where we were not adding to the national debt. I for one say that if the Representative and Senator for Lockheed will deliver legislation increasing taxes to keep the assembly plant in Marietta open then build as many as you want; just pay for them with NEW TAXES!
JT
June 25th, 2009
3:32 pm
Ron – Agreed, I would take the F-22 over National Healthcare any day of the week.
Splavistic
June 25th, 2009
3:32 pm
What is happening is called a FREE MARKET. A better, cheaper product is being built called the F-35. Stop wailing against the natural flow of capitalism and the advancement of a superior design, people. Buck up.
JT
June 25th, 2009
3:34 pm
the F-35 is not a better product, period.
findog
June 25th, 2009
3:37 pm
Just got a call from 877-648-0958 and talked to Brian, who works for a company he identified as Account Services.
They can reduce my interest rates on all the credit cards I don’t have.
Almost identical to the people who could help me get extended warranty’s on cars I don’t own…
Best part is that the number they called is a temporary office number for me at a hazardous waste site.
I love those robo-call companies; I look forward to the same offer to come to my cell phone!
Dr Soul
June 25th, 2009
3:40 pm
At 2:57 and 3:27…good posts Truth…
amazing how few people really get into the issues and look deeply at
how our ’so-called’ stewards of the ‘citizens bank’ spend without any
regard to real budgets or care for anything but their own ego and standing among colleagues… more amazing is how we continue to elect
these bums over and over, then just complain… there is such apathy when it comes to voting and a very misunderstood theorem that nothing will ever change… we have noone but ourselves to blame… we really need to get to work as an electorate nation and clean house.. and, why don’t we.. “it will not make a difference”..says 95% of voters..!!!!
so, where do you go…. ‘bitch on blogs’…. later
Jason
June 25th, 2009
3:41 pm
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!”
DontTreadOnMe
June 25th, 2009
3:42 pm
Has nothing to do with the FREE MARKET. The F-35 and F-22 serve two purposes. The F-35 is the Swiss Army knife while the F-22 is an air superiority fighter.
Hotlanta
June 25th, 2009
3:55 pm
Marietta pull yourself up by your bootstraps isn’t that what you guys always tell us in SW Atlanta to do. These same folks are harping about they don’t govment intervention in health care but will be mad if Obama doesn’t sign this bill. They want the government in their lives when it is CONVENIENT for them.
Big Bucks GOP doing the Lords work
June 25th, 2009
3:56 pm
The additions to the F22 program is a waste of $3,500,000,000.00 yet out “CONSERVATIVE” Congressmen and SOCIALIST Senators are for it. How can you be a Conservative and vote for this waste. Saxby & Johnny the Socialist voted for TARP but our Congressmen voted against it. You can’t have it both ways, you ar are either Conservatives or SOCIALIST.
wheezy
June 25th, 2009
4:02 pm
The GENERALS AT THE PENTAGON say “we don’t need the F-22″ that’s good enough for me. If this plane was being built in Nebraska no one here would even care. Let the President and Secretary of Defense do their job you numbskulls.
southside
June 25th, 2009
4:03 pm
Georgians are idiots most on this blog have no idea what a F-22 is .If Obama is for it they are against it. For the money we spend on it should never sit we could have used it too find that S.C. governor
JT
June 25th, 2009
4:08 pm
I could care less where the plane is built. This plane keeps us competitive in the world of air supremacy. The Pentagon was forced to make tough decisions and this is what they came up with. If we are “cutting back” it shouldn’t be in defense spending, it should be in our entitlement programs.
cheapman
June 25th, 2009
4:09 pm
My vote is for Nixon. Hell, even with his descrepancies, he was far better than the Big “O”
Bo Chambliss LOBBYIST
June 25th, 2009
4:12 pm
Saxby got over $2.5 Million to vote for TARP. With Saxby MONEY talks & BS walks.
southside
June 25th, 2009
4:12 pm
If the F-22 serves no purpose in the wars we are in whats the use other than to line the politicans pockets.
southside
June 25th, 2009
4:13 pm
Saxby is abigger crook than Regan was.
Dr Soul
June 25th, 2009
4:14 pm
Yo…JT.. you hit it on the head…
NOBAMA is nothing but the ‘Pied Piper’ of Socialism and there are a lot
of rats in step with him..primarily because they live off these entitlements and expect more, because he has implied more will be coming.. he gives people very little incentive to work..!!!
And, do not expect the economy or his programs to move very fast; as long as he keeps people down and living off entitlements, he has a large supporting electorate.. we will only see progress in the last year of his administration when he scares them into believing that he has tried, and making progress, but will need 4 more years to make it happen for them.. that people are fighting against them and he is trying to get it right.. ‘won’t happen overnight’ (heard that one before).. all a big game folks..
Dr Soul
June 25th, 2009
4:16 pm
The election of Saxby is the largest show of ignorance in Georgia
Get Real
June 25th, 2009
4:17 pm
Some of you are real twits. If China wants to go to war with us, it doesn’t have to fire one missile. All it has to do is call in the $3 Trillion marker we owe them. That would bring this country to its knees financially. And Obama’s spending is a fraction of that. You all blame him for this when the Republican Secretary of Defense and “Generals on the ground” say we don’t need it. I thought listening to Generals on the ground was so important these last 6 years? Real hypocrites you are. You rail against pork-barrel spending until its in your backyard.
Tony Starks
June 25th, 2009
4:18 pm
Russia and China has a plane that is dominant over the F-22 called the Su-47 and the MiG 1.44. Outperforms what there making in little old Marietta. Scrap that old thing (F-22). Second, President Obama is moving critical funds away from the Republicans which might help them get re-elected in the future against him and any other Democrat (Smart Tactics). Third join me in the welfare line and see what it feels like (LMFAO).
JT
June 25th, 2009
4:22 pm
Nothing is dominant over the F-22, competitive yes, dominant, no. And those 2 planes would destroy an F-15 or F-35. Makes me feel safe.
Island Dawg
June 25th, 2009
4:32 pm
What a bunch of rubes! Non politically appointed generals who have worked their way up the military echelon to that level say we don’t need it. I love how the most blow-hard neo-con “patriots” are also the most scaredy cat wussbags. Also that comment about Russia having the best fighter is the stupidest thing I’ve heard in quite some time. They can’t even keep their conscripts enlisted for more than 2 years. Bunch of idiots!
F22Raptor4Ever
June 25th, 2009
4:33 pm
Enter your comments here
CVL
June 25th, 2009
4:33 pm
I feel bad for the folks that went through their schooling,and got all their wonderful clearances and skills that can ONLY USE THEM TO BUILD OBSOLETE AND OVERPRICED AIRPLANES…….
how about a nice tall glass of WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
I’m glad to finally have a president with the cajoles to spend the money where its needed and not to hookup his buddies. Besides since Georgia didnt vote him, he owes you nothing.
Your party is in such disarray, if you dont support Obama in 2012, who do you support? The pig in lipstick who cant control her family, the Argentinian adulterer, or the kind gentleman from Louisiana who has all of the charisma of a Q-tip.
When you guys say the democrats are ruining the country, it makes us feel great, because your idea of a great country clearly needs to be ruined.
Tony Starks
June 25th, 2009
4:39 pm
You old timers are still stuck on this one plane, one tank or object. Let it go cut the program were doomed. There is a new military strategy we have to meet over the next twenty years and its not with the F-22. Why send a jet with missiles against a nuclear armed country? I just dont get it. Fly the thing in your backyard after they can it.
F22Raptor4Ever
June 25th, 2009
4:39 pm
All I can say is – this is an abomination (Obamanation – get it?) Whatever they say about the F-22 vs its cousin the F-35 – well – who did it all first? It is THE FIRST Fifth Generation Stealth Fighter, and God help us if we need it for the purpose for which it was conceived. ‘Cause there won’t be enough to protect our nation and its allies.
Dr Soul
June 25th, 2009
4:41 pm
“I’m glad to finally have a president with the cajoles to spend the money where its needed and not to hookup his buddies.”
The optimum point here is ‘where it is needed’ and we have not really seen evidence of that yet.. lot of debt spending and waste.. as to hooking up his buddies, the ‘entitlement rats’ are his real buddies and what keeps him going…!!!
Little Head
June 25th, 2009
4:42 pm
For those not familiar with the F-22 and why it’s a waste, let me explain. It’s one of the most – if not the most advanced air-to-air fighters in the world…. To fight the Soviet Union’s next generation fighters. That’s right, that’s why it was developed. The fighter has limited air-to-ground capabilities, which renders it pretty much useless in the wars we’re fighting right now, and might be fighting well into the future. President Obama and Secretary Gates have rightly decided to shift our procurement to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, which we could actually use, because of its air-to-ground and stealth capabilities.
BW
June 25th, 2009
4:46 pm
How far will Defense Secretary Robert Gates go? Even before the House Armed Services Committee voted to slip in $369 million for more F-22 Raptor jet fighters this week, people on Capitol Hill were abuzz about what the Obama administration might do in response – to make a point about the direction of U.S. defense policy.
Veto the entire defense spending bill because of the provision? Far-fetched as it seems, some politicians think Gates might want Obama to do so.
Gates has a point to prove, and Lockheed Martin’s F-22 and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter are looming as the point’s mightiest pair of symbols. He wants to redesign Pentagon procurement around counterinsurgencies rather than against a major adversary such as Russia or China, and his promotion of the F-35 as the next generation fighter jet has energized enthusiasts around the world. Lockheed Martin expects to eventually sell thousands of them.
The Defense Secretary also might be aggravated by what appears to be a limited rebellion from within the U.S. Air Force ranks, as commanders and generals start speaking out in favor of the F-22.
And Gates is no doubt irritated by Congress itself, which isn’t about to give up its say-so on spending. The military “needs to learn who’s in charge, and the Congress is,” says Neil Abercrombie, a Hawaii Democrat.