No Budget? No Problem. Murtha Sets Out Priorities
In the absence of a 2010 defense budget from the Pentagon, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., is fashioning his own military spending plan.
Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., sketched out his spending preferences March 25 after what would have been a budget hearing. (Staff)
Here are key elements of the aircraft portion:
■ New refueling tankers are the top priority for Air Force. Splitting the buy between the two competing contractors is a priority for Murtha.
■ There will be a new presidential helicopter, but not the budget-busting model with all the protective gear the Secret Service wants.
■ Money for Navy F/A-18E/F aircraft may be included in the war-funding supplemental.
■ Parts suppliers for the F-22 stealth fighter have to be kept in business.
■ Congress wants a second engine for the Joint Strike Fighter, even if the Air Force doesn't.
Murtha, who is chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee on defense, sketched out his spending preferences March 25 after what would have been a budget hearing. But the Obama administration has released only a vague outline of its defense spending plans; the final request is expected on April 21.
Instead, Murtha presided as senior Navy and Air Force aircraft acquisition officials described in exquisite detail what's in the 2009 budget - the one Congress passed last fall.
"We're listening to these people today," Murtha fumed afterward. "What the hell can they tell us? They can't tell us anything."
That's partly because the 2010 defense budget isn't finished yet. But there's also an unusual absence of related leaks this year because the military's top officers were forced by Defense Secretary Robert Gates to sign statements promising not to reveal budget details.
Typically, the defense budget goes to Capitol Hill the first Monday in February. But President Barack Obama has delayed it for 11 weeks so his administration can write a new spending plan rather than submit one prepared by his predecessor.
Lack of a budget hasn't stopped lawmakers from conducting budget hearings, however. Murtha said his appropriations subcommittee will have conducted more than 40 hearings by April 6 - with two weeks still to go before they expect to see an actual budget.
"We're doing what we can," Murtha said.
In comments to reporters after his hearing, Murtha said refueling tankers are the Air Force's top priority. The bulk of the planes in the tanker fleet, KC-135 aircraft, are about 45 years old on average.
In February 2008, the Air Force awarded a contract to Northrop Grumman to build tankers out of European Airbus airliners. But that $35 billion award was overturned by a bid protest filed by Northrop's rival Boeing.
Boeing complained of more than 100 improper contracting practices. The Government Accountability Office agreed with eight of them.
The Air Force is planning to reopen competition for a tanker contract this spring, Lt. Gen. Mark Shackelford, the Air Force's acquisition chief, told the subcommittee.
Murtha said the Air Force should buy tankers from both Northrop and Boeing. If only one company gets a contract, there will be another bid protest, he said.
But the buy shouldn't be split 50-50, Murtha said. "Whoever comes in with the best price will get the most airplanes."
Murtha acknowledged that Gates opposes the plan. So does Rep. Norman Dicks, D-Wash., who represents thousands of Boeing workers and is second in seniority on the subcommittee behind Murtha.
To overcome opposition to a split tanker buy, Murtha said he plans to meet with Boeing and Northrop officials as well as with Gates and Dicks.
Murtha said he has already spoken with White House officials about the VH-71 presidential helicopter. "I told them not to cancel it. We need those helicopters," he said. Aircraft in the current presidential fleet are about 30 years old.
Begun in 2005 as a $6.1 billion program to build 28 helicopters, the VH-71 has ballooned in price to $13 billion. The increase is due to security equipment demanded by the Secret Service, Murtha said.
Sophisticated communications gear, defenses against missiles, hardened hulls and other alterations have pushed up to cost - and the weight. Even with three engines, the European-made AugustaWestland helicopter "can't lift all the stuff the Secret Service wants to put on it," Murtha said.
"We're going to build the presidential helicopter, but we're not going to build the expensive version of the presidential helicopter," he said.
Murtha said he may try to add money for extra F/A-18E/F fighters to a war-funding supplemental because the planes are being used to fight the wars.
Although the Bush administration crammed war-time supplementals full of non-wartime costs, such as Joint Strike Fighters, the Obama administration was expected to end that practice.
Murtha clearly does not want to. A $75.5 billion supplemental to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for the second half of 2009 is expected to include $600 million to buy four more F-22s, pushing to total to 187.
Murtha asked Shackelford whether the Air Force also needed advance procurement money in the supplemental to keep F-22 subcontractors in business.
"Suppliers," Shackelford said, not subcontractors.
Rep. Pete Visclosky and Murtha told Shackelford and Navy acquisition chief Adm. David Architzel that Congress strongly supports developing an alternative engine for the Joint Strike Fighter.
For three years, the Air Force has balked, Visclosky said.
Shackelford said a "business case analysis" shows that developing an alternative engine will cost more than it is worth. "The cost-benefit is not favorable."
Citing costly problems in the early 1980s, when fighters could be powered by only one engine, lawmakers want a second engine that will generate competition between two manufacturers and drive down prices.
Shackelford argued that "the risks associated with a single source engine supplier are manageable," and are cheaper than the $4.3 billion cost of continuing to develop second engine.
"Both the House and the Senate feel very strongly about the alternative engine," Murtha said. The Joint Strike Fighter is expected to be around for decades, and the savings that result from having competition between engine makers will be substantial, he said.
"We expect the Air Force to build the alternative engine," he said.
E-mail: bmatthews@defensenews.com.
Help
