March 13, 2007:
In a recent press release, the group, Citizens Against
Government Waste (CAGW), declared the F-22 a "pork" project, citing a
Government Accountability Office report. This declaration, though, is somewhat
questionable, largely due to the fact that once again, a political pressure
group has gotten it wrong in its haste to pursue its agenda.
CAGW was pushing for additional production of the F-35 instead of the F-22,
citing the difference in price. Here was the first problem. The F-35 price
cited by CAGW, $35 million, was misleading. Estimates for the price per F-35
are anywhere from $44 million to $61 million as of January, 2005. Thus the CAGW
number is an understatement of at least
20.5 percent, using the lower figure (the higher figure would make the
understatement as much as 42.8 percent). Meanwhile, the flyaway cost for the
F-22 is estimates at $116 million per plane, close to the $120 million figure
cited.
The CAGW "Pig Book" for 2007 also targeted other DOD programs. One
target was $9.5 million for new cold-weather clothing (much of it designed
after experience in Afghanistan). Another target was $5.3 million for marine
mammal research. The Navy has been facing a number of lawsuits over its use of
sonar, and also used dolphins and sea lions for security work. Another target
was $11.5 million for a new telescope for early detection of asteroids and
other space objects that might hit earth.
Past recommendations by CAGW have also shown a distinct focus on dollars and
cents rather than on what the troops might need. Last year, CAGW labeled the
production of new C-130J transports as pork, despite that fact that the DOD was
requesting more C-130Js and had reversed a decision to stop procurement after
the Air Force grounded nearly 100 C-130Es whose wings suffered "severe
fatigue" that same year. At least a dozen of those planes, which first
entered service in August, 1962, had been flying since the Vietnam War.
Another target of CAGW has been the V-22 Osprey. Again, CAGW has ignored the
fact that canceling the Osprey would leave the Marines flying in on ancient
CH-46 helicopters (the youngest CH-46s are 35 years old). CAGW also ignored the
quantum leap in capabilities the V-22 provides, including a top speed that is
two times that of the CH-46, larger payload, and a much greater combat radius.
Still another CAGW recommendation involved procuring conventionally-powered
carriers instead of nuclear-powered carriers. This proposal ignored the impact
that such a measure would have on a carrier's combat capability. Nuclear power
has increased the amount of fuel and weapons for the carrier's primary weapon
that can be carried on board. A shift to conventional power would force a
carrier to rely more on supply vessels, and would arguably make the U.S. Navy's
prime power-projection asset much less capable.
Much of what is cited as defense pork is, in actuality, good for the
country, particularly when it keeps a production line open. When a production
line shuts down, a number of things happen. The workers who run the line are
either re-assigned or they retire. Companies that once provided parts for the
production line re-tool or go out of business. The equipment is often shifted
to another production line, or it is destroyed (as Boeing did with the MD-11
production line). When a production line goes away, restoring it is often
impossible.
CAGW might be penny-wise, but they are being pound-foolish at the very
least. The worst part about their single-minded focus on perceived waste is
that the real price for these cost-savings will be paid by soldiers, sailors,
airmen, and Marines down the road, often because the programs halted today
could be needed tomorrow. - Harold C. Hutchison ([email protected])