America's Debate > McCain and the tanker contract

Help - Search - Members - Calendar

Full Version: McCain and the tanker contract

America's Debate > In the News > Election 2008

Google

Sponsored Links

quick

Mar 11 2008, 06:29 PM

Below is an excerpt from a news story on the Northrop-Grumman/Airbus refueling tanker contract:

QUOTE

WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Defense Secretary Robert Gates assured Senator John McCain last year that the tender process for a billion-dollar aircraft tanker contract had been changed in line with his concerns, the Pentagon said Tuesday.

A team that included European aerospace giant EADS won the 35-billion-dollar contract to supply refuelling aircraft on February 29, setting off a storm of protests among supporters of US rival Boeing in the US Congress.

Some Democrats blamed the loss of the contract on McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, because he fought an earlier air force deal to lease tanker planes from Boeing....

That [earlier] deal collapsed amid an influence peddling scandal that ousted the company's CEO and sent two executives to prison....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080311/pl_af...yAqWUx7heRh24cA

Questions for Debate:

1) Did McCain unethically influence the tanker contract?

2) Should a foreign government-owned company like Airbus have any seat at the table when awarding U.S. military contracts unless they offer something unique that cannot be produced by an American company?

3) Should the contract be rebid?

4) Is there any real competiton at this level of govt contracting considering the few number of real players?

Google

Sponsored Links

Ted

Mar 11 2008, 07:04 PM

Questions for Debate:

1) Did McCain unethically influence the tanker contract?
Only in that he kept the government fro violating their own rules and awarding it “sole sourse” to Boeing – at great waste and expense to the taxpayers. He shoulsd be thanked not scorned.

2) Should a foreign government-owned company like Airbus have any seat at the table when awarding U.S. military contracts unless they offer something unique that cannot be produced by an American company?
Of course. This is germany and France – not exactly enimies.

3) Should the contract be rebid?
No. You don’t get to rebid. Boeing had the chance to submit the winning bid. Sour grapes and political pressure should not work.

4) Is there any real competiton at this level of govt contracting considering the few number of real players?

Obviously there is – all it takes is two good qualified sources – as these two are – to make for good competition. This award will save the military billions of $$$$. THAT is competition at work.

logophage

Mar 11 2008, 07:42 PM

Wow. This is the first time I've ever completely and unambiguously agreed with a Ted post.

1) Did McCain unethically influence the tanker contract?

No. Ted is correct.

2) Should a foreign government-owned company like Airbus have any seat at the table when awarding U.S. military contracts unless they offer something unique that cannot be produced by an American company?

Quite a lot of Airbus manufacturing occurs in the US. Boeing has a rather significant facility in the UK.

What is the strategic concern here? Will Airbus suddenly withhold equipment contracted by the US military? Is there a concern that Airbus will go out of business and thus be unable to maintain their contracts? What salient difference is there between company based in the EU vs. US? Equipment will still be subject to the criteria set in the contract.

3) Should the contract be rebid?

No. Ted is correct.

4) Is there any real competition at this level of govt contracting considering the few number of real players?

If we limit contracts to only Boeing, then there will never be any real competition. Airbus is the only other significant aircraft manufacturer in the world right now.

Google