E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSFrom NBC's Michael Isikoff
The surprise House vote today to kill $450 million to build a alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter was a big victory for an unlikely alliance that included the Obama administration and Tea Party Republicans determined to slash spending across the board, including the military budget.
But it was also a setback for House GOP leaders, including Speaker John Boehner, who HAS fought hard to save the project over the years.
No budget item has been more heavily lobbied in recent weeks, with GE spending millions running full-page newspaper ads and hiring big-gun lobbyists, including Dick Gephart, Trent Lott and John Breaux. But a rebellion by freshman Republicans -- such as Tim Griffin of Arkansas -- swelled the ranks of opponents who argued that the country can't afford to pay another $3 billion over the next few years to build two engines for the same airplane. The final vote was 233-198 to eliminate the project. (General Electric is a minority owner of NBC Universal.)
In effect, they contended, the GE alternative engine was simply a thinly disguised earmark and a classic example of pork-barrel spending. GE (and Rolls Royce) are partners in the project to develop the alternate or back up engine to the primary one being built by Pratt & Whitney in Connecticut.
One of the biggest backers of the project: House Speaker John Boehner, whose district is just outside the main GE plant where the alternate engine is being built. (Boehner even cut a YouTube video last year extolling the virtues of the project. He reiterated his support for the GE engine just this week, but told reporters he would let the House "work its will" by having an up or down vote. As Speaker, he also did not personally vote on today's amendment.) Another strong supporter: House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, whose district includes a Rolls Royce plant. Click here to see the roll call vote.
*** UPDATE *** Boehner's office sends along the following exchange with reporters yesterday:
REPORTER: “Mr. Speaker, will the Republican leadership join Lynn Westmoreland in proposing to get rid of the money in the current Continuing Resolution for the F-35 extra engine?”
BOEHNER: “I suspect there will be a healthy debate on that big question. As you all know that I believe that over the next ten years that this will save the government money. But let’s have the policy debate out in the open on the House floor and let the House work its will.”
Leave a Comment:
Thanks Michael for pointing this out!
Appears your colleague, Mr. Russert didn't have the intestinal fortitude to bring it up!
Uh OH -- Boenher won't be bringing home the bacon! lol
Feisty -
Just goes to prove what I've always said -
If it's the opposition party's district, it's "pork".
If it's a district in your own party, it's bringing home the "bacon".
Of course, if it's MY district, it'll always be scrapple!
Say it with me Fiesty: Go tea Party!
And JoAnne - no bacon in anybody's district for both the Tea Party and Obama. Isn't it nice when they see eye to eye. [And for you and Fiesty, very unsettling, no doubt]
Good news - we all win when spending gets slashed.
It's not over yet. I am sure Immelt from GE is on the phone suggesting to his buddy, Obama that he might not receive the campaign funds he is expecting if he doesn't veto it. It will be interesting to see how this plays out but it is a great first step.
Well, Weeper, tell the folks in the district 'so be it'!
Rocco, nice try but.... President Obama left the spare engine out of his budget. It will be hard for Immelt to defend an engine the Pentagon and Secretary Gates says it does not want and does not need. We're talking about spare engines, not all engines.
Say it with me, Spanky, Eric Cantor AND John Boehner strongly supported this pork project and Obama Democrats and some Tea Partiers defeated it.
Jody, It will be easy for Immelt to defend anything that cost his company profits. The program being out of Obama's budget is one thing. Immelt agreeing to it being out is another.The interesting thing is, will Obama sign the budget or veto if it is in the budget that is presented. How it plays out in the Senate will tell more. Maybe be if congress bothered to pass a budget last year we would have an idea. By the way Jody, do you know if it in the budget proposed last year by Obama that didn't get passed? Did it get out of the house last year with it in or out? I could not find specifics on it. My google must be taking a coffee break.
Boehner did not shed a tear while stating "so be it" when it came to cutting all the federal worker's jobs. I wonder if he will shed some tears for the workers in his and Cantor's district? I bet he will shed some for the loss financial backing from G.E. How did Cantor, who also wants to eliminate federal jobs, vote on the funding of it?
"GE- we bring teas to your eyes"
Hey, that'd make a neat promo....
They are like 'tears', only without the 'r'. Us fat-fingered doofs type like that....
How much can we trust the media to give us fair news in situations like this when they are financially connected to the bills in Congress?
Also, I am not a tea party fan, but kudos to the Dems and the tea party on this vote.
Wait a minute, Colorado. We actually report on something that has a financial tie to a minority owner and you contend that you can't trust us to report on it? Wouldn't it make more sense to make that argument if we didn't report on GE's lobbying?
Doesn't CABLETOWN own you guys now? lol
Thank you, Mark Murray.
Michael Isikoff is an excellent investigative journalist--when he speaks or writes something, it is worth hearing or reading.
Sorry, Domenico...didn't mean to insinuate that you (personally) can't be trusted....quite the contrary.
What I was referring to was the power that GE has through NBC to influence the discussion on a bill/topic that they have a financial interest in. A big megaphone.
Kudos the NBC. The CNN article about this story did not mention that GE was building the engines, that the plant was in Boehner's district, or that GE had spent millions lobbying for the project, but I guess the last was a given.
One of the biggest backers of the project: House Speaker John Boehner, whose district is just outside the main GE plant where the alternate engine is being built.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
That's sort of a big part of your job when you are in congress. The project is a white elephant, but it would have meant jobs for his district and state. The day a congressperson doesn't support a project in their district will be news, this not so much...
Don't forget Eric Cantor, his district benefited as well.
Actually, neither district will be benefiting now, but the fact that congresspeople ALWAYS support projects, regardless of party (or merit), when their constituents will benefit remains true...
Michael Isikoff, one journalist who tells it like it is. Thank you for the report.
Great news today. If legislators are serious about spending cuts, then they should be serious about making them where they are needed. A few weeks ago, I posted a comment that I wanted legislators to tell the truth and that I wanted legislators to stand up and say no to spending on programs that aren't needed, don't work or aren't wanted. This spare engine was part of that comment, either build a more reliable engine or explain why two engines for every plane was not excessive tax payer money spent to build, store, maintain and upgrade especially when the Pentagon didn't want any more spares.
Cheers to the freshmen GOPTP legislators who joined the ranks of democrats and some republicans to defeat this albatross around the taxpayers' necks. This is the kind of spending cut that makes sense.
I am not expressing a preference one way or the other, but the Military plans for duplicate and backups systems. Additionally, there may be a need for a second manufacture as part of a back up plan.
No doubt, I am familiar with spares, backups are part of original purchases and subsequent buys. But one entire engine as a spare for every engine built tells me wasteful spending or an unreliable engine. Since the Pentagon says it does not need one for every one built, I assume the extras are wasted tax dollars.
Lesson learned yet Boehner? Remember what we said "you gotta dance with those what brought you." Yep, you are starting to learn. The "teabaggers" are only loyal to their own individual ox. Wait and and listen for the mighty scream when you try to gore that ox. Should be EXCELLENT entertainment.
So true, newdayDawning, House watching will provide plenty of drama, comedy and soap opera entertainment.
The new Republicans came in on a promise of fiscal restraint. This is not nor is it supposed to be the right vs. the left. It's right vs wrong and these guys voted correctly in my opinion. This is the type of vote that we will all hopefully see more of. I'm not sure if the Democrats were voting "for" saving $450 million or voting "against" what they thought the Republicans wanted. Either way, they got the correct vote in this case. Fiscal restraint, reduce spending, those are the issues that the November election was really about and this is a good start.
words matter. Just having a little fun because conservatives were quite quick to criticize when democrats had trouble getting the votes needed. No one said it was right versus left; in fact if you read an earlier comment of mine, you'll see I gave the freshmen GOPTPers a cheer for joining other opponents of this extra engine the Pentagon said it did not want or need.
I guess they will want their bribe money back !!! Now thats something to cry about !
good one.
Budget cuts have consequences. As usual budget cuts are ok if they do not affect people in your district.
Now I know why GE stock was down today.
Of course budget cuts have consequences but it makes sense to me to cut things the Pentagon says it doesn't want or need particularly when there are programs that are needed that conservatives want to cut. I'm fot modest cuts where appropriate but drastic cuts at this time in the recession recovery will cause more harm to the economy than good.
I wonder if Speaker Boehner will tell the people of his state who lose jobs "so be it" and if they don't find new jobs that they are lazy?
gotta do what you gotta do, no one promised anyone a rose garden except for that "hope and change" thingy.
Poor Boehner & Cantor,
They are all for cutting out waste - unless it's waste that helps them... Now it's time for the Tea Party to turn around and bite the hand that feed them, LOL... And to think - I knew placating the fringe would only lead to trouble...
True, BobbyG.
A lot of us were saying that embracing the TPers would cause the GOP a lot of pain. They may have won back the House but they can't do anything with that huge majority. How many times did conservatives criticize democrats for having trouble passing legislation despite their huge majority--welcome to the club republicans. Like her or not, Speaker Pelosi herded the democratic cats and passed legislation that the media and pundits said was dead--she deserves credit. Speaker Boehner is finding out how hard the job really is.
Oh well Mr. Boeher, so be it.
Perfect, Job 1, you win! Thanks for the chuckle!
Best laugh of the day, Job1.
Left or Right I think cutting this sort of program is something just about anyone who doesn't work at GE/Evendale can agree on. Witness the V22 Osprey flying coffin, which should have been killed YEARS before it ever went into service.
Defense is vital. Defense as a jobs program is worthless.
The tank that wants to be a boat is another waste of money.
John B -
The Ospreys are built right in my backyard at the Boeing plant here in PA-7. Former Congressman Curt Weldon(R) built his entire career on getting the funding for them to keep being built here, even throughout all those years of fatal accidents in testing. It was one reason why I voted for Joe Sestak to replace him, because I agree with you that "defense as a jobs program is worthless", and it seemed like a huge waste of taxpayer dollars, not to mention lives.
But then once Sestak took over, he surprised me by supporting it too. A recent article in the local paper said:
"Part of the reason the Osprey program is threatened so often is that its capabilities aren't fully understood, Sestak said.
"People don't think of it in that transformational way," he said. "It is a totally different platform. It's so much more secure in protecting our troops. It is uniquely needed for the types of conflict where you have to go fast into unknown landing places. It's no longer this frontal warfare where you're landing on a beach."
Sestak explained the Osprey could be stored on a ship and sea and quickly fly hundreds of miles inland, landing in locations without an airfield.
"This is not only an aircraft that can fly higher but it can rapidly descend," he said. "It's so much more secure in completing its mission. Yes, there's a history of problems in the past. We're beyond that. It will survive."
So now I don't know what to think. Interestingly enough, the same article says that:
"In the 1980s, then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney attempted to kill the program but Curt Weldon, the former longtime Republican congressman who represented the 7th District prior to Democrat Joe Sestak, was credited with saving it."
So now I REALLY don't know what to think - me and Cheney? On the same side?
Deacon John B, you're now a military expert? Well I see the Osprey fly down here and it's a good bird. A light transport for the mission it does. Mission=job that it's built for, but since you're a military expert you knew this.
When I was in the CH-47 was called a flying coffin, boy time has changed in the last 3 years. Even though the CH-47 is a good chopper......
Geez Joanne, you think Sestak might had known something being a military man and seeing what it does? Consult with Deacon John B, now military expert.
"Defense is vital. Defense as a jobs program is worthless"
Some of those programs are R & D..............I'm sure you knew that too right?
Thanks for bringing up the R&D aspect of Defense, Paul. That's part of the reason it's such a lousy investment.
The vast majority of all Defense R&D is classified. As such it takes hard-won knowledge that was expensive to acquire and locks it in a vault. Obviously that's important if the technology only is good for killing people because it keeps that technology from being used against us. Mostly that isn't the case, however. In most cases that vault only keeps technology from being used for the benefit of the greater society. It stifles those developments, preventing new civilian uses that could solve thorny problems and build new companies.
To that extent military R&D doesn't build employment, it prevents employment.
As far as the Osprey is concerned here's just one of many articles about the inherently unsafe aircraft. http://www.g2mil.com/V-22safety.htm This after the bird first flew YEARS late and MANY billions of dollars over budget.
"The surprise House vote today to kill $450 million to build a alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter was a big victory for an unlikely alliance that included the Obama administration and Tea Party Republicans."
Does this mean I have to start (GULP) liking the Tea Party?!?!?!?
Now that thought just turns my stomach!!!
"Green" tea maybe otherwise, I'm sticking with coffee.
I think this is one of the smartest things I've seen since the tea partiers were elected. Hurrah!
Great job to Democrats and the tea party!
Some of the Republicans and the Tea party continue to want to cut educational benefits. This does not make a lot of sense. As our weapons systems get more and more complicated, education should be cut? In other words, the more complicated the system, the less education needed to operate it. Do we see a problem when these complicated systems reach field level?
I agree. When the U.S. needs more emphasis on education for the future, conservatives would rather build two engines when one is needed (and a few spares) and cut education. No wonder we're in trouble. You presented a scarey question/thought.
Explain why Government needs to be involved in education? What about the parents?
Simple, Paul:
Our level of cruelty has surpassed our level of compassion and knowledge.
Because good public education is part of our American heritage that has contributed to the success of our democracy while building a population capable of being the most innovative, intelligent, productive workforce in the history of the world.
But what use is all of that?
I don't see this as a defeat for Boehner, but a victory for the tea party elected members and the American tax payers. I am glad that this was voted down by a combination of democrats and republicans. Let hope the rest of the congress members take a hint and quit trying to protect their own turfs at the expense of the American people.
Somehow, this has an "Aesop's Fable" feel to it, PARTICULARLY the one about "The Frog and The Scorpion".
When I served in the Army, 1967-1974, we used udimentarily systems in combat. It was fairly simple, aim, fie, and shoot, hoping to actually hit something. now, we have lasers, laser tracking, computer controls, etc., and the military is lowering its standards to bring in new people. They may be good/great at Nintendo, Wii, etc., but, are these the type of quality people we want to defend our country? The parents should/NEED to be involved, but, with the financial situation in this country, both parents must work. The country has spiraled to a point short, very short of out of control. What we need, as a country is good, strong, leadership, instead, we have two sides sniping at each other, proclaiming that their side is not to blame, its the other side that has/is doing it. The Tea party seems to be just sitting back and waiting for the two dominate sides to destroy each other, so they can come in and get the spoils. Folks, it is time, no, well past time, to quit listening to the assorted talking heads on BOTH sides of aisle and start listening to your very own common snense. God, gave it to you, use mit as He intended. Quit voting for the best sound bite, and start voting for who your common sense tells you is best for the country.
MSNBC's intentionally distorted wording: "G.E. engine vote a defeat for Boehner" ???
REALLY ???
Realistically speaking.... Who was directly hurt and suffered the most ???.... Boehner or Jeffery Immelt ???
But, where is MSNBC's article stating that this vote was a MAJOR DEVESTATING LOSS for Jeffery Immelt ???
We all know the answer..... MSNBC will NEVER bite the (G. E., Jeffery Immelt) hand that feeds them !
So, factual honesty will NEVER be reported from MSNBC.
Well MR Bohner "So be It"
Don't cry over spilled milk!
If Mr. Boehner truely means "So be It" than I hope that it means that he is cutting his staff and the congresstional budget in half. I also hope that he is asking the entire excutive Branch of government to reduce thier salaries by half. Sure it sounds small but every little bit helps. Would I like to see taxes on Big Oil? Yes because it would drive up fuel prices on everyone and would be the end of big fuel guzzling engines. It would than double the use of alternative fuels.