House seeking $6.9b on unwanted military equipment

Earmarks stay despite threats by Obama, Gates

By R. Jeffrey Smith, Washington Post | July 30, 2009

WASHINGTON - The Democratic-controlled House of Representatives is poised to give the Pentagon dozens of new ships, planes, helicopters, and armored vehicles that Defense Secretary Robert Gates says the military does not need, acting in many cases in support of defense contractors and political contributors under a “business as usual’’ approach the Obama administration vowed to end.

The unwanted equipment in a military spending bill expected to come to a vote on the House floor today has a price tag of at least $6.9 billion. The White House has said that some but not all of the extra expenditures could draw a presidential veto of the Defense Department’s entire $636 billion budget for 2010, and it sent a message to House lawmakers urging them to cut expenditures for items that “duplicate existing programs, or that have outlived their usefulness.’’

The dispute over Congress’s insistence on additional spending for items such as the C-17 transport plane, a troubled missile defense interceptor program, and the VH-71 presidential helicopter reflects a continuing struggle between Gates and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle who are loyal to existing military programs benefiting contractors that provide jobs and heavy campaign donations.

Gates vowed in April to overhaul the military’s “approach to procurement, acquisition, and contracting’’ and urged Congress to back a shift from many traditional weapons programs toward spending on counterinsurgency efforts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But House lawmakers who support past priorities appear likely to prevail in this round, because an unusually restrictive rule for floor debate agreed upon yesterday will only allow amendments to strip less than half of the spending the administration dislikes.

About $2.75 billion of the extra funds - all of which were unanimously approved in an 18-minute-long markup Monday by the Democratic-controlled House Appropriations Committee - would finance earmarks, or projects demanded by individual lawmakers the Pentagon did not request. About half of that amount reflects spending requested by private firms, including 95 companies or related political action committees that donated a total of $789,190 to members of the appropriations subcommittee on defense, according to an analysis by Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonprofit group.

Representative Jeff Flake, an Arizona Republican and spending critic who has long waged a campaign against such earmarks, has said he will try again today to strike all such spending. But his previous earmark-stripping efforts have succeeded only once in dozens of attempts.

“Simply put, members of Congress should not have the ability to award no-bid contracts’’ to private firms, Flake said in a statement.

The annual Defense Appropriations Bill is an "Epic Tragedy played in two acts". In act one, the congress, in its infinite wisdom, strips out items that the military has asked for to protect the nation and the troops. Items may be stripped out because they cost too much, the congressman doesn't understand their purpose, or they are not beneficial to the congressman's district.

In act two, mentioned above, the congressman gives the military things that the military doesn't want and didn't ask for (remember $600 hammers?) The sole qualifier here is what benefits the congressperson's constituent's and his uh donors, yes - got to take care of your uh that is the people who those who give you contributions.

Congressional representatives serve two year terms, Senators serve for six years. Then they stand for re-election. Many in the capitol have been there so long that they've forgotten what it's like to hold an honest job, if they ever did. Starting in November, 2010, join us in banishing the word re-election from our language. One term and out! is the new motto let the congress critters go home and live under the laws they've created just like the rest of us. Don't let them sit there long enough to have the power and influence that breeds corruption and bribery and favoritism.

The president too. One term for everyone. No more running for re-election from day one in office. If nobody has to worry about popularity contests, maybe more of the peoples' work will get done. No special medical care or retirement after leaving office either. You get what the people get, so you better take care of the people!

Let's make better use of the U.S. Army's 3rd Infantry Regiment "The Old Guard", you've seen them doing the tomb guard duty at Arlington National Cemetery and doing funerals for deceased presidents. If we ever again accidentally elect a communist to any position of power in the government, I would love to see him tied to a stake on the capitol steps. Then a squad of riflemen from "The Old Guard" in dress blues commanded by a lieutenant wielding a saber could render a 21 gun salute with live ammo. The network commentators would love it.