Butting Heads With the Pentagon. Buy American.

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Butting Heads With the Pentagon
By LESLIE WAYNE
Doug Mills/The New York Times
Duncan Hunter, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, has roiled the Defense Department.
There is no better friend of the Pentagon than Duncan Hunter, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. A conservative and a hawk on defense, Mr. Hunter has long been someone the military could count on to push its dream projects through Congress.
So there is considerable dismay, and some outright consternation, over sweeping "buy America" provisions that Mr. Hunter inserted into the House version of legislation authorizing the coming year's Pentagon budget. Countries that failed to help the United States in the Iraq war, he argues, should not enjoy the spoils of American military contracts or put the Pentagon in a position of depending on them for critical components.
That view has set Mr. Hunter on a collision course with his many friends at the Pentagon and among American military contractors that buy everything from microprocessors to jet engines and airplane wings overseas. Mr. Hunter's proposal would cut back sharply on the foreign content allowed in American military goods as well as provide a laundry list of items — from fuses to machine tools to airplane tires — that only American companies could supply.

Considering the state of the American economy and industry would you side with Mr. Hunters position. As I remember at one time chips and semi conductors were not allowed to be procured from off shore sources for military equipment. But that was many years ago.
Is it so unreasonable to expect our tax dollars to be spent where they would do the most good for US industries and citizens.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/23/business/23BUY.html?th

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 878 • Replies: 15

No top replies

Who me? I'd like to see the Pentagon lose all it's funding, only to have it restored dollar by dollar according to need and according to the efficiency with which it's used. After that we can take a look at the sources of the military goods.

Much as we'd like to think otherwise, we are not the number one provider of reliable goods and services. I mentioned in another thread the continuing shocker of periodic official surveys of auto quality and reliability showing that (hurrah hurrah) this year America actually has a vehicle which is better than mediocre -- a Buick. The rest are significantly below par. In the home stretch and at the top are Japanese vehicles for the most part. We thought, back in the late '60's, that the challenge from Japan and Europe would make for much better American cars. Now we clap ourselves on the back because they're a little bit better. Hmmm. Not sure I want my nephews and grandkids going into battle with anything but the best-produced military materials.

Au -- you will undoubtedly come back at me with that ol' refrain that I'm an America hater. No. I'm an American realist. 1) I don't NEED to believe America is #1 in all matters. 2) I know the only way of becoming #1 is by acknowledging the deficiencies and doing something about them. The last thing we want is Pentagon brass getting fat on contracts with American corporations which aren't above selling faulty, overpriced goods and services which the foot soldier pays the ultimate price for.

0 Replies

Tartarin
No it is not for me to pass judgment on your feelings about America.
Regarding the quality. One cannot measure the quality of product produced for the military against commercial products. Two different animals.
As for letting contracts to those fat cats as you call them. These same fat cats, if they are forced to by American components put people to work and feed the American economy. At the present time they buy these components from off shore sources and feed foreign economies.
I should point out even if the parts should be more expensive and I do not know that they are the taxes paid by American workers and the unemployment $ not needing to be paid will more than compensate for the difference.

Just a note most of the advances the we enjoy in the world of electronics and electronic design and manufacture are the product of the industries you seem to frown down on.

For your information I worked in that Industry for 40+ years with most of my carreer being in Quality Assurance.

0 Replies

Aahhhh yes,
Imagine if you will, a completely insular United States, with borders closed to bilateral trade, foreign workers, tourists and anything else coming from the disgraced nations.
While you're at it, employ sanctions on every country whose interior politics and opinions differ from the United States.
I'd imagine since there are few countries actively partaking in or championing the 'war', you could pare down that list the five, give or take.
Imagine the nosedive the economy would take. Yikes.
Thanks,
Ceili

0 Replies

if we dont do something drastic about our education system, we wont be able to complete with anyone.

0 Replies

Yeah. Everybody's economy, by the way.

0 Replies

You probably assured quality, Au. But not everyone does. Particularly in a culture where the buyers like to siphon off the difference between assured quality and something a tad cheaper. The whole process loses my sympathy. We keep talking about competition. So let's welcome competition.

Speaking of which: Why did Jessica's gun jam? Was it a manufacturing defect? Some say Jessica didn't clean her gun -- "those guns don't jam unless they're dirty." Snood, where are you?! It was on one of your radio stations they had a whole program on that!

0 Replies

Void

0 Replies

Ceili
How you can equate the purchase of items for the military to closing borders and the rest of your rave I cannot fathom. Equipment purchased by the military should be manufactured with components manufactured in the US. We should not depend on components made off shore in particular vital ones. A disruption in Taiwan for instance where many IC's are manufactured, at least that was how it was before I retired and no doubt still is, could seriously impact the manufacture and delivery of equipment. In addition we cannot afford to lose the capability for the manufacture of those items and have to depend on foreign sources for supply. When I say we I mean the US not Canada.

0 Replies

Tartarin
In an attemt to keep this discussion civil I will only say you do not know what you are talking about.

0 Replies

Quote:

Ceili
How you can equate the purchase of items for the military to closing borders and the rest of your rave I cannot fathom.

Geez, I had no idea I was raving???

I was exaggerating the point. Shocked

illustrating how closed minded thinking is never really thought out.
Mr Hunters' sentiment seems more centered on punishment and a "go-it-alone attitude ", than a practical solution or one bent on protecting the workforce or the US military.

Quote:

So there is considerable dismay, and some outright consternation, over sweeping "buy America" provisions that Mr. Hunter inserted into the House version of legislation authorizing the coming year's Pentagon budget. Countries that failed to help the United States in the Iraq war, he argues, should not enjoy the spoils of American military contracts or put the Pentagon in a position of depending on them for critical components.

My statement was a comment on the broader picture. Trade with the United States is becoming fraught with red tape. Free trade agreements are anything but, and if attitudes such as Mr. Hunter's prevail in congress or on the street, could my exaggeration be far from the truth?

Thanks,
Ceili

0 Replies

Ceili
Two seperate issues. Aside from making our tax dollars work for the American worker. We should be self sufficient when it
comes to the supply of our military.
A side issue but just think how different the world would be if we and the entire industrial world did not have to depend on the Mid East for a good portion of it energy requirements.

0 Replies

Au -- I'll be glad to step out if you think my posts are uncivil. My comment indicated that I'm sure you did or would do the job right, but that we know from past history that the Pentagon's buying processes are corrupt (the toilet seats, etc.), that skimming goes on, that there is a much too cosy relationship between buyer (Pentagon) and manufacturer. And (see Jessica Lynch) there is talk about the quality and maintenance of weapons. My contention is that there should be a full review of process, taking in all the points mentioned above, rather than a "buy America" campaign.

0 Replies

I should add that I make a habit of looking and trying to participate in threads started by friends and neighbors from other threads. That's why I dropped into your thread, not because (as you know!) I'm an expert in military procurement. Just trying to be friendly and help get a discussion started.

0 Replies

Tartarin
I did not mean to imply that your comments were uncivil. Some of your comments pulled my trigger and I was ready to fire. That coupled with the root canal I had a few hours before I posted made for a nasty combination. In fact you will note that I voided a post. No need to say why.

0 Replies

GOP worries grow on job losses

Congressional Republicans propose tax breaks, ‘buy American’ rules

By Tom Curry
MSNBC

WASHINGTON, July 25 — Concerned about the loss of factory jobs and with an eye on next year’s election, some congressional Republicans are pushing protectionist and pro-manufacturing measures — which may provide cover for incumbents running for re-election. Republicans have offered a range of measures, from beefing up “buy American” provisions in defense contracting to tax breaks for manufacturing firms.

EVEN AS THE House approved free trade accords with Chile and Singapore Thursday, there was an undercurrent of deep worry about the hemorrhage of American manufacturing jobs.
“We’re getting killed. Cored out to the bone,” said Rep. Don Manzullo, R- Ill., who represents a northern Illinois district with a heavy concentration of machine tool and tool-and-die plants, in an interview with MSNBC.com Thursday. “There’s 11.3 percent unemployment in Rockford,” the largest city in his district.
Manzullo added that fellow Republican House Speaker Dennis Hastert’s district, just south of Manzullo’s in Illinois, is “getting hit as unmercifully as mine is. So this is big-time stuff.”

It.'s amazing It's as thought they just came out of a long stupor. We have been bleeding jobs for years. It's amazing how perceptive our congress is
http://www.msnbc.com/news/940725.asp?0cv=NB10

0 Replies

Butting Heads With the Pentagon. Buy American.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know