Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
03.11.2008 6:41 am

Could Boeing’s loss be McCain’s as well?

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Will Boeing’s loss of a major government contract hurt John McCain in Missouri?

The aerospace firm - and its St. Louis based defense-unit - took an enormous hit last week when the Pentagon announced that Boeing, despite being the favorite, had lost a $40 billion bid to supply the Air Force with fueling vessels.

Instead, the contract went to a European company, EADS - known for its Airbus line of jets - and a U.S. partner, Northrop Grumman.

So what’s that go to do with the GOP nominee for president?

Five years ago, Boeing had a $23.5 billion deal in place to lease the fuel tankers - planes that can gas-up other planes in midair - to the military. 

McCain - who was in town for a fundraiser on Monday - questioned the proposal. He led criticism that it would actually cost more to lease the tankers than own them outright.

That helped expose a far more stinging scandal for Boeing: That the firm offered a Air Force procurement office, Darleen Druyun, future employment while she inflated the price of the tanker contract.

Both Druyun and the Boeing executive that offered her the job, St. Louisan Michael M. Sears, admited to federal corruption charges.

McCain, since early on in the campaign, has trumpeted his involvement in exposing the Boeing lease plan, claiming that he saved taxpayers billions.

But now that the contract has been re-bid several years later, many of those jobs that would have gone to Boeing will now go overseas to EADS. And that could quickly become a liability for McCain in St. Louis and other cities with Boeing facilities.

Here’s what AP writer Matthew Daly wrote in a recent analysis:

McCain has run ads touting his role in fighting “pork” such as the tanker project and cited the deal in a recent GOP debate.

“I saved the taxpayers $6 billion in a bogus tanker deal,” he said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., echoing the thoughts of many congressional Democrats, sees McCain’s role in a less positive light. She said the earlier tanker deal was “on course for Boeing” before McCain started railing against it.

“I mean, the thought was that it would be a domestic supplier for it,” Pelosi told reporters. “Senator McCain intervened, and now we have a situation where the contract may be - this work may be outsourced.”

Even Boeing’s Republican supporters are critical of McCain.

“John McCain will be the nominee and I will support him, but if John McCain believes that Airbus or EADS is the company for our Air Force tanker program he’s flat-out wrong - and I’ll tell him that to his face,” said Rep. Dave Reichert, R-Wash.

Missouri’s senior senator, Kit Bond, has entered the fray, writing a letter last week to a Air National Guard, questioning the process behind awarding the air-tanker contract.

But Bond has not, publicly at least, joined the crowd upset with McCain.

McCain in Frontenac

McCain in Frontenac on Monday

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 5 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...
Tags:
22 comments

Comments are closed.

— eseider
11:08 am March 11th, 2008

Why does our government insist on continually pumping our tax dollars out of our country???

— STL
12:07 pm March 11th, 2008

McCain

“I’ll give it to you straight my friends..Those jobs won’t be coming back! We need to retrain our workforce in America to green technologies.. ‘off camera prompt’.. (pause) It’s the wave of the future, just like the hula-hoop of yesteryear!” ‘Grin’ …

— Jimmy
12:12 pm March 11th, 2008

First off, McCain did not select NG/EADS, the Air Force did. All McCain did was to scuttle a deal to lease tankers for as much as it costs to build and own new ones. When that lease was up, it would have cost us much more to re-lease them again. The fact that this uncovered the hanky panky with the Air Force Procurement officer is Boeing’s fault. All this talk of blaming McCain is kind of like blaming the ref when you get caught commiting a foul.

As for the new procurement, there were strings being pulled on all sides. Shoot, Boeing was airing commercials in DC the week before the announcement saying how this was good for America and jobs. This was much too late to affect the actual decision. I think they already had a feeling that they had lost and were preparing the political ground to get this thing stopped in Congress.

Lastly, if it was so wrong to have a foreign company as a major subcontractor for this plane, then why did the gov’t permit NG and EADS to waste their money bidding this proposal. Was this all a hoax, with NG playing Joe Shmoe. Maybe we’d all be happy if Patriot fans lobbied the NFL to have the Superbowl overturned.

— HG
12:22 pm March 11th, 2008

McCain

“This process was fair and open. My letters did not influence the results here..
HEY! Get off my lawn you little JER*! ..’off camera prompt’ ..(pause) ..mumbling.. Let us strike that from the record if I may! ..(grin)..”

— Jimmy
12:36 pm March 11th, 2008

McCain was a key player in the process but told reporters yesterday, “I never weighed in for or against anybody that competed for the contract. All I asked for was a fair process. And the facts are that I never showed any bias in any way against anybody - except for the taxpayer.”

If you don’t get it..read it again … :)

— Jimmy
1:00 pm March 11th, 2008

Here’s what happened.

The bids originally were to include info on government subsidies, with the intent being to find out how production would be affected if subsidies were stopped or decreased.

McCain got this requirement dropped, benefitting the foreign competitor. Seems it was a deal breaker for them, but not for Boeing.

It also smells pretty bad that several people who work in his campaign were lobbyists for EADS previously.

— Robert M Walsh
2:35 pm March 11th, 2008

McCain can finance our 100 year war with Iraq by borrowing money from China to pay the French who build our military hardware….

That’s fair…except for the U.S. taxpayer.

— Garrison
2:36 pm March 11th, 2008

I deleted the aforementioned comment by someone using a name that was obviously not their own. Commenters are free to use a range of monikers, just not one that posits to be somebody else.

— Jake Wagman
2:38 pm March 11th, 2008

I read where the military had two demonstrators from both Boeing and Eads/Northrop, and the military said the Eads model was far superior both in reliability and features. Boeing’s head got a little too big and they need to start focusing on making better planes vs. making a profit. The same mentality cost the Big Three (Ford, Chrysler, GM) billions. John McCain is a representative of our government, and represents us, both as citizens and consumers in the choices that are made. If Airbus/Eads/Northrop makes a superior product, myself and every other American should be behind his decision. I could care less about wether the plane is made in St. Louis, or by union members or not. Most Americans are now buying Hondas, Toyotas, etc. because their durability, styling, features, and safety have been superior to the American versions for years. So who can blame the government when they want the superior product as well?

— Scott
1:20 am March 12th, 2008

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 » Show All