Takes Flight

31 Mar 2008
Watchdog groups reiterate support for fair and open contracting process
This afternoon, Citizens Against Government Waste and the nation's other top taxpayer and budget watchdog groups, who represent millions of taxpayers, joined together to reiterate their support for making sure that the Defense Department contracting process remains fair and open, and to express their backing of the Air Force decision that resulted in Northrop Grumman's win of the contract to build the next generation of aerial refueling tankers.

The groups said their examination of the matter led them to the conclusion that the Air Force bidding process was fair and transparent.

Groups backing Northrop Grumman's win include The American Conservative Union, Americans for Prosperity, Citizens Against Government Waste, and the National Taxpayers Union. The organizations also said that the Government Accountability Office should be allowed to review Boeing's challenge to the contract without interference from Congress, and called on Congress to respect the GAO's decision if it upholds Northrop Grumman's win.

To read the group's entire press release, go to: http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=11346

News You Need To See on Northrop Grumman's KC 45

A pair of retired Air Force Generals criticized Boeing this morning over its decision to challenge Northrop Grumman's win of the Air Force contract to build America's next generation of aerial refueling tankers, saying Boeing is wrong on the facts, and is both maligning the Air Force and engaging in protectionism and xenophobia in pushing its misinformation.

Writing in The National Review, General Charles Horner (Ret.) says that Boeing's claim that the Air Force changed contracting procedures to favor Northrop Grumman are "patently absurd and false."

Horner, who was the Combined Forces Air Component Commander during Desert Shield and Desert Storm, notes that Air Force Assistant Secretary for Acquisition Sue Payton "stated unequivocally that there was constant, open communication between her group and the two competitors. Each side had an opportunity, through multiple steps, to protest or question anything that they felt was going awry in the process. Boeing accepted the playing field as it was and remained silent. In fact, company officials repeatedly praised the openness of the process. It was only after they lost that they found it to be unfair."

Horner says that Boeing's protest is further delaying a "long overdue" upgrade to the tanker fleet, which has been the number-one acquisition priority for the Air Force.

The retired general also slams Boeing for criticizing Republican presidential nominee John McCain, whose investigative efforts previously revealed corruption in Boeing's attempts to lease tankers to the Air Force; two Boeing contracting officials ended up in federal prison as a result of the scheme, and Boeing's CEO had to resign – and the scandal is directly connected to the Air Force's decision to re-bid the contract.

"To suggest that Senator McCain took a stand that is un-American is to suggest that corruption is the American way," Horner says.

Horner also notes that Boeing – through its apologists – complain that Northrop Grumman has partnered with a European company to build the tankers, and notes that Boeing itself works with China, Japan and Italy, and uses foreign components in its aircraft.

"The fact of the matter is that Boeing lost, and lost fair and square in an open process, and all of its post-defeat complaining is little more than noise," Horner says. "Is it right for the country, which needs and deserves an Air Force with the best equipment available? Not in the least."

To read Horner's entire column, go to:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=
NzQ0ZmNkMGE3MTM5OWVjMjY5OTA5NGYyM2ZmOGVlYjk#more

What Others Are Saying:

Writing in the online edition of Human Events, Lt. General Tom McInerney (Ret.) also took issue with Boeing's complaints about Northrop Grumman's win, posing a question central to this dispute: "I would suggest readers consider who to believe – the men and women of the US Air Force, who analyzed both aircraft in excruciating detail and will fly the new tanker in harm's way for the next 50 years, or the Boeing Corporation, whose job is sell KC-767s."

McInerney also noted that Northrop Grumman has won the past five competitions for building aerial tankers, winning contracts with the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

McInerney also asks why Boeing didn't protest the contract terms and conditions until it lost, and joins the chorus of those who have made clear that both companies were fully briefed on what the Air Force was looking for in a new tanker.

In outlining the reasons Northrop Grumman won, McInerney notes that Northrop Grumman has already built, flown and tested a plane "on its own nickel," while Boeing has no aircraft.

"Finally, Northrop came in cheaper than the Boeing design. Basically, Northrop offered a more capable, lower cost system at lower risk than Boeing. That's why they won," McInerney wrote. "That's just not my view -- that's the view of men and women from five different air forces who decide what type of aircraft they want to take into combat. I'll defer to the warfighter's judgment."

To read McInerney's entire column, go to:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=
NzQ0ZmNkMGE3MTM5OWVjMjY5OTA5NGYyM2ZmOGVlYjk=

< Back to index