Why buy one when you can have two!

Discussion in 'Congress' started by Navy1960, Nov 1, 2010.

  1. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    The U.S. House of Representatives on May 28 voted to retain funding for the F136 engine General Electric and Rolls-Royce are developing for the F-35 as an alternative to the Pratt & Whitney F135. The FY11 Defense Authorization Bill contains $485 million for continuation of the engine, which is around 70 percent through its development program. The vote followed a mark-up to the bill by the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) that was agreed to on May 14.


    Alternative F136 Engine for F-35 JSF Lives To Fight On: AINonline

    This program has been cut in 2009 and then lives on again, and is a small example of our Govt. spending habits. Why, buy one that is alaready working when you can buy one more. This is not just limited to one party it's a habit that both parties havve gotten into. Want a good example here, this Alternate engine with is not needed is being built by G.E. in Ohio and one of the people that voted to approve it was none other than the minority leader himself. Until such time as congress, makes the hard choices needed to spend money wisely then these things will continue and our nation will slide furtther into a hole. Just as a side note, and I will most likely post on it as well, is the C-17 program, for years the USAF has told congress they have enough , and yet, each year congress purchases more of them. Perhaps its time congress begiins to listen to the warfighters and actually spends money the way it is needed and not the way they want it to.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    Representatives are supposed to represent their constituents best interests. And people like to have jobs....

    Just observations, not taking a side on the issue of the engine program.
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2010
  3. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    As the 2011 U.S. defense budget creeps languidly through Congress, two senators have launched an effort to keep their colleagues from adding money to buy more C-17 cargo planes.

    Sens. Tom Carper, D-Del., and John McCain, R-Ariz., held a hearing July 13 so three senior Pentagon officials and two other military experts could testify - repeatedly - that the U.S. Air Force does not need any more C-17s.

    Rather, the Air Force has an airlift surplus of at least 10 percent that could easily be expanded to 20 percent or more, the five witnesses agreed.

    The Air Force hasn't asked for more money to buy C-17s since 2007. That year the Air Force wanted 12, and Congress bought it 22. In 2008, the Air Force wanted none, but Congress bought 15. In 2009, the request was also zero, and Congress bought eight. In 2010, the Air Force once again asked for no C-17s, and lawmakers bought 10.
    Strategy Emerges To Prevent More U.S. C-17 Funding - Defense News

    Again these are just some examples of how our Govt. spends money , often times in ways that are not very smart. It's always been my humble opinion if Govt. would just apply a little common sense in the way it spends money then that might go a long way in making other programs a little more solvent and perhaps lessen the possibility of our nation having to beg for additional money from others nations to bail us out (i.e. China)
     
  4. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    Congress is where things like this fails because of the old you vote for my bill and I will vote for yours and lobbyist monies.
    Every state representative is supposed to represent his constituents interests but the overall function of a national congress is to filter those issues out to wind up what is best for the country.
     
  5. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    You have to take everything most of them say with sort of a slanted eye these days, when it comes to wanting to reduce the debt, or cut spending. While some will say, "lets cut this, or lets cut that" they really mean, I dont mind cutting others just not mine. Personally, I think that if the money that congress gets was just spent with more attention to detail and they were held responsible for it then a natural benefit of that would be a reduction in the bloated spending on things like 2 engines instead of one, more aircraft when more are not wanted or needed, etc.
     
  6. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    Yep same thing with vote the incumbents out.
    Just vote your incumbent out.
     

Share This Page