The second engine for the F-35 "Joint Strike Fighter" and the C-17 "Globemaster III" transport aircraft are dominating the press coverage of this year's defense budget. Even though some in the Pentagon and even in the Government Accountability Office favor competition between jet engine manufacturers, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has deemed the alternate GE engine for the F-35 to be every bit as porky as buying still more unrequested, overpriced, under-performing C-17s.
For his efforts, Gates is being ignored not just by Congress but by the White House.
Can the departure of a disgusted Gates be far behind?
When the House of Representatives considered an amendment last week to strip the bill of its funding for the second, "unnecessary" F-35 engine, it was defeated by the not-close margin of 193-231. There were three reasons for this humiliation of Gates. First, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi did not instruct her go-fers on the floor of the House to "whip" the amendment, thereby bringing the Democratic caucus into line in favor of it. Second, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) waited until the last minute to release its "Statement of Administration Policy" (SAP) articulating its veto threat against the bill if it funds the second engine. Third, the text of the veto threat was wimpy; it failed to freeze Capitol Hill's porkers in the headlights.
It looks like Obama is leaving Gates out in the wind to twist a bit.
The standard of a meaningful veto threat was issued last year against the F-22. In its July 15, 2009 SAP, OMB said "...if the final bill presented to him contains this provision [funding more F-22s], the President will veto it." (Find it at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/sap_111/saps1390s_20090715.pdf.) Compare that to this year's threat against the second engine in the May 27, 2010 SAP: "If the final bill presented to the President includes funding or a legislative direction to continue an extra engine program, the President's senior advisers would recommend a veto." (Find it at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/sap_111/saphr5136h_20100527.pdf.)
In other words, Obama is not yet convinced he should veto a defense bill with the second engine in it. The Administration can only say the President's advisers will recommend a veto, not that he will do it.
Obama is dithering.*
After working on Capitol Hill for over 30 years, I know the difference between real and soft veto threats; the current one against the second engine is too squishy to compel anyone on Capitol Hill. When the words come out of Obama's mouth or OMB stands over the legislation Dirty Harry-like with a Magnum .44 snarling for Congress to make its day, then the veto threat will be taken seriously. Until then, the porkers on Capitol Hill will continue to feel a free rein.
Gates is also about to be had on the C-17 when the defense bill is considered by the Senate. There, the Boeing-porkers have the votes in favor of additional C-17s, which the House bill did not include. (Last year, the Senate defeated an anti-C-17 McCain amendment by the also not-close tally of 34 to 64.)
The Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Carl Levin (D-MI) has made it clear he wants to avoid a confrontation on the second F-35 engine in the Senate so that he can cave to the House position when the bill goes to a House-Senate conference committee. Similarly, the C-17 porkers in the House were silent so the Senate could add it. When the bill comes out of conference, both porker camps will be sated. As to such a bill actually getting vetoed, Obama has showed them nothing.
Obama seems to be buying the election year sophistry that to show how strong they are on defense (and to counter Republican attacks), the Democrats must go along with any defense spending in sight. That means not being associated with the defeat - or veto - of any defense bill coming out of Congress - no matter how porky or otherwise foul smelling.
With no hard core support from the White House, Gates is being dragged through the slops by Congress. With President Obama dithering on what Gates has made central to his message to clean up at least some of the Pentagon's hyper-waste, don't be surprised by a Gates press conference right after the elections - leaving the entire muddle to a diffident president and whomever he can convince to inherent the festering defense mess.
*Correction: I stated President Obama was dithering in not fully backing SecDef Gates' threat to recommend a veto if defense legislation includes funding for the second F-35 engine (and by implication the C-17). I was incorrect to say so; Friday, May 28, the White House released the statement below, proving me wrong. I regret to say I was unaware of this statement until just now and apologize for my misleading thoughts.
Loading comments… 
