F136 Should Be Scrapped, Group Says
Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) released an Issue
Brief on the alternate engine for the new Joint Strike Fighter
(JSF) Tuesday. The group says the program should be scrapped as a
waste of government spending.
“The alternate engine should be grounded,” said CAGW
President Tom Schatz. “Two presidents, two secretaries of
defense, a phalanx of top military officials, and a majority of the
Senate have all agreed that this program should not be funded.
Since CAGW launched its ad campaign in July, more than 13,000
taxpayers have expressed their opposition to the alternate engine.
CAGW’s Citizen’s Demand says that ‘America
can’t afford this kind of high-flying waste,’ and calls
for a halt to funding for the alternate engine.”
Over the past eight years, the JSF program has evolved into the
largest DOD acquisition program, expected to ultimately cost $300
billion. Congressional meddling in the program began in fiscal year
(FY) 2007, when the DOD proposed termination of the alternate
engine and declined to include funds in its budget request.
F136 Engine Testing
Since 2004, Congress has earmarked $771 million for the
alternate engine. In the FY 2009 Defense Appropriations Act, the
alternate engine program received three earmarks for a total of
$465 million. They were among the 142 anonymous earmarks worth $6.4
billion slipped into the legislation. This year, Congress has once
again ignored the evidence, as well as a threatened veto, by adding
$603 million for the program in the House version of the fiscal
year 2010 Defense Authorization Act, and $560 million in the
Defense Appropriations Act.
CAGW’s Issue Brief cites President Obama’s and
Defense Secretary Gates’ specific objections to the alternate
engine. On May 7, 2009, President Obama said, “The Defense
Department is already pleased with the engine that it has. They do
not want – and do not plan to use – the alternate
version. That’s why the Pentagon stopped requesting this
funding two years ago.” Defense Secretary Gates stated on
August 31, 2009, that the Department of Defense feels
“strongly there is not a need for the second engine,”
while adding, “Every dollar additional to the budget that we
have to put into the F-35 is a dollar taken from something else
that the troops may need.”
The alternate engine program has been the subject of several
comprehensive reports that indicate that it is duplicative and
unnecessary. In 2007, according to CBS News, the U.S. Air Force and
two independent panels concluded that the second engine is
“not necessary and not affordable” and that the alleged
savings from creating a mock competition “will never be
achieved.”