Critics blast tanker contract

Fallout from the Pentagon’s decision to award a $35 billion contract for new Air Force tankers to a company with a major foreign partner spread from Washington state to Washington, D.C., Monday and spilled over onto the presidential campaign trail.

Members of Congress from Washington state and Kansas – two states that stood to have thousands of workers assembling a tanker by Boeing Co. – adopted a “buy American” stance in discussing the new plane, which is a key element of the nation’s air strategy.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., called it a “European stimulus plan” and noted the United States has filed a case against the European Union for illegal subsidies to Airbus, which will be Northrop Grumman’s partner on the new plane.

“At a time when our economy is hurting, the decision to outsource our tankers is a blow to the American aerospace industry, American workers and America’s military,” Murray said in a prepared statement.

The consortium led by Northrop, which includes the European manufacturer of Airbus, won the contract for 179 new tankers on Friday, a deal worth an estimated $35 billion. After more than six years looking for a way to replace the Air Force’s aging fleet of KC-135 tankers, the Pentagon chose a modified version of the Airbus 330 jetliner over a modified version of the Boeing 767 jetliner.

Loren Thompson, an analyst with the Arlington, Va., based Lexington Institute, said Northrop beat Boeing in four of the five categories the Air Force was measuring, and tied in the fifth. The contract means more planes, with more capability, in use by 2013, and Northrop’s victory “was not a close outcome.”

Boeing made the KC-135s in the 1950s and 1960s. The Air Force’s other tanker, the KC-10, was built by a company that has since been purchased by Boeing. In 2004, the company was in line for a $23 billion contract to build and lease 100 new tankers to the Air Force, but that deal was canceled by Congress amid scandal over the contract awarding process and complaints – primarily from Arizona Sen. John McCain, now the likely GOP nominee for president – that the deal was too expensive.

McCain said he wanted to study this latest version of the tanker deal but told reporters Monday he didn’t think jobs were the key issue.

“I’ve always felt that the best thing to do is to create the best weapons system we can at minimum cost to taxpayers,” McCain said.

Both leading Democratic candidates for the White House questioned the decision.

U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., said she was concerned about a decision to “outsource” what is being described as the second largest military contract in history. U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said he had trouble believing “an American company that has been a traditional source of aeronautical excellence would not have done this job.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said awarding the contract to Northrop raises questions Congress should examine. Pentagon officials said Friday the number of jobs the two proposals would have created was not a factor in their decision. Pelosi said jobs in America and protecting the nation’s technological base should have been considered.

“What are the national security implications of using an aircraft supplied by a foreign firm for this essential mission?” she asked in a prepared statement. “Were the risks associated with choosing a conceptual design over a proven capability properly assessed?”

Senators from Alabama, the state that stands to gain the most jobs with the construction of a new factory by Northrop to assemble what is being designated as the KC-45A, praised the decision in floor speeches Monday. Opponents were expected to take the Senate floor this morning for what Murray’s office was labeling a “bipartisan show of disapproval.”

Members of Congress from Washington and Kansas called for a quicker explanation of the decision in a letter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The Pentagon had planned to tell Boeing where it fell down in a “debriefing session” on March 12; Republicans and Democrats from both states asked that it be done right away.

“If the Air Force was prepared to make the decision, then they should be able to begin the debriefing process immediately,” the letter, signed by four senators and five representatives, said.

Any potential challenge Boeing might mount must wait for the debriefing session.