Theodore's World: Obama's Budget Eliminates Boeing C-17 Program

« Obama Skipping Over Press Corps? | Main | Obama Forces Military Hospitals to Stock Morning After Pill »

February 09, 2010

Obama's Budget Eliminates Boeing C-17 Program

Obama's Budget Eliminates Boeing C-17 Program

FOX News

There's concern about Boeing's C-17 aircraft. President Obama's budget proposal calls for cutting several weapons programs, including the C-17. Eliminating the C-17 program could mean eliminating jobs in the Gateway City.

When unveiling his budget, President Obama said, "We save money by eliminating unnecessary defense programs that do nothing to keep us safe. One example is the 2.5 billion dollars that were spending to build C-17 transport aircraft."

C-17s have been used extensively in flying supplies and troops to earthquake ravaged Haiti. Senator Kit Bond says they're desperately needed.

Four years ago, the Defense Department decided to stop production of the C-17 because it had acquired the 180 it requested.

"Yet every year since, congress has provided unrequested money for more C-17s the Pentagon doesn't want or need. It's waste pure and simple," says the President.

The C-17 is one of Boeing's premiere aircraft. It supports a thousand jobs in St. Louis, jobs that could be cut, if the program is cancelled.

Senator Kit Bond said," The president's mixed up spending priorities also threatens workers right here in St. Louis and our nation's air lift capacity."

You may recall, the government tried to eliminate the C-17 program in 2009, but lawmakers saved it. Bond says he'll fight for it again this year especially since the Pentagon now has the ability to retire C-5As.

Sen. Bond says," They need the C-17s to replace those aircraft. I'm going to make that point very loudly in the appropriations process. We'll see whether we're successful."

U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill says she will also fight to save the C-17 program. She released the following statement:

We have known for years now that the c-17 has been flying into a strong headwind. Over the last three years, secretaries of defense and presidents from both political parties have uniformly sought to end its production. Since coming to the senate, i have fought side by side with my colleagues against these recommendations and we have successfully prevented an end of production. At a time when the c-17s first-rate capabilities are in increasing demand around the world, i will once again fight for this plane. I will be looking particularly closely at the substantial readiness problems with the c-5, the only other strategic airlifter. It seems long overdue that we should retire the oldest c-5 planes that arent working and replace them with the c-17, a plane that we know works and is produced at a fair cost.

Boeing released the following statement reacting to the proposed defense budget cuts:

"What we have been able to see so far of the proposed DOD budget and the QDR raise key public policy issues that will be discussed in the days, weeks, and months ahead.Critically important among these issues are the future of America's defense industrial base and maintaining healthy competition in the defense industry. As a matter of public policy and defense doctrine, America has invested in developing and maintaining a national defense industrial base that meets the evolving needs of the military while providing the best value for the taxpayer. It is a true national asset - built over many years by investing in highly-skilled engineering and a high-tech manufacturing workforce and by developing best-of-industry practices. The Congress now begins its work towards passing the overall budget and the DOD segment. We will continue to study the budget proposals being made for potential impact to Boeing, the industry, its industrial base, and to its workers, as well as important policy debates in other critical areas such as healthcare, energy, the environment and education. Meanwhile, the men and women of The Boeing Company will continue to perform at the highest possible level to deliver the best value to our customers and to the taxpayer."

Wild Thing's comment.......

Obama is sooooo stupid and his hate for our military shows in alll of his decisions like this one. Everything he does fails, everything he messes with in our country gets ruined. He is so vile, so horrible!!!!

....Thank you Darth for sending this to me.

U.S. Airforce
C-5 loadmaster

Posted by Wild Thing at February 9, 2010 05:48 AM


So what are our pilots suppose to fly? Paper airplanes? The C17 is super important to this nation's safety. This bozo in chief doesn't obviously care about safety of the American people. He has no clue what is going on with the military. I have another nephew leaving for basic training in June to South Carolina with the National Guard. He's a medic. My niece's boyfriend leaves the same time for the same place. How much you want to bet Joe and Justin end up in the same squad? If anything, our President needs to work on our safety first and foremost.

Posted by: Lynn at February 9, 2010 08:18 AM

If DoD doesn't want any more C-17s, then maybe obama is right on this. Damn, that was difficult to say. More C-17s are being produced because Congressmen want jobs and defense $$ in their districts. They have always forced ships on the Navy and aircraft on the Air force and other items the services did not want. The Osprey is one of those products. This is one of the things John Murtha was so well known for. Getting Defense money to his district for items the military did not want. Each of these projects takes money away from something the military needed more. It is very difficult to agree with obama. However, I bet that would not be defense $$ saved. In his mind that would be $$ for ACORN or some other obama Marxist plan.

Posted by: TomR at February 9, 2010 10:35 AM

Actually the Pentagon and Air Force are wanting to eliminate the C-17 program. They say they have enough to do the job. The C-17 has become the workhorse of the Air Force but the problem with the Air Force brass is they don't want to be the workhorse of the military.

Air Force senior officers like fighter aircraft, not slow transports. Fighters are sleek, fast, and their pilots get the glory. After all, they're the fighters, the warriors, the hero's. Prior to Desert Storm, the Air Force was going to retire the A-10. It was slow, ugly, and didn't fit the fighter pilot image. In Desert Storm, the A-10 proved its worth to ground troops and it's here today over the objection of many senior officers at the time...maybe the reason mostly guard and reserve units fly the A-10.

Compared to fighter aircraft, transports are slow lumbering behemoths; no AF pilot wants to be know as a "bus driver" or "trash hauler". Look at the movie Top Gun and how "Maverick" was threatened with hauling dog sh_t on transports if he didn't straighten up. Also, since the movie Top Gun came out, Air Force fighter pilots have even gone to giving themselves "cool" nicknames like Navy pilots; even the bomber pilots have started it.

This is one time where I'll say don't blame Obama. He's only doing what the top brass wants done and the brass doesn't want to be a transport service.

Posted by: BobF at February 9, 2010 10:38 AM

One very expensive program that America can no longer afford is Obama. He needs to be eliminated immediately.

Posted by: cuchieddie(Enemy of the State) at February 9, 2010 01:52 PM

BobF: what you describe reminds me of what Tom Wolfe wrote about in "The Right Stuff": a mentality that fighter pilots were all that mattered, the elite, those who flew other aircraft a lesser breed, "left behind".

But when ego leads to eliminating or understaffing important support roles, is that such a good idea?

Posted by: Curmudgeon at February 9, 2010 03:18 PM

The Air Force wanted to scrap the A-10 until the Gulf war. The Brass is Brass SNAPFU, as far as obama is concerned he's in the way like a fly around a horse.

Posted by: Mark at February 9, 2010 07:37 PM

You can never have too much strategic airlift, but you can always have too little... especially twenty years down the road after loss of airframes, the potential rise of a strategic competitor (e.g., China), more wars, etc. It doesn't matter if the planes can slice, dice and make julianne fries and if you fly them 24/7/365, at some point you can only do more with more planes... and we won't have them. Talk about pennywise but pound foolish.

Posted by: Anonymous at February 9, 2010 07:58 PM

Thank you everyone soooo much.

Posted by: Wild Thing at February 9, 2010 11:24 PM