[Peace-discuss] Belleville: Lockheed organizing city councils to pressure Durbin to back F-35

[Robert Naiman]

Well, it's true that the adversary will demagogue the jobs thing.

The theory of the the MoveOn petition is that it should be short. It's hard
to debunk the jobs thing in a sentence.

But perhaps I could link to this:

Cut the Pentagon Budget, Not Social Security and Veterans' Benefits
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/cut-the-pentagon-budget-n_b_1844125.html

or this:

Jobs Plan? End the Wars, Save 400,000 Jobs
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/jobs-plan-end-the-wars-sa_b_952430.html




On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Carl G. Estabrook
<galliher at illinois.edu>wrote:

> Demanding the F-35 be cut (or allowing "something else [to] be cut ...
> that will destroy more jobs than cutting the F-35") without demanding a
> serious jobs plan from this wretched administration simply invites a
> "they're taking our jobs" response, however cynically manipulated.
>
>
>
> On Sep 23, 2013, at 11:26 AM, Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>
> wrote:
>
> Every plausible alternative use of the money creates more jobs than
> military spending, including cutting taxes. The only alternative use of the
> money that would not create more jobs is paying down the debt, but since
> according to current plans, the amount of debt reduction is fixed, this is
> not an issue. If the F-35 is not cut, something else will be cut, and that
> will destroy more jobs than cutting the F-35.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Carl G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu
> > wrote:
>
>> But we should join it with a demand for the equivalent of a new WPA.
>>
>> Military spending does create jobs, if not very efficiently. (It was,
>> after all, what ended the Great Depression.)
>>
>> Given the shameful record on jobs of the present Wall Street-subservient
>> administration, we cannot demand the end of a job-crteating program until
>> there is something to take its place.
>>
>> --CGE
>>
>>
>> On Sep 23, 2013, at 10:29 AM, Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> We should counter this.
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.bnd.com/2013/09/21/2810493/lobbyist-spurs-belleville-city.html#storylink=cpy
>>
>> *Belleville shows support for controversial jet; councilwoman calls it
>> 'inappropriate'*
>> Published: September 21, 2013
>>
>> By MIKE FITZGERALD — News-Democrat
>>
>> BELLEVILLE — The letters have been streaming into the office of U.S.
>> Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Springfield, for months now.
>>
>> They've poured in from all corners of Illinois, from chambers of commerce
>> and city councils of Orland Hills, Elk Grove and Downers Grove. One even
>> came from the St. Clair County Housing Authority, according to Durbin's
>> office.
>>
>> The letters urge Durbin, the chairman of the Senate Defense
>> Appropriations Subcommittee, to keep alive the controversial F-35 Joint
>> Strike Fighter because the program supports 2,000 jobs in Illinois and
>> generates more than $500 million in economic benefits.
>>
>> On Monday, the Belleville City Council joined the public bodies urging
>> Durbin to save the F-35, which, with a planned cost of $1.5 trillion, is
>> the most expense weapons program in Pentagon history. It's also been one of
>> the most heavily criticized.
>>
>> But in urging the council to approve the letter (a copy of which also was
>> sent to U.S. Rep. Bill Enyart, D-Belleville), Mayor Mark Eckert did not
>> cite the F-35's history of operational failures and cost overruns, or the
>> fact that Durbin has expressed skepticism about the program's future.
>>
>> Instead, Eckert told the council that Scott Air Force Base serves all the
>> armed services and that the F-35, even though it won't be based there,
>> "will create some jobs to help the economic impact of our state and will
>> also indirectly or directly positively affect it."
>>
>> Eckert told the council the letter originated with Jeff Dixon, the son of
>> former U.S. Sen. Alan Dixon, D-Belleville.
>>
>> When asked if Jeff Dixon, a Chicago lobbyist, works for anyone connected
>> to the F-35, Eckert replied, "I'm not sure who his employer is," according
>> to a videotape of the meeting posted online.
>>
>> Dixon acknowledged to the News-Democrat that he is working indirectly for
>> defense giant Lockheed Martin, the F-35's primary contractor.
>>
>> "I think it's just an effort to demonstrate the support for the program
>> and why it's good for the country and any region of the country," Dixon
>> said of the campaign to promote the F-35.
>>
>> But Melinda Hult, a Ward 2 alderwoman, accused Eckert of lobbying on
>> behalf of Lockheed Martin by sending the letter in support of the F-35 to
>> Durbin.
>>
>> "I felt he was using the city as a lobbyist and that is inappropriate,"
>> said Hult, the only council member to vote against the letter supporting
>> the F-35. "I feel it's really inappropriate for a municipality to be acting
>> as a lobbyist, especially on issues we know nothing about."
>>
>> Laura Siebert, a Lockheed Martin spokeswoman, said the effort to promote
>> the F-35 is coming from both Lockheed and its supplier base.
>>
>> "Because it's just as important to our supplier base that they continue
>> to have these jobs at a time when budgets are being cut, and sequestration
>> is at the forefront," she said. "It's important that our country and the
>> people need to understand the need for this aircraft. The threats are
>> there. We need this aircraft. And the secondary message, by the way, is it
>> supports over 100,000 jobs in this country. So it's a great story."
>>
>> The F-35 was conceived as a "fifth generation" fighter that could serve
>> the wide-ranging needs the Air Force, Navy and Marines in the decades
>> ahead. In 2001, the Pentagon planned to buy 2,852 of the planes. The
>> current estimated cost per plane is about $120 million.
>>
>> The Marine Corps version of the F-35 is scheduled to begin operational
>> flying in two years. The Air Force and Navy versions are set to begin
>> flying in 2016 and 2019, respectively. The Pentagon estimates it will spend
>> $136 billion a year for the next three decades to operate the F-35 fleet.
>>
>> But after decades of setbacks, the fighter program reached a crossroads
>> at a time when the Pentagon faces $500 billion in planned budget cuts over
>> the next decade, plus another $500 billion in cuts because of the federal
>> budget sequester.
>>
>> In 2012, former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta officially took the Marine
>> Corps version of the fighter plane off probation. Recent reports, however,
>> show the program is at least $150 billion over budget.
>>
>> Durbin raised questions in June about the F-35's viability.
>>
>> "In the financial industry, we have this phrase, 'too big to fail,' and
>> I'm wondering if this project is so large in scope that it was too big to
>> cancel," Durbin said. "Have we reached a point when it comes to
>> acquisitions in the future that we have to take this into consideration?"
>>
>> The answer is yes, according to Stephen Miles, a spokesman for Win
>> Without War, a not-for-profit coalition of groups seeking a "smart"
>> military spending policy.
>>
>> Miles said it's no coincidence letters to the U.S. Congress calling for
>> support of the F-35 program are going out now, when efforts are underway to
>> slash the nation's military spending.
>>
>> "I think the uptick of activity that you see coming from (Lockheed
>> Martin) is indicative of concern over the future of the program," said
>> Miles, who started an online petition calling for the F-35's cancellation.
>> "Everyone recognizes that the program as planned is unsustainable. There
>> simply isn't $1.5 trillion to spend on a weapons system that doesn't work."
>>
>> A spate of recent news stories have highlighted the F-35's woes with
>> software, engine turbine blades and the fact, recently reported in Vanity
>> Fair magazine, that the "Pentagon's supposedly 'all weather' F-35 Lightning
>> II, ironically cannot fly within 25 miles of lighting."
>>
>> Money for the F-35 is money that could come from other defense programs
>> that could directly benefit Scott Air Force Base, Miles said.
>>
>> "The reality is if you protect the F-35, you do so at the expense of
>> other programs," he said.
>>
>> Contact reporter Mike Fitzgerald at mfitzgerald at bnd.com or 618-239-2533.
>> --
>> Robert Naiman
>> Policy Director
>> Just Foreign Policy
>> www.justforeignpolicy.org
>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
>>  _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Robert Naiman
> Policy Director
> Just Foreign Policy
> www.justforeignpolicy.org
> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
>
>
>


-- 
Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20130923/9960ea9b/attachment-0001.html>