Outsourcing the U. S. Aerospace Industry

Floor Speech

OUTSOURCING THE U.S. AEROSPACE INDUSTRY -- (Senate - March 07, 2008)

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, over the course of this past week, I have come to the Senate floor every single day to sound an alarm about the misguided and potentially dangerous decision to outsource a major piece of our aerospace industry to Europe.

I have talked about the dismay Boeing workers felt in my home State of Washington when they learned the Pentagon had decided to award a contract to build the next generation of aerial refueling tankers not to Boeing but to a French company, Airbus.

I have talked about my shock that we would award Airbus this contract, given the EU's lengthy history of subsidizing these planes in order to create European, not American, jobs.

I have talked about the fact that Airbus is being less than open about how many U.S. jobs it will really create in this country.

All of these are reasons to be deeply troubled about this decision. But today I want to address yet another concern; that is, the ability to control our national security once we have effectively turned over control of our military capability and technology to a foreign government. This is an issue we all need to take a good hard look at.

America's global military strength is built on our ability to use military might anywhere in the world, at a moment's notice. Our aerial refueling tankers are the critical link that allows the U.S. Air Force to stretch across the globe. From Fairchild Air Force Base in my home State of Washington to the Far East, from Andrews to Baghdad, our bombers and our fighters can fly farther and faster because our tankers, which supply fuel in midair, are always there to support them.

Tankers, in fact, are so important to our military that Army GEN Hugh Shelton, who is the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, once said the motto of the tanker and airlift forces should be: ``Try fighting without us.''

Until now, the technology that powered these critical planes rested in the hands of Boeing and its American workforce, who have been building them for more than 50 years now.

Until now, our tankers have been built by manufacturers, by designers, and by engineers who have been able to pass on those skills and technology that 50 years of experience brings, and who are bound by law from selling that technology to countries that sponsor terrorism.

Well, last Friday, that ended. Last Friday, the Air Force made a decision that will enable a company that is controlled by a foreign government to develop and share that technology. Are we going to look back on this decision and say this is the moment when we threw open the doors to our military technology? Are we going to allow our tankers, a linchpin of our national defense, to be the first domino to fall?

I have said this before. With one contract, we could wipe out what it has taken our Nation 50 years to build up: an experienced and exceptional aerospace industry. Once it is gone, we are not going to get it back. We will not get it back. Once we lose the ability to produce military technology right here at home, we begin to lose control over our Nation's defense.

This decision effectively gives foreign governments control over aspects of our own national security. In this case, we are giving up control and $40 billion to the European Aeronautical Defense and Space Company called EADS. That is the company that has made no secret of their desire to dismantle our American aerospace industry. In fact, this decision can be seen as a $40 billion investment in the military research budget of EADS and Airbus.

So we are allowing Airbus to take over a cornerstone of our military technology, and we are actually paying them to do it. While that certainly doesn't make sense, the fact that this deal could allow Airbus to share American technology with whomever they please is just plain dangerous.

The Air Force's decision means that American tanker technology, which has been developed over the last 50 years, is now out on the free market, available to the highest bidder. Under American law, the law that Boeing has to abide by, they are prohibited from selling technology to countries that sponsor terrorism. In other words, we have control. We have control over where that technology goes right now. But EADS and Airbus don't have to follow those same restrictions. They have said so in the past, and they have demonstrated that they don't care about giving technology to terrorists. They only care about their bottom line.

In fact, back in 2005, EADS was caught trying to sell military helicopters to Iran. But if the company is so pro-American, as they are saying right now, why was it ignoring U.S. policy to isolate Iran? Well, the answer to that question was simple to EADS Representative Michel Tripier. When he was asked about this back in 2005, his response was:

As a European company, we are not supposed to take into account embargoes from the U.S.

Let me repeat that. Here is what he said:

As a European company, we are not supposed to take into account embargoes from the U.S.

In 2006, EADS, the parent company of Airbus, proved they meant it when they tried to sell transport and patrol planes to Venezuela. That is a circumvention of U.S. law.

What if in the years to come Airbus wants to sell their tanker technology to Pakistan, to China, or to Iran? I wish to remind my colleagues that Russia now owns 5 percent of EADS, and it is pushing for 10 percent more. The United Arab Emirates now controls 7.5 percent of EADS.

What the Air Force has done is extremely shortsighted. They have said it wasn't their responsibility to take our security or our industry into account. Well, I say to my colleagues: Then Congress has to. Congress has to. We need to be more forward-looking than the Air Force was last Friday.

What happens in 20 years if EADS is controlled by countries that disagree with our policy on, say, Israel or elsewhere in the Middle East or around the globe? What if they decide to slow down production of tankers, to put us at a strategic disadvantage? Right now, we have no way to prevent that.

Where do we go from here? What other aspect of our military technology are we Americans willing to part with? Our aerial tankers are the backbone of our military strength. But what about our other critical military supplies? Are we going to outsource our tanks? Are we going to outsource our military satellites? What about the missiles that are currently made in Alabama? Are we going to outsource those? What about the equipment that has to be delivered constantly to our troops in the field? Are we going to outsource our meals ready to eat, our ammunition? I would not support that, and I know many of my colleagues wouldn't either.

So I am here to ask all of us: Where do we draw the line? The Air Force said it wasn't their job to consider the future of our national security and defense, but we as Senators have taken an oath to do that.

I urge all my colleagues to take pause and truly think about the consequences of this shortsighted contract. The American people and our national security are depending on it.

I yield the floor.

Source