Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008--Motion to Proceed

Floor Speech

RENEWABLE ENERGY AND JOB CREATION ACT OF 2008--MOTION TO PROCEED -- (Senate - June 18, 2008)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

LARGE DEFENSE CONTRACT AWARDED TO AIRBUS

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, 3 months ago, our U.S. Air Force made a decision that is going to affect our military for decades. Our Air Force awarded one of the largest defense contracts in history to the European company Airbus.

As my colleagues know, I have been here many times to talk about my numerous concerns about this contract and about whether it is in the best interest of our taxpayers and our service men and women for Airbus to supply our next generation of aerial refueling tankers. Those tankers refuel planes and aircraft that are stationed across the world. As long as we, the United States, control the technology to build those refueling tankers, we control our skies and our own security. But the Pentagon has yet to justify this decision to give that contract to the European company Airbus.

Within the next 24 hours, we expect the Government Accountability Office to issue a ruling on one overarching question that has been raised about this contract and that is whether the Air Force followed the letter of the law when it made that decision. This GAO decision will not answer whether Airbus will supply the best plane for our military, and it will not answer whether buying the Airbus tanker would do permanent harm to our aerospace industry.

So I rise today to urge my colleagues to join with me and continue to fight to get those answers. It is common sense that before we, the Congress, finalize a $35 billion contract, we need to know why the Air Force chose a plane that is much bigger and less efficient than it asked for--one that cannot use hundreds of our runways, ramps, and hangars and one that costs billions of dollars more in fuel and maintenance.

We, as Members of Congress, and the people we represent need to know whether our Government should buy a plane that even the Air Force says is ``less survivable.'' That means it is less able to keep our men and women who are in them safe. We need to know what the effect on our economy will be and the effect on our national security if we turn this critical technology over to a company that is owned by a foreign government.

I was out on the Boeing 767 line the day the Air Force announced its decision. I will never forget the shock and dismay I saw on our workers' faces. After all, they have been making our Nation's refueling tankers now for more than 50 years, and they know how important those tankers are to the military. In fact, I remember so well this one woman rushing over to me on the factory floor to tell me her son actually flies those refueling tankers for the Air Force and that she--an American mom--wanted to be the one making them for him.

She and workers across this country want to know why. Why would we give this contract, this Air Force contract, to a subsidized European company controlled by foreign governments that just want to put America's aerospace industry out of business and take away her job?

The U.S. Trade Representative is so concerned about the subsidies Airbus receives that it has brought a case against the EU before the World Trade Organization because of those illegal subsidies. We need to know why in the world we would accuse Airbus of unfair trade practices on one hand and then turn around and hand them a major piece of our defense industry. We, as Members of Congress and representatives of the American people, need to know why our Government would hand them this contract now.

In May, employers cut 49,000 jobs. It was the largest 1-month jump in unemployment in this country in 22 years. Yet at the same time our administration is sending 44,000 U.S. jobs overseas to build our Air Force refueling tankers, when we are hemorrhaging jobs at home in this country. It does not make sense to me.

Some of our colleagues are saying we need to move this process along quickly so we can get those planes into the hands of our airmen and airwomen. I agree. They need these planes. But this is a contract that will affect our military, it will affect our taxpayers, and it will affect our decisions in this country for years to come. So we had better be thoughtful, conscientious, and thorough. Members of Congress have a responsibility to thoroughly evaluate whether we are buying the best plane for our taxpayers and our men and women who fly those planes. So I hope my colleagues, as we hear from the GAO in the next 24 hours, will stand with me and ensure we get this contract right.

I see my colleague from Maryland is here to speak, and I yield the floor.

Source