National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2010

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I rise this morning to support the Levin-McCain amendment. It seems to me that buying more F-22s at this point would meet the very definition of government waste.

What you have is a situation where the Pentagon, which, suffice it to say, has not exactly been shy over the years in terms of calling for additional weapons, is on record as saying this is unnecessary. Further, I have been out talking with members of the Guard at home and trying to get their sense of what is needed in this dangerous time, and they have never once mentioned something like this.

They talk, for example, about body armor. They talk about boots. They don't talk about more F-22s. Suffice it to say, when the Congress is now having a debate about trying to find additional money for health care, for example, to go out and spend close to $2 billion to buy seven more F-22 fighters the Air Force says it doesn't want defies common sense.

My home State, for example, would love to hire back police and other essential workers who have been laid off. Instead of building seven planes, we could be restoring infrastructure and developing renewable energy. Again, in my home State, we have had budget shortfalls. We have seen reductions in essential services, law enforcement being one. The debate is not about necessary steps to ensuring a strong national defense. The question is about whether the U.S. Congress wants to spend close to $2 billion to pay for more fighter jets the Air Force does not want.

It is also important to remember that the F-22 is not being purchased for wars the United States is currently fighting. Certainly, the Taliban and Iraqi insurgents do not have an Air Force. The F-22 is being purchased to fight in possible future conflicts with other countries that may have an air force. While I strongly believe the Pentagon ought to be able to prepare for such possibilities, it is the Pentagon that is telling us we don't need these additional F-22s.

It is also important to note that the Pentagon has purchased 187 F-22s. There is not a debate about whether the United States ought to have fighters in our arsenal. The question is whether the Air Force needs 194 of them instead of 187. We have a very good Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates. The Secretary has said that 187 is sufficient to combat current and future threats. He is the one who said that more are not needed. He is the one who said:

We must break the old habit of adding layer upon layer of cost, complexity, and delay to systems that are so expensive and so elaborate that only a small number can be built, and that are then usable only in a narrow range of low probability scenarios.

Secretary Gates has hit the nail about as perfectly on the head as one can. He and our country want the strongest defense possible. But there are ways to make better use of that $1.75 billion than on seven more F-22s.

I serve on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. I know there are threats to our forces every single day. I see the Senator from Georgia who serves on the Intelligence Committee. He believes strongly about this as well. We need to make sure we are protecting our troops in harm's way, but we have a variety of choices in order to secure the protection our troops have been in need of. I intend to work with Chairman Levin, Secretary Gates, the distinguished Senator from Arizona, and the President to ensure we replace the current F-15 with more capable and safer fighters.

Last month, I visited with some of the 3,000 members of the Oregon National Guard's 41st brigade combat team, as they trained for their current deployment to Iraq. Not a one of the soldiers told me that their big concern was whether the Air Force would have 194 F-22s instead of 187. They talked to me instead about the best vehicles, the best medical care if they are injured, about the best body armor. Not one of them mentioned the F-22.

I am not voting against the F-22. I am voting for the soldier, the taxpayer. They both deserve our government's greatest protection at this critical time in our history.

I urge colleagues to support the Levin-McCain amendment.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source