June 22, 2006
Dear Senator,
Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) has introduced an amendment (SA 4261) to the Defense Authorization Bill (S. 2766) that would allow for Multiyear Procurement (MYP) of the F-22A Fighter. We have several reasons to believe that the utilization of MYP for the F-22 will increase costs to the taxpayers in future. The Project On Government Oversight (
POGO
) is an independent nonprofit that investigates and exposes corruption and other misconduct in order to achieve a more accountable federal government. As such, we are always concerned about ill-advised expenditures.
In an email obtained by
POGO
, Lockheed Martin claims that funding the F-22A under a MYP would save the American taxpayer “a minimum of a quarter of a billion dollars” over the next three years. During a Congressional hearing before the Air Land Subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Air Force acquisition officer Lt. General Hoffman stated that a multiyear procurement proposal of the F-22A would save approximately 5 percent of the total cost of a series of annual contracts. However, when asked to address these claims, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) stated that “it is accurate to say that MYP will not save money.” [Emphasis added]
The Lockheed Martin email also refers to a claim made by the Institute for Defense Analysis that the F-22A has met all of the statutory criteria for a multiyear contract (10 U.S.C. 2306b). The Government Accountability Office (GAO) disagrees. The GAO recently responded to an inquiry from Chairman Bill Young (R-FL) regarding MYP for the F-22. In a
June 20, 2006
letter GAO Comptroller General David M. Walker stated:
Because of large disparity between what the Air Force wants for the F-22A program and what the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) has committed to fund, there is a significant break in the business case to justify buying more F-22As. For this reason, Congress may want to consider withholding additional funding for procurement and modernization until the [Defense] Department completes a comprehensive business case that addresses the concerns we have risen herein.
POGO
agrees fully with GAO’s recommendations. We also find the fact that the investigative arm of Congress has come to this conclusion is a strong reason for you to reconsider this appropriation. We have posted the GAO letter on our website www.pogo.org for your convenience, along with other supporting documents.
Project on Government Oversight request that you vote “Nay” to this amendment and take the appropriate measures to ensure that this inaccurately-justified provision does not move forward. Thank you for your leadership in this matter. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me or Todd Bowers at (202) 347-1122.
Sincerely,
Danielle Brian
Executive Director
|
|
