[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 83 (Friday, May 28, 2010)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1006]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. MIKE McINTYRE

                           of north carolina

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 27, 2010

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 5136) to 
     authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2011 for military 
     activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe 
     military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for 
     other purposes:

  Mr. McINTYRE. Mr. Chair, as a member of the House Armed Services 
Committee and a strong supporter of the Joint Strike Fighter 
alternative engine program, I rise today in opposition to the Pingree/
Larson Amendment.
  This amendment, which would redirect funding for the program, is 
about terminating jobs, killing competition and giving a $100 billion 
monopoly to one contractor who is already $2.5 billion (50 percent) 
over budget.
  This amendment would add $20 billion to the deficit by eliminating 
the savings GAO says will occur with competition.
  Supporting this amendment means making the choice to give one company 
a sole source contract for the next 30 years versus having two 
companies compete head-to-head every year, resulting in the best price 
and best engine.
  There was no competition for this program. The engines for every 
major weapons program in history have been competed--except for the 
Joint Strike Fighter, the largest defense program ever.
  Congress is not required to give a rubber stamp to the Defense 
Department, which has been proven wrong in its opposition to several 
key programs, including development of the Predator, creation of the 
U.S. Special Operations Command and funding for the V-22 Osprey.
  If this amendment passes, our national security will be put at grave 
risk, as the U.S. and Allied forces will depend entirely on one engine 
for 90 percent of their fighter jet fleets.
  And, there will be job loss. We must maintain our support of the 
competitive engine program to sustain the thousands of jobs in the 
United States that are a result of this program.
  I am pleased to join both the Armed Services Committee Chairman and 
Ranking Member, and the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the Air & Land 
Forces, the Sea Power & Expeditionary Forces Subcommittees, and the 
Acquisition Reform Panel in opposing this amendment.
  My colleagues on the House Armed Services Committee and I approved 
funding for the alternative engine program to continue, and the 
Department of Defense's own analysis states that ``the estimated costs 
of a competitive engine acquisition strategy are projected to be 
approximately equivalent to a sole-source scenario.'' If that is the 
case, I am confident the benefits of a competitive engine strategy 
warrant continued support.
  Therefore, I strongly oppose the Pingree/Larson amendment and I rise 
in support of keeping jobs, sustaining competition, and our country's 
national security.

                          ____________________