[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3133-3134]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          AIRBUS FALSE CLAIMS

  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I come to the floor this morning to spend 
a few minutes talking about the future of our Nation's global aerospace 
leadership, because, frankly, I believe it is in serious jeopardy.
  Now, for any of my colleagues who have not heard, last Friday, the 
Air Force awarded one of the largest military contracts in history. It 
is a $40 billion contract. But the Air Force picked a group led by the 
French company, Airbus, over an American company, Boeing, to supply our 
next generation of aerial refueling tankers.

[[Page 3134]]

  I think I speak for many of us when I say it is deeply troubling we 
would turn our aerospace leadership over to a foreign company. If the 
contract had gone to Boeing, it would have meant 44,000 American jobs. 
So now Airbus is arguing that this contract isn't outsourcing jobs 
because it teamed with Northrop Grumman, and they have their supporters 
on the radio and TV talking about how excited they are about the work 
that will come to the United States because of this deal.
  I think we better step back and take a good hard look at what Airbus 
is planning before anybody pops the champagne. The reality is, we don't 
know what Airbus is planning.
  The Air Force has already said it did not consider jobs a factor when 
it awarded the tanker contract, so all we have to go on is Airbus's 
word. We have seen Airbus's slick marketing campaign before, and we 
have very good reason to be worried. Airbus has a history of bending 
the truth to try to convince Congress that it plans to invest in the 
United States, but when you examine their claims, they don't hold up.
  Five years ago, when Airbus was first working to unravel Boeing's 
tanker contract, Airbus and its parent company, EADS, hired a small 
army of lobbyists to come out here and assert to us that their business 
was good for America. Well, at the time I was very skeptical of their 
PR campaign, so I asked our Commerce Department to investigate. Guess 
what I found. Airbus had claimed they had created 100,000 jobs here, 
but the Commerce Department looked into it and it wasn't 100,000 jobs; 
it was 500. Airbus said it had contracted with 800 U.S. firms, but the 
Commerce Department came back and said it was only 250.
  At that point, Airbus did something very funny. They changed their 
numbers, decreasing the number of contracts from 800 all of a sudden to 
300, but they increased the alleged value of those contracts from $5 
billion to $6 billion a year. So I said at the time: You cannot trust 
Airbus's funny numbers.
  What is interesting is, if you peel back the veneer on Airbus's 
promises this time, you start asking similar questions. Airbus had said 
it will build an assembly plant in Alabama. The Air Force says the 
planes will be American. A plant doesn't exist in America, and the only 
thing we know about the jobs it will create is that most of that work 
is going to be done overseas. If you don't believe me, read the British 
newspapers.
  An article in a newspaper in Britain reported Monday that:

       Airbus will build the planes in Europe, and fly them to a 
     plant in Mobile, Alabama, for fitting out.

  Supposedly, this allows them to call them ``made in America.'' That 
is like shipping a BMW over from Germany, putting new tires on it, and 
calling it America's newest luxury car.
  As I have said before, you can put an American sticker on a plane and 
call it American, but that doesn't make it American made.
  I think we have to take some cues from the reaction of the French and 
German leaders about what this contract means for Boeing and the 
American industry, and it is not good. German Chancellor Angela Merkel 
called the deal ``an immense success for Airbus and the European 
aerospace industry.''
  That is what they are saying in Europe.
  A spokesman for French President Nicolas Sarkozy called this deal a 
``historic success.'' That is what they are calling it in Europe.
  Four years ago, I stood on this floor to raise an alarm to my 
colleagues about Europe's attempt to dismantle the American aerospace 
industry, and I have spent years warning the administration and 
Congress that we have to defend our industry and demand that Airbus 
play by the rules. For decades, Europe has provided subsidies to prop 
up Airbus and EADS. Airbus is, to them, a jobs program in Europe, and 
it has led to tens of thousands of layoffs in the United States because 
of their illegal tactics, which I have been out on the floor a number 
of times over the past years to delineate for all of my colleagues. The 
U.S. Government now has a WTO case pending against Airbus--against the 
exact company the Air Force has now awarded a $40 billion contract to.
  So I think we have even more reason for concern because this contract 
now gives Airbus a firm foothold as a U.S. contractor, and it is one 
that is going to hurt our U.S. workers for years to come.
  It took us 100 years to build an aerospace industry in the United 
States. But once our plants shut down, the industry is gone. We can't 
just rebuild it overnight. So let's set the record straight. With this 
contract--this Air Force contract--Airbus is not creating American 
jobs; it is killing them. With this contract, we can say bon voyage to 
44,000 U.S. jobs and bon voyage to $40 billion of our taxpayer money.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cardin. The Senator from Louisiana is 
recognized.
  Mr. VITTER. I ask unanimous consent to be recognized for 5 minutes as 
in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________