EDITORIALS Words pay no debts

When tough choices aren’t so tough

— IT’S A SMART move to back up your computer. It’s also a good idea to back up dinner plans, vacation ideas and third base.

But do you need a back-up house? You know, in case the one you’re in doesn’t work out. Or how about a backup family? And a back-up bass boat on the other side of the garage, too?

There are some things you don’t need back-up for. Especially the kind of back-ups that cost, say . . . something like $450 million.

Was there really a time in this country’s history when patriots took to the streets to cheer Congress? That’s been a few centuries back. But a story in Wednesday’s paper got some of us in the tricorne mood again.

Congress may actually kill the F-35 back-up engine this year.

You might have heard of this ill-considered (especially for taxpayers) pork project. It’s a prime example of what’s wrong with Washington, government spending, the annual deficit, and the far bigger national debt.

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is supposed to be the nation’s next F-16, the bad boy of the skies. The government is set to buy thousands of them. Which is just fine with Lockheed-Martin, which is building the things for about $92 million each. But for some cockeyed reason, General Electric was told to build an alternative engine for the aircraft, and Congress has been funding that back-up project at the rate of $450 million a year.

The Obama administration doesn’t want the back-up engine.

The Bush administration before it didn’t want the back-up engine.

Robert Gates, the current secretary of defense who served in the last administration, too, doesn’t want the back-up engine.

None of the military branches that are planning to use the F-35 want the back-up engine.

Who wants the back-up engine? General Electric, of course, which pays lobbyists lots to push the program in D.C. Also, more than 1,000 workers and their families in Ohio, where the backup is being built.

It’s hard to be against jobs. But shouldthe defense of a nation be a public works program?

According to dispatches from the political front, GE argues that the U.S. should keep the program going because, ahem, a competing program will reduce costs in the long run. Yeah, and in the long run, as John Maynard Keynes once observed, we’re all dead. He may have been an economist, but he did have a sense of reality.

Reduce costs in the long run? Now that’s brass. Try it at work: Hey, boss, I’m going to do the exact same job as that guy across the room, put together the same stuff, and duplicate his work exactly. You’ll pay us both-a lot-but the competition between us will save you money, ahem, in the long run.

Competition in public contracting is a good thing. That is, before bids are accepted for a project. Once the right company has been chosen, it makes little economic sense to pay somebody to produce back-up bridges, interstates and, yes, jet engines.

THE CONGRESSMEN from Arkansas-all four of them, Rick Crawford, Tim Griffin, Mike Ross and Steve Womack-voted against the back-up engine. Mr. Ross, the only veteran member of Congress in this bunch, and the only Democrat as well, voted to cut the funding for this redundant program last year, too, which only reinforced our respect for him.

Tim Griffin, who’s been outspoken about the F-35 back-up engine, estimates that taxpayers have already spent $2.9 billion on this second-string engine. And just about that much more would be needed to complete development.

For an engine that nobody will use.

Let’s hope this new crop of congressmen in Washington means it when they talk about cutting the fat out of the federal budget. Shakespeare said that words pay no debts. But if these words lead to action-if congressmen start voting the way they talk-maybe one day in the not-too-distant future, we can all start talking about America’s annual deficit and accumulating national debt without once having to use the word “trillion.”

Editorial, Pages 74 on 02/20/2011

Upcoming Events