Yet another John McCain lobbying scandal is emerging. Lost in the Elliot Spitzer news is this report that three current McCain campaign advisors lobbied for the European Aeronautic Defence Company for the US military's $35 billion air refuling tanker deal.
Here's the nut:
Top current advisers to Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign last year lobbied for a European plane maker that beat Boeing to a $35 billion Air Force tanker contract, taking sides in a bidding fight that McCain has tried to referee for more than five years.
Two of the advisers gave up their lobbying work when they joined McCain's campaign. A third, former Texas Rep. Tom Loeffler, lobbied for the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. while serving as McCain's national finance chairman.
EADS is the parent company of Airbus, which teamed up with U.S.-based Northrop Grumman Corp. to win the lucrative aerial refueling contract on Feb. 29. Boeing Co. Chairman and CEO Jim McNerney said in a statement Monday that the Chicago-based aerospace company "found serious flaws in the process that we believe warrant appeal."
McCain, the Republican presidential nominee in waiting, has been a key figure in the Pentagon's yearslong attempt to complete a deal on the tanker. McCain helped block an earlier tanker contract with Boeing and prodded the Pentagon in 2006 to develop bidding procedures that did not exclude Airbus.
To put it simply, McCain intervened in the Pentagon's procurement process in such a way that it gave an advantage to EADS because it is subsidized by European Governments -- and could offer a lower price target. In effect, McCain's intervention shipped American jobs to France.
In December 2006, just weeks before the Air Force was set to release its formal request for proposals, McCain wrote a letter to the incoming defense secretary, Robert Gates, warning that he was "troubled" by the Air Force's draft request for bids.
The United States had filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization alleging that Airbus unfairly benefits from European subsidies. Airbus in turn argued that Boeing also receives government support, mostly as tax breaks.
Under the Air Force proposal, bidders would have been required to explain how financial penalties or other sanctions stemming from the subsidy dispute might affect their ability to execute the contract. The request was widely viewed as hurting the EADS-Northrop Grumman bid.
The proposed bid request "may risk eliminating competition before bids are submitted," McCain wrote in a Dec. 1, 2006, letter to Gates. The Air Force changed the criteria four days later.
[...]
EADS' interest in the tanker deal is evident in the political contributions of its employees. From 2004 to 2006, donations by its employees jumped from $42,500 to $141,931, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. So far this election cycle, company employees have donated $120,350. Of that, McCain's presidential campaign has received $14,000, the most of any other member of Congress this election cycle.
Now, Boeing supporters are irate, and blaming McCain for undercutting Boeing's ability to make a competitive bid. They are vowing revenge against the Senator.
It certainly does not help that McCain seems to have a vendetta against the company. McCain forced an investigation into an earlier tanker contract between Boeing and the Airforce that resulted in corruption charges and prison terms. While that was laudible, he interveneved in a later contract with Boeing to supply a component of the military's Future Combat System that was developed after Boeing cleaned up its act. He also probed another contract with Boeing to supply the Air Force with combat rescue helecopters.
And the addition of Airbus/EADS lobbyists to McCain's campaign -- not to mention the well-timed contributions by Airbus/EADS officials to McCain's campaign coffers -- sure does lend credenceto the suggestion that McCain has a problem with Boeing. What that is due to the influence of lobbyists, or his famed temper, it is not a sign that McCain has the temperment to be President of the United States. We already have a petulant, grudge holder in the White House, much to ths country's detreiment. I don't thik America wants another one.
UPDATE: I see that my diary was a little late to ths subject. Please see JedReport's diary that provides a number of interesting and additional details.
© Kos Media, LLC
Site content may be used for any purpose without
explicit permission unless otherwise specified.
Privacy Policy
Powered by Scoop.
Permalink | 33 comments