As the House of Representatives passes a 2010 defense budget, the porkers' howls grow louder and louder. For this installment of our Monday mornings C-17 series, we have an extra special treat for our readers--C-17 comedy!. If you are new to these pages, before reading this installment, readers might want to skip to the bottom and read a few of the related articles. This will give a good introduction to the C-17 match up and will increase the laughter of the following portions of this article.

But, before we get to the comedy, here's what happened last week. With most of the Washington spotlight focused on healthcare, the US House of Representatives passed a defense authorization bill which deleted funds for the veto targeted F-22 fighter jet. By so doing, the House bill is in agreement with the Senate version as it relates to the F-22. It's not the same for the C-17. The Senate bill does not provide for more C-17s, while the House bill includes funds for 3 more of the big planes. The differences will be worked out in committee. After this, the House packed their bags and went off on vacation until September. The Senate will do the same at the end of this week. So, there will be no resolution of the bills before September.

The Obama Administration has promised a Presidential veto if the defense bills include funds for more F-22s, but it has been much less clear on which, if any, other undesired programs could draw the veto. Thus, the House included several programs the Administration is trying to kill--such as the much maligned new presidential helicopters and the second engine for the F-35 joint strike fighter.

During House floor debate last Thursday, a few members, such as Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who some have called "the House's leading crusader against earmarks", and Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass.), attempted to remove some of the pork from the bill, but these amendments failed by large margins. Some reputable news sources, including the Washington Post, have suggested that the unwanted earmark spending could still possibly result in a veto, but your Editors do not see that happening. The earmarks in the House bill were enough, however, to raise howls from a growing cadre of anti porkers, so we will just have to wait and see what the conference committee does with the bills.

All this discussion about pork and earmarks is not to suggest that the funds for C-17s are either pork or earmarks. All we really know is that Secretary of Defense , Robert M. Gates, and President Obama have said the US military does not need more of the planes, and despite this, congress continues to vote for more of the roughly 200 million dollar apiece planes. There is almost no discussion about how many C-17s are actually needed. It seems clear that those in congress continue to vote for spending more taxpayer money on the big planes based on jobs and votes, rather than the need for the planes.

Based on all this, your Editors could hardly stop laughing when we came across the following piece, published right after the House vote last Thursday, and used here with permission.

If it squeals like pork…
By RICK HOROWITZ
Thursday, July 30, 2009

You can always use an extra transport plane—that’s the way I figured it. After
all, when you’re thinking of moving a lot of people, or even a lot of cargo,
from here to there, what’s better than a C-17? And why not a brand-spanking-new
C-17, instead of one of those ratty old used ones?
I knew just where to find one, too.
I called Congress.
And not just any old place in Congress. When you want to get things done, you
have to go right to the particular people who make those particular things
happen, so that’s just what I did.
I called the House Appropriations Committee.
They weren’t expecting me.
“I’d like one of your C-17s,” I told them.
“Our what?” they asked. They sounded surprised.
“I hear you’re ordering up a bunch of C-17s for the Pentagon. I’d like to put in
a request for one of them.”
“What do you need a C-17 for?” they wanted to know.
“What’s need got to do with it?” I explained.
Now, it’s not like C-17s were the only thing the Appropriations Committee had
been ordering up for the Pentagon—at least according to all the stories in the
papers. Ships. Planes. Armored vehicles. Presidential helicopters. Hundreds of
billions of dollars of stuff, the stories said, which is a pretty typical annual
budget for the Pentagon—but it included billions of dollars of stuff that the
Pentagon didn’t even want!
That’s where I saw my opening.
“Look,” I said to the nice man on the phone. “You’re insisting that all these
things get built, right?”
Right. It means jobs in the congressmen’s districts.
“Even though the Pentagon doesn’t want them.”
Right. It’s good for the economy.
“Even though Secretary Gates says he doesn’t need them.”
Right. It means contributions from defense contractors.
“Even though Secretary Gates says the same money you’re wasting could go for
other stuff, like counter-insurgency programs, instead of all this fancy
hardware.”
“What’s your point?” (The nice man on the phone wasn’t sounding all that nice
anymore.)
“My point is you’re just trying to keep the contractors happy.”
So?
“So why not keep me happy?”
Are you a contractor?
“Do I sound like a contractor?”
I had him there.
So I pressed my advantage. It wasn’t just about making me happy, I told him—it
was about keeping the C-17 happy, too. Why keep saying yes to building all those
planes, and making sure they’re built in strategically located factories all
over the country, if they’re only going to sit in some Pentagon warehouse
somewhere?
So?
“So I’m willing to take one of the planes off your hands,” I said. “You know,
give it a good home.”
And this happiness of mine, the man wanted to know…
And the plane, too, I reminded him. Don’t forget the plane’s happiness.
“And this happiness of yours,” he tried again. “What’s it’s worth to you?”
It would mean everything, I told him. I’ve never had a transport plane. I’ve…
“You don’t understand,” he said. “What would it be worth to you—in numbers?”
“It’s a 10!” I told him. “Definitely a 10!”
“With how many zeroes after it?”
“Zeroes?”
That’s when he hung up on me.
I’d have settled for a battleship.
Rick Horowitz is a syndicated columnist. You can write to him at
rickhoro@execpc.com.