Shock and Audit: The Axis of Pork

Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Lockheed) and other foes of defense reform.

Photo of Saxby Chambliss by flickr user <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/dizzygirl/3074451627/sizes/l/" target="blank">Dizzy Girl</a> used under a Creative Commons licence.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


This is Part IV of a Mother Jones special report on the defense budget. Click the links for Parts I, II, III, and V.

As the defense budget moves into its final stages, the horse-trading is going to get pretty intense. Who will be the key players? The heads of the appropriations committees act as the ultimate gatekeepers in this process. In the House that’s Rep. Dave Obey (D-Wis.), and in the Senate, Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii)—or, as he likes to call himself, the “king of pork.”

It’s also worth scrutinizing legislators from states where Boeing is active (like Missouri, Kansas, Washington, and California) because Boeing is the contractor hit hardest by the Gates budget. Here are five lawmakers who deserve extra-close attention:

Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.)

Pet program: Future Combat Systems, which is partly manufactured in Oklahoma

MO: Inhofe will leave no rhetorical bomb unthrown in his battle to save weapons systems which are vital to the nation’s security and which also happen to be made in Oklahoma. Here he is standing on a tarmac in Afghanistan charging that Obama is trying to “disarm America” to increase “welfares to an unconscionable high.”

Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.)

Pet program: The F-22 fighter jet is partly manufactured in Georgia.

MO: The Georgia delegation is expected to fight hardest for the F-22—it employs around 2,000 workers who construct the plane’s airframe at a Lockheed plant in Marietta. Like Inhofe, Chambliss is not a very subtle guy. He has already said that the administration is “willing to sacrifice the lives of American military men and women for the sake of domestic programs favored by President Obama.”

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.)

Pet programs: The F22, whose engines are manufactured in Connecticut. Also missile defense, which is not manufactured in Connecticut. Lieberman just likes it.

MO: Lieberman is likely to be a major opponent of even small cuts to missile defense. He may also pull some tricky maneuvering on the VH-71 presidential helicopter. He’ll probably support cutting it, but only because he wants a replacement contract to be awarded to a Connecticut-based company called Sikorsky.

Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.)

Pet program: Too many to list

MO: The House’s reigning porklord originally wanted to add $10 to 12 billion dollars worth of extra defense spending to supplemental war spending bills this year. He didn’t succeed, although the final legislation still contained nearly $5 billion for equipment that the Pentagon didn’t request. Look for Murtha to try again when the House appropriations committee gets its hands on the main defense budget bill.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)

Pet program: The C-17 cargo plane. More than 5,000 workers assemble the C-17 at a plant in Long Beach, and thousands more work on the plane elsewhere in the state.

MO: For three years the Pentagon has said it doesn’t need any more C-17s, which cost around $276 million each. And for three years California’s congressional delegation has insisted that the government buy more of them, with Boxer playing a leading role. This may be the only issue on which she and Republican hardliner Dana Rohrabacher have ever seen eye to eye, although as far as we know only Boxer attempts to justify the program by arguing that the C-17 comes in handy on humanitarian missions. This year the plane’s backers have won out yet again: Congress already inserted $2 billion for more C-17s into the war supplemental legislation.

Special Report: Shock & Audit

(Links will go live as reports are published.)

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate