By Emelie Rutherford
A top defense appropriator expressed optimism last Friday that a contested jet engine program will be funded in the final Pentagon budget.
Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), the third-ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee (HAC-D), said he expects the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter’s alternate engine, which he supports and is developed by General Electric [GE] and Rolls-Royce, to overcome opposition from the White House and some key lawmakers.
HAC-D Chairman Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) and House Appropriations Committee (HAC) Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) voted against including the second engine in the policy-setting fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill on May 27.
It thus remains to be seen if Dicks will agree to fund the engine effort in the forthcoming HAC-D version of the FY ’11 defense appropriations legislation. The HAC and SAC defense appropriations bills, which will truly dictate the engine program’s future, have not yet surfaced on Capitol Hill.
Moran noted that Dicks “was clearly torn” when he decided to vote against the second engine in the authorization bill. Thus, Moran said the future looks bright for the engine effort, considering most HAC-D members voted in favor of it during that May 27 vote. Plus, he said, Senate Appropriations Defense subcommittee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) also has expressed support for it.
“This is not one of these things where (Dicks is) advocating one side or the other; he’s trying to weigh both,” Moran said. ” And I think in the interest of comity on the subcommittee he would weigh that as well.”
The engine effort’s fate, Moran said, ultimately could be decided behind-closed-doors in a conference committee, which will include Dicks and Inouye, that will reconcile the House and Senate’s forthcoming versions of the defense appropriations bill.
“I have to believe that the alternative engine is going to be included in that final bill and it’s not going to be vetoed,” Moran told reporters at Defense Requirements, Resourcing & Acquisition Conference in Arlington, Va., sponsored by McAleese & Associates, P.C., and Credit Suisse Equity Research.
“The more I look at it, the more convinced I am that it’s the right thing to do,” he said.
Moran also said he finds it hard to believe President Barack Obama would follow through with the threat to veto defense legislation that supports the alternate engine.
“I can’t believe he would veto that bill over the F-35, when I think we have a very legitimate difference of opinion,” the congressman said. He cast the argument as one where supportive lawmakers want the engine effort because of long-term savings, while the Pentagon opposes it because of high near-term costs.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates argues continuing to develop the alternate engine would be a waste of $3 billion and that problems may exist with its design and cost estimates, while congressional supports maintain continuing the General Electric -Rolls-Royce engine would cost the Pentagon roughly the same as canceling it and also would yield multiple benefits through competition.
The authorization bill the House passed May 28 backs the alternate engine, while the Senate Armed Services Committee’s version of the policy-setting legislation does not authorize it.
The appropriations bills are moving slowly on Capitol Hill, and lawmakers will be leaving Washington in the coming months for reelection campaigns. Moran said the defense appropriations legislation may not come up until December, after the elections, and Pentagon funding could be covered in a temporary continuing resolution after the new fiscal year starts Oct. 1.