Connect with us

News

Inefficiency and ‘Too Big To Fail’ Government Contracts Sting The Taxpayer

Gary S. Goldman is the nationally recognized host of “Business, Politics, & Lifestyles” a weekly talk show airing on WCRN 830 in Metro Boston MA. Learn more at garyonbpl.com.   

Published

on

There are many problems with government contracting. The Federal News Network identified one problem when they reported on May 11, 2021, “The longer it takes the Biden administration to get its final fiscal year 2022 appropriation request out, the worse it’ll be for federal contracting. By one account, the final numbers might not get until February.” That is February of 2022, because they will likely not finish work on appropriations until the end of the year while the Fiscal 2022 year starts on October 1, 2021. Inefficiently usually leads to taxpayers paying more for less.

There is another problem for the taxpayer, and it is enormous long term federal contracts that are on autopilot. During the 2008 financial crisis, Americans learned the danger of “too big to fail.” Banks that had lent foolishly had to be bailed out at great expense. Well, these days we are relearning the lesson of “too big to fail.” Except now the government has put itself on the hook.

The issue this time revolves around federal government contracting, especially at the Pentagon. The problem begins in a different era, the 1990s. Back then, the United States was the unchallenged and unchallengeable power. The Soviet Union had collapsed, and the rest of the world was either allied with us our cowed by us.

At that time, the goal was to develop a new generation of weapons that would expand military dominance for decades to come. The federal treasury was overflowing, and money was no object. Leaders decided to back the F-35, a Joint Strike Fighter that would, supposedly, be able to replace jets used by the Air Force, the Navy, and the Marine Corps. A big problem with the plan is that it relied, as so many government projects do, on a single contractor.

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The entire F-35 contract went to Lockheed Martin, which could then strategically divide up the spoils among subcontractors. Lockheed brags: “the F-35 program teams with nearly 1,900 U.S. suppliers—including more than 1,000 small business suppliers—in 45 states and Puerto Rico to produce thousands of aircraft components.”

But that doesn’t mean the program is diversified. It just means Lockheed can spend federal government money to buy support in congressional districts across the country.

Representatives from those districts will then support the F-35, whether or not it is a useful program. It’s a classic “too big to fail” scheme, and it has worked for Lockheed decades.

What hasn’t worked is the F-35 itself. If the jet had lived up to its advance billing, perhaps all the government waste would be worth it (perhaps). We would at least have a successful weapon system. Instead, the F-35 lags in virtually every important area.

“Older aircraft remain better than F-35s,” commentator Sean McFate wrote this year. “Dedicated bombers can fly farther with larger payloads. The A-10 Thunderbolt, an aircraft introduced in 1977, is better at ground support missions.” Also, he adds, the F-35 regularly loses in dogfights against the F-15, a jet that has been in service for decades. “The older aircraft easily maneuvered behind the F-35 for a clear shot, even sneaking up on the ‘stealth’ jet. Despite the F-35s vaunted abilities, it was blown out of the sky in multiple tests.”

Also, the U.S. Navy’s and Marine Corps’ F-35s become unpredictable to handle when executing the kind of extreme maneuvers a pilot would use in a dogfight or while avoiding a missile,” Defense News found.

Meanwhile, Lockheed is getting paid to fix the problems it caused. A report from the Defense Department’s inspector general shows the Pentagon may have paid $300 million “to correct wrong or incomplete electronic equipment logs,” as Defense News reported. Separately, Military.com reports that, “Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-New York, charged that air crews incurred $183 million in labor costs devising workarounds to track and ensure the reliability of spare parts for the F-35.”

Yet after all the money spent to build and repair the F-35, the jet still has more than 870 “deficiencies” that need to be addressed. That includes 10 Category 1 deficiencies, which the Air Force says “may cause death or severe injury.” Its guns don’t even shoot correctly.

The entire American Rescue Plan Act, drawn up to help the country survive COVID, will cost $1.9 trillion. The economy, we can probably agree, is too big to fail. The F-35 will cost about the same amount, some $1.7 trillion over its lifetime. That’s hardly a good return on investment.

Future military programs should be smaller and handled through multiple bidders, to create some price pressure. Meanwhile, the F-35 program needs to be grounded right away. It’s not too big to fail, and fail it certainly has.

Gary S. Goldman is the nationally recognized host of “Business, Politics, & Lifestyles” a weekly talk show airing on WCRN 830 in Metro Boston MA. Learn more at garyonbpl.com

Entertainment

DirecTV Removes Conservative News Network in Blow to Free Speech

The move is just the latest incident in which conservative bandwidth has been arbitrarily limited, and it certainly won’t be the last. 

Published

on

In our nation, we’ve long held the belief that the diversity of opinion is a tool for sharpening our abilities and ingenuity.  The freedom to speak as you want is the best way to keep the evil among us from snatching up the entirety of the American Dream for themselves, and it levels the playing field among the masses.

That it why the latest move from DirecTV is so egregious.

The largest satellite provider in the United States said late Friday it will drop One America News, a move that could financially cripple the rightwing TV network known for fueling conspiracy theories about the 2020 election.

The announcement by DirecTV, which is 70% owned by AT&T, comes three months after a Reuters investigation revealed that OAN’s founder testified that AT&T inspired him to create the network. Court testimony also showed that OAN receives nearly all of its revenue from DirecTV.

The sudden change comes after years of cooperation.

DirecTV, with approximately 15 million subscribers, is by far OAN’s largest carrier. According to testimony by OAN’s accountant reviewed by Reuters, DirecTV provided 90% of the conservative network’s revenue.

“We informed Herring Networks that, following a routine internal review, we do not plan to enter into a new contract when our current agreement expires,” DirecTV said in a statement.

The OAN-DirecTV contract is set to expire in the next several months. DirecTV began airing OAN in April 2017, a deal that began shortly after OAN and AT&T settled a lawsuit over alleged oral promises during negotiations.

The move is just the latest incident in which conservative bandwidth has been arbitrarily limited, and it certainly won’t be the last.

In our nation, we’ve long held the belief that the diversity of opinion is a tool for sharpening our abilities and ingenuity.  The freedom to speak as you want is the best way to keep the evil among us from snatching up the entirety of the American Dream for themselves, and it levels the playing field among the masses. That it why the latest move from DirecTV is so egregious. The largest satellite provider in the United States said late Friday it will drop One America News, a move that could financially cripple the rightwing TV network known for fueling conspiracy theories about the 2020 election. The announcement by DirecTV, which is 70% owned by AT&T, comes three months after a Reuters investigation revealed that OAN’s founder testified that AT&T inspired him to create the network. Court testimony also showed that OAN receives nearly all of its revenue from DirecTV. The sudden change comes after years of cooperation. DirecTV, with approximately 15 million subscribers, is by far OAN’s largest carrier. According to testimony by OAN’s accountant reviewed by Reuters, DirecTV provided 90% of the conservative network’s revenue. “We informed Herring Networks that, following a routine internal review, we do not plan to enter into a new contract when our current agreement expires,” DirecTV said in a statement. The OAN-DirecTV contract is set to expire in the next several months. DirecTV began airing OAN in April 2017, a deal that began shortly after OAN and AT&T settled a lawsuit over alleged oral promises during negotiations. The move is just the latest incident in which conservative bandwidth has been arbitrarily limited, and it certainly won’t be the last.

Continue Reading

News

My Pillow CEO Blackballed by Banking Institutions Over ‘Reputation Risk’

The left is taking their war on conservatism to absurd new lengths.

Published

on

As the 2022 midterm election remains just over the horizon, casting an already dark cloud over the coming months, there has been a concerted effort among those on the left side of the aisle to exploit the events of January 6th, 2021 for political gain.  And, as Democrats continue to fear for the worst in 2022, they are casting an ever wider net.

The tactic is essentially spray and pray:  Throw subpoenas and accusations all over the place, and then beg the heavens above that something sticks.

This is making life very difficult for those who are, or were once, associated with Donald Trump.  This includes the CEO of the My Pillow corporation, Mike Lindell.

During a Friday episode of right-wing political strategist Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast, Lindell claimed that Heartland Financial and Minnesota Bank and Trust are attempting to “de-bank” him over concerns that they could face fallout related to having him as a client. During the podcast, Bannon and Lindell played an audio recording that they said was a call with a bank official.

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“Just because of our organization saying, ‘Well, why are we connected with somebody that could be in the news.’ And, not that the FBI is even sniffing and looking, but what if somebody came in and said, ‘You know what, we are gonna subpoena all his account records…and then also we make the news,'” the person in the recording said. “So it’s more of a reputation risk.”

Lindell went on to tell Bannon that the financial institutions want him to shutter his accounts within 30 days. But the pro-Trump businessman insisted that he is refusing to comply.

“I said, ‘I am not being part of this. I’m not leaving. So you’re going to have to throw me out of your bank,'” he said. During the segment, Bannon put the phone numbers and contact information of top officials at the institutions onscreen—urging supporters to call and complain.

And, finally…

“Where does it end everybody? Where does it end?” Lindell asked, suggesting that he is being persecuted for his controversial activism. He contended that the banks’ decision was related to his refusal to comply with the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021 pro-Trump attack against the U.S. Capitol.

As the January 6th committee grows bolder and brasher, we should perhaps expect more examples of such political discrimination to make headlines.

As the 2022 midterm election remains just over the horizon, casting an already dark cloud over the coming months, there has been a concerted effort among those on the left side of the aisle to exploit the events of January 6th, 2021 for political gain.  And, as Democrats continue to fear for the worst in 2022, they are casting an ever wider net. The tactic is essentially spray and pray:  Throw subpoenas and accusations all over the place, and then beg the heavens above that something sticks. This is making life very difficult for those who are, or were once, associated with Donald Trump.  This includes the CEO of the My Pillow corporation, Mike Lindell. During a Friday episode of right-wing political strategist Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast, Lindell claimed that Heartland Financial and Minnesota Bank and Trust are attempting to “de-bank” him over concerns that they could face fallout related to having him as a client. During the podcast, Bannon and Lindell played an audio recording that they said was a call with a bank official. “Just because of our organization saying, ‘Well, why are we connected with somebody that could be in the news.’ And, not that the FBI is even sniffing and looking, but what if somebody came in and said, ‘You know what, we are gonna subpoena all his account records…and then also we make the news,'” the person in the recording said. “So it’s more of a reputation risk.” Lindell went on to tell Bannon that the financial institutions want him to shutter his accounts within 30 days. But the pro-Trump businessman insisted that he is refusing to comply. “I said, ‘I am not being part of this. I’m not leaving. So you’re going to have to throw me out of your bank,'” he said. During the…

Continue Reading
The Schaftlein Report

Latest Articles

Best of the Week