Is the Fight Over the F-22 Just Prudent Congressional Oversight?

In a word: no. Something I touched on in my previous post about the addition of parts for 12 F-22s in the defense authorization bill is that Representative Neil Abercrombie (D-HI) has framed this as "the reassertion of oversight by the Congress." According to Rep. Abercrombie, Defense Secretary Gates's decision to halt production of the F-22s--after 44 Senators and nearly half of the House wrote letters urging the Secretary to procure more--was just another example of the Department of Defense (DoD) not being accountable to Congress. "We cannot allow the executive to run roughshod over congressional obligation and responsibility," he told reporters last week. From the transcript:

I have the record right here. I feel like Joe McCarthy. I have in my hand the names and the list right here, all the letters and everything that we wrote to Mr. Gates on the F-22 saying look, here's what you have to do. Here's what the Congress wants you to do. And if you don't do it there's going to be some severe consequences that are going to take place.

In most cases, POGO would agree with Rep. Abercrombie that Congress needs to be more aggressive in its oversight efforts--that's why we started our Congressional Oversight Training Series. But Congress's constitutional responsibility to conduct oversight is intended to assure the public that the government is open, honest, and accountable to the public, not parochial interests. As the New York Times said in an editorial over the weekend:

You would think that with all the legitimate and expensive claims on the government pocketbook--including two wars, an economic crisis and desperately needed health care reform--Congress would be extra judicious about how it spends the taxpayers’ money...The Pentagon budget must be more closely attuned to military and economic reality than the misdirected and undisciplined spending of the last eight years.

Real congressional oversight means making sure that the DoD's budget meets our strategic national security needs. It means it's time for Congress to say goodbye to the F-22.

-- Mandy Smithberger

Comments

[Ricardo]

I would have said buy more Raptors if they hadn't already bought 100 Raptors that can't even be upgraded. Then we have to spend 8 billion dollars in addtion to the 62 billion already spent to make this thing perform up to scratch.Here check it out:

http://www.examiner.com/x-5411-Military-and-Civil-Aviation-Examiner~y2009m6d18-Sharpening-the-Raptors-talons