MORNING SMOKE |
|
Where there's smoke, there's fire. POGO's Morning Smoke is a collection of the freshest investigations, scoops, and opinions related to the world of government oversight. Have a story you'd like to see included? Contact POGO's blog editor |
National Security
The F-35 is Not a $1 Trillion Program, It's More
Winslow Wheeler, Center for Defense Information
Will the $55 Billion Bomber Program Fly?
David Axe, iWatch News
Paul Ryan's Budget a Turning Point in Defense Debate
Sandra Erwin, National Defense Magazine
Lawmakers: U.S. Air Force Numbers Lack Credibility
Marcus Weisgerber, Defense News
Contract Oversight
DoD Looking for 'Cost-Conscious' Contractors, Assad Says
Sarah Chacko, Federal Times
Lockheed Agrees to Pay $15.8 Million Settlement in False Claims Act Case
Mike Scarcella, The Blog of Legal Times
Experts Call for Better Training of Warzone Contracting Officers
Sarah Chacko, Federal Times
Energy Issues
Federal Regulators 'Could Have Prevented' Upper Big Branch, W. Va. Mine Disaster, Report Concludes
Brad Plumer, The Washington Post
Audit: Natural Gas Lines Tied to Fracking Lack Oversight
Garance Burke, Associated Press
Financial Oversight
MF Global's Corzine Maybe be Liable if Customer Risk Known
Linda Sandler and Phil Mattingly, Bloomberg
Bank Lobby's Onslaught Shifts Debate on Volcker Rule
Robert Schmidt and Phil Mattingly, Bloomberg
SEC Takes Wells Fargo to Court to Enforce Subpoenas
Sarah N. Lynch and Rick Rothacker, Reuters
You taxpayers signed Lockheed Martin up to a contract saying you would pay them $1.10 for every $1.00 they spend designing and building the F-35, and now after you've already paid them over $34 billion you want to back out of that deal? Well, which is more inane, backing out now and getting nothing for the $34 billion already spent or pressing on knowing the contractor will continue to jack up the price?
You lose either way. The contractor wins either way. They get to keep that $.10 profit on every dollar they spent, free and clear. No one goes to jail. No one is held accountable. After all, it was perfectly legal. No one forced you to sign that stupid contract. Eventually you'll want another fighter to replace the late, not-so-great, F-35 and who will you go to then, Boeing? And you'll give them the same kind of contract, guaranteeing them $1.10 for every $1.00 they spend. Then what will happen?
Do you really think that if you keep flopping back and forth between Lockheed and Boeing with that same kind of contract one of these days it's going to result in a good, well designed airplane delivered on time and on budget? And what's going to make them do that? The fact that suddenly they'll see the light and stop being motivated by profit? Yeah, that could happen. So keep trying the same thing over and over again, each time hoping for a better result and let me know how that works out for you.
Posted by: Dfens | Mar 26, 2012 at 04:43 PM