The House of Representatives yesterday voted to cancel federal funding for a jet engine that has been widely opposed by both the Bush and Obama administrations, as well as Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The removal of the F−35 Joint Strike Fighter's alternative engine from the federal spending bill that will fund the government through the end of the year will cut an additional $450 million and save up to $3 billion over the next few years. While funding for the engine has met strong opposition, its continuation has also been adamantly defended by representatives in whose districts its construction has created manufacturing and supply jobs.
Approximately $3 billion has already been spent on the project. But in the interest of cutting their losses, many senior officials have been trying to discontinue it for years, calling it a wasteful endeavor during a time of economic crisis. President Barack Obama has referred to the engine as a symbol of waste, and Gates said that the money could better be directed toward "higher−priority defense efforts."
Nonetheless, previous votes in the House to cut its funding had been unsuccessful, and many prominent members of the House — notably House Speaker John Boehner (R−OH), in whose district much of the engine is being built — have urged its continuation. Supporters of the engine argue that the project has provided a significant number of domestic jobs — the manufacturers of the engine spread work to over 15 states and promised that it would create over 4,000 jobs — and that ending now is a waste of the work already done on a military project that will ultimately prove useful.
During Wednesday's vote, the majority of Republican votes to terminate the project came from the House's freshman Republicans who sided with liberal Democrats. The freshman Republicans' decision to vote for the cutting of a military project that was believed by many — most importantly those in the Pentagon — to be an unconstructive use of the budget is commendable. Particularly as new members of the House, it was risky to vote to cut military spending for fear of looking soft on defense issues. However, the decision to vote based on the specific issue at hand, rather than a traditional party line, deserves praise.
The Joint Strike Fighter is the military's most expensive program, and another F−35 engine is already being built in the United States. While supporters of the project make a valid point in arguing that continuing construction of the engine will spur employment, there are more effective ways that the additional $3 billion can be used to create jobs rather than adding more money to a military project that is believed by experts and senior White House officials to be an unconstructive use of the budget.
It is laudable that the bipartisan group of House members who voted against continued funding of the engine were able to see the bigger picture and vote in favor of preventing another waste of $3 billion. Decisions regarding military endeavors such as the F−35 alternative engine should not be made based on regional interest but rather on the actual utility of the project itself and its potential benefits to the country as a whole.
--
