The Hill | J.D. Hayworth
April 17, 2023
John Paul Jones, the legendary naval commander in America’s Revolutionary War, is credited with the famous words: “I have not yet begun to fight!”
And as the U.S. prepares to celebrate its 247th year of independence, Jones would find that a variation on his famous words remains quite relevant on Capitol Hill. In the annual effort to fund our military, some legislators and staffers appear to have adopted this credo: “We will fight to exercise the ‘power of the purse’ at our sole discretion!”
But the sentiment expressed above, while certainly constitutionally correct, ignores the practical result of reaching a consensus based on the needs of those for whom the funds will be spent.
Once again, Congress is clearing a legislative path to fund an expensive program that the Pentagon says it doesn’t want — and doesn’t need.
Consider the Adaptive Engine Transition Program (AETP) for the F-35 fighter jet.
In March, following many years of deliberation and wildly expensive research, the Air Force finally decided that the F-35’s existing engine could be updated, through an approach called the Engine Core Upgrade (ECU). By sticking with that engine (known as the F-135), rather than demanding a completely new propulsion system, the Pentagon would avoid sticking taxpayers with an additional $6 billion tab.
But a key congressional committee apparently has other ideas.
The mid-June Chairman’s mark of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) from the House Armed Services Committee proposes a restoration of funding for the AETP for fiscal 2024, and gives a green light to the expenditure of approximately $600 million to keep AETP alive.
An unnamed “senior congressional aide” explained that the funding was restored to “keep that technology going as we head into sixth-generation aircraft.” But with the legislative draft also authorizing funds for the ECU, critics sounded the familiar refrain of “wasteful Washington spending” with AETP in the bullseye.
Predictably, a key defense contractor in the F-35 program wasted little time in advocating for the restored spending. Against the backdrop of the Paris Air Show, Lockheed Martin’s executive vice president for aeronautics went public with his praise. In an interview with Breaking Defense, Greg Ulmer said “I’m going to advocate, and I do advocate for [ATEP], another engine.”
But Ulmer did more than endorse the spending increase and engine change. He also sought to throw a little shade in the direction of Pratt & Whitney, manufacturer of the F-135 engine, and lead contractor of ECU, adding that “I think some of the approaches today are very short-sighted and not considering a longer-term view.”
Jill Albertelli, president of military engines at Pratt & Whitney, returned the rhetorical fire effectively, with Defense News citing her statement that “Lockheed Martin wants to put an unproven adaptive engine on a single engine fighter jet, regardless of the hefty price tag and the significant delay in delivering critical capabilities to the warfighter at a time of urgent need.”
Longtime budget hawks on the Hill could very well see a need for something similar to the Tea Party-inspired action taken in early 2011, which also concerned the future of F-35 engines. Former Rep. Tom Rooney (R-Fla.), then in his second term, persuaded conservative newcomers to join him in supporting a vote on the House floor to cut $450 million that would have been spent on a “competitive engine” for the jet fighter.
Then, as now, the House Armed Services Committee chairman supported the expenditure.
Then, as now, the Pentagon opposed the extra spending. In fact, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates had made the extra engine program one of his top targets, saying it was “unnecessary and extravagant.”
In the end, Rooney, with the help of 47 GOP freshmen, prevailed with an amendment to kill the program, by a vote of 233-198.
He was no John Paul Jones, but think instead of Samuel Clemens, who after spending some time as a riverboat pilot on the Mighty Mississippi, eventually adopted the nautical term “Mark Twain” as his pseudonym.
“History doesn’t repeat itself, but it rhymes,” wrote Twain.
Another fight looms over unwanted big spending and F-35 engines. Don’t be surprised if the outcome in 2023 closely resembles what occurred a dozen years ago. House members are just beginning to fight.
J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.) served as a member of Congress from 1995 to 2007. Currently he runs Great 48th Group, LLC, where he consults on public policy issues.