Sunday, June 13, 2010
Editorial: Fiscal responsibility goes out the window
Shortly after promising a new GOP commitment to fiscal discipline, Rep. Eric Cantor pushes for $485 million in unnecessary spending.
From the RoundTable blog
Read the latest entries
Back in April, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia wrote a commentary trying to make the case that Republicans, despite their past record of profligacy, really were the party of fiscal discipline and responsibility.
He acknowledged that congressional Republicans in 2005 "were guilty of spending too much and growing government too much."
Voters can trust them now, though, he argued. "But the GOP in the House today is different. Very different. Led by a new generation of young and energetic leaders, we are committed to restoring the public's trust in our ability to lead as responsible adults."
This new GOP is grounded in "fiscally responsible, small-government principles," he wrote. It's all about cutting spending and saving money.
Except when it's not, of course. Like when a juicy federal contract could provide hundreds of home-state jobs.
The new GOP looks a lot like the old GOP. Just ask Cantor himself, who recently led the push to keep $485 million in the latest defense appropriation bill to pay for an alternate engine program for the next generation of advanced jet fighters.
Lockheed Martin, the defense giant that won the contract for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, decided to use an engine made by Pratt & Whitney. That decision was approved by the Pentagon.
But GE and Rolls Royce want to build an alternate engine for use in the jet, at a cost of at least $485 million.
Rolls Royce just opened a new headquarters in Virginia and is building a factory in Prince George County.
So Cantor abandoned any pretense of fiscal responsibility and pushed the appropriation for an engine neither the jet's builder nor the Pentagon believe is necessary.
Let's put this $485 million in perspective. Remember the Bridge to Nowhere? That symbol of Republican earmark excess, which sparked so much outrage back in 2005, would have cost federal taxpayers a little more than $350 million.
Though the massive project only would have connected a tiny island village of 50 to a nearby airport, it would have accomplished more than the $485 million Cantor is insisting the Pentagon spend on this jet engine.
Cantor and others arguing for the second engine say the competition could lead to major savings down the line. That's a weak rationale and an uncertain promise.
This isn't a partisan issue. Democrats and Republicans are on both sides, some pushing for the appropriation and others resisting. Those taking the lead in fighting the appropriation tend to have Pratt & Whitney facilities in their districts.
But it does show that Cantor's promise of a new, fiscally responsible GOP is hollow.
Parochial concerns, tax cuts and favors for lobbyists took precedence over deficit reduction last time Republicans controlled Congress. There's little reason to suspect that would change if voters give them another chance.
