On the recordMay 25, 2011
I would just simply respond that, again, the value for the taxpayer at the end of the day is what we need to do. We're going to have to cut costs across this government, and that's going to mean that people are going to have to do something differently than they have done in the past. And to simply say that the American manufacturing jobs should have absolute preference over getting the best deal for the taxpayer, in my view, doesn't make sense. We've got a very complicated acquisition process in place right now. And it reminds me of the headlines that were shown in the last couple of days of the number of folks who got money from the vaunted stimulus plan that was--in fact, whose sole purpose was to really create jobs, unlike acquisition for the military and Department of Defense whose sole purpose is to provide the goods and services and equipment needed for our warfighters at the point and time they need it at a cost that makes sense for the taxpayer. The job creation of the stimulus plan, that emphasis was flawed in the extreme. And I don't believe that adding that emphasis to defense acquisition will make for a better acquisition process or will make for a better piece of equipment that we get. And the analogy that the country that goes out of business costs all of these other kinds of things, that's basically hyperbole. I don't think my good colleague has any of the facts to associate that with.…
