Senate Proceeding on Jul 23rd, 2009 :: 2:46:00 to 2:51:10
Total video length: 13 hours 40 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Views:85 Duration: 0:05:10 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

2:45:57 to 2:46:21( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: eloquent argument on behalf of his position. again, my very important role that he plays as a member of the armed services committee. this is one of the few times that we disagree, but i think he's presented his side of the argument with eloquence.

2:46:00 to 2:51:10( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Evan Bayh

2:46:22 to 2:46:43( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: i yield the the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. bayh: perhaps i should quit while i'm ahead following those very generous remarks by my friend and colleague from arizona. i am compelled, however, i'm going to save a few minutes of my time from senator levin who is the chairman of the armed services committee and is supportive of our amendment, for

2:46:44 to 2:47:04( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: him to come and offer additional observations about this. i do want to close with a few closing remarks. first, i'd like to thank senator kennedy who could not be with us today but is a strong supporter of our amendment. senators kerry, voinovich r-rbgs brown and senator levin have all spoken in support of this amendment. i'd like to thank them.

2:47:05 to 2:47:26( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: i do want to address a couple of points that have been raised. first, with regard to the issue of for those who care about the helicopters, the marine helicopters will be fully funded. that is off the table. for the assertions made about the reduction in the number of joint strike fighters that will

2:47:27 to 2:47:47( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: be procured, we have funded the administration's request. there will be no reduction in the number of planes purchased because of my amendment. we have taken care of that issue. that is no longer relevant. the president's staff recommending a upon the presumption that there would be a reduction in the number of planes purchased. since that has been taken care of, the veto threat is no longer relevant. that's been ten care of.

2:47:48 to 2:48:08( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: there have been comments mad about the c130 procurement. i too support the procurement. we have fully funded, fully funded the administration's request. it was passed in the supplemental. the money is there. in recognition of that, that's why the house of representatives fully eliminated the account that we are using to fund the second engine.

2:48:09 to 2:48:29( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: for those who care about the c-130, as do i, and i thought senator mccain's comments were very appropriate about the need for that important plane, that has been fully funded. in our authorization is a duplicate funding, a double funding. and so for those of us who care about duplication and that sort of thing, this in fact would

2:48:30 to 2:48:51( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: save the taxpayers' money, which i understand premises underlying the lieberman accepting their premise, this is a fully appropriate funding source. the final thing i'd like to say, madam chair, is to address this issue of competion once again. it has been asserted and alleged over and over that there was a competion,

2:48:52 to 2:49:12( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: that the competion was run by pratt&whitney. that there was competion, competition, competion. i hold in my hand copies of the contractsiven to pratt and whitney. hold them right here, the cover page. january 23, 1997. pratt & whitney, $804 million, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. in bold type.

2:49:13 to 2:49:33( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: this contract was not competitively procured. let me repeat that. this contract was not competitively procured. the second contract for the engine dated october 26, 2001, pratt ant whitney, in

2:49:34 to 2:49:54( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: $4.8 billion. once again bold type so people could understand. this contract was not competitively procured. it couldn't be any plainer than that for those of us who can read these documents. there is not a competion with regard to this engine. it is a sole-source contract. therein lies the issue.

2:49:55 to 2:50:15( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: it is not about the helicopters, not about the number of procured, not about the c-130. all those have been taken care of. it is about your belief whether competition is in the bes interest of the taxpayers and quality. if you believe tha support this amendment. it maintains competion. if you believe that single-source, noncompetitively bid contracts like these are in the best interest of quality and

2:50:16 to 2:50:37( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: protecting the taxpayers, then you will support senator lieberman's amendment. that's what this is all about. since i don't have much time left -- how much time do i have left, the presiding officer: the senator mr. bayh: i quoted at length

2:50:38 to 2:50:58( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: in my previous comments from the general accounting office. it was asserted g.a.o. didn't offer much reasoning for their comments. i willust point out once aga that they state very clearly that the savings from this competition, the second engine, has the potential to be equal to or exceeding its cost. prior experience, they indicate, points to

2:50:59 to 2:51:12( Edit History Discussion )

Evan Bayh: confident the competive pressures could yield these kind of so the g.a.o. as well on recd. i understand there is a dispute studies, but that is the g.a.o.'s opinion.