Senate Proceeding on Oct 6th, 2009 :: 2:06:55 to 2:13:10
Total video length: 2 hours 39 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

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

Views:13 Duration: 0:06:15 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

2:06:54 to 2:07:14( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: these these requests be printed in the record. the presid objection. mr. leahy: madam preside suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

2:06:55 to 2:13:10( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Jeff Sessions

2:07:15 to 2:07:35( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: sessions: madam president? i ask that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sessions: i want to speak on morning business for a few minutes. on a different subject than what we have been discussing, i have been concerned with the air force's call for a tanker. it was september the second time on september 25 with the release

2:07:36 to 2:07:56( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: of the r.f.p., the request for proposals to the two bidders. we know that this has been a troubled acquisition people actlly went toail early on in this process for attempting to source lease agreement. that breach in the public trust caused the senate and the congress to mandate that a full

2:07:57 to 2:08:17( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: and open competion be held to replace the air force's aging tankers. full and open competion language was included in the 2005 defense authorization act explicitly to prevent one competitor from having any advantage over the other. now, another troubling fact has come to my attention regarding the second

2:08:18 to 2:08:39( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: competition. that fact is that the air force lease northrop grumman's proposed pricing for tanker to boeing, the other competitor, at the end of the first competion. a competion that declared northrop grumman the winner.

2:08:40 to 2:09:00( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: so their bidding data was given to the other competitor, boeing. i'm told that the pricing data was within acquisition regulations. it's not a violation of rules, i'm told, and customary that the winning proposal, the northrop grumman

2:09:01 to 2:09:22( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: proposal numbers be shared with the other competitors. in this case, the single other but the department of defense has stated that the air force did disclose the winner's pricing information to the losing competitor after last year's source selection. the department of defense

2:09:23 to 2:09:44( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: further states, quote -- "that this disclosure was in accordance with regulation and more importantly that it created no competive disadvantage because the data in question are inaccurate, outdated and not jermaine to this -- and not germane to this source selection." well, that statement might sound

2:09:45 to 2:10:05( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: okay if it was not your pricing data that had been given to your competitor, but it certainly flies in the face of even the simplest definition of fairness, i think. let's be clear here. the round of k.c.x. competition is based on the same capabilities development

2:10:06 to 2:10:27( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: document of -- the c.d.d. as the last, and the winner of the last competition is going to be bidding the same aircraft they won with last time. so how is their pricing data not germane to this round of the competition? if it's not relevant, then why won't the department give both compitor the same insight to each team's pricing in the last competition?

2:10:28 to 2:10:48( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: earlier this year, we passed the weapons system acquisition reform act of 2009 and dedicated an entire section of that act to the need for fair competition. a basic ten meant of effective competition is transparency to all bidders. in both versions of the 2010

2:10:49 to 2:11:11( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: authorization bills currently pending in this session now, there is language that directs a fair and open competition as has been true in previous years as we considered this acquisition project. it's a big one. it's an important one. it's the air force's number one priority. so i stand behind the air force in their recognition of the need

2:11:12 to 2:11:34( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: to re-establish their credibility. it had been lost somewhat in the impr several years ago, but i am disheartened by the fact that they don't seem to understand that this issue of not sharing the same pricing data between the two bidders undermines their

2:11:35 to 2:11:57( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: credibility and fairness. the air force, i don't think, can take -- certainly can't take northrop's pricing data back. it's already been given to boeing. it's too late for that. there is a simple fix to this problem. both competitors should have the pricing data from the last competition. i think that would be the way to level the playing field. it's the only way, practically,

2:11:58 to 2:12:19( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: i think, to level the playing field. and it's the right way to go forward with the aging tanker fleet which is 50 and 60 years old. by the time the new tankers are in place, some existing tankers will be 80 years old. so that is what a fair competition requires and what the united states air force??

2:12:20 to 2:12:41( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: should do. now, i understand that the bill managers have selected a certain number of amendments, and this amendment would not be selected for a vote. i would just say that i've got some amendments that have been selected. i can't complain too much, but i believe that the air force

2:12:42 to 2:13:03( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: should consider this simple step toward fairness and should be committed to making sure one side does not have an advantage over the other. i thank the chair and w madam president, i've talked with senator coburn and senator vitter who have an interest in

2:13:04 to 2:13:12( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Sessions: this nomination. they have agreed to vitiate the cloture vote and proceed to an