McCain advisers lobbied for Airbus

Top current advisers to Sen. John McCain’s presidential campaign last year lobbied for a European plane maker that beat Boeing to a $35 billion Air Force tanker contract, taking sides in a bidding fight that McCain has tried to referee for more than five years.

Two of the advisers gave up their lobbying work when they joined McCain’s campaign. A third, former Texas Rep. Tom Loeffler, lobbied for the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. while serving as McCain’s national finance chairman.

EADS is the parent company of Airbus, which teamed up with U.S.-based Northrop Grumman Corp. to win the lucrative aerial refueling contract on Feb. 29. Boeing Co. Chairman and CEO Jim McNerney said in a statement Monday that the Chicago-based aerospace company “found serious flaws in the process that we believe warrant appeal.”

McCain, the Republican presidential nominee in waiting, has been a key figure in the Pentagon’s yearslong attempt to complete a deal on the tanker. McCain helped block an earlier tanker contract with Boeing and prodded the Pentagon in 2006 to develop bidding procedures that did not exclude Airbus.

EADS retained Ogilvy Government Relations and The Loeffler Group to lobby for the tanker deal last year, months after McCain sent two letters urging the Defense Department to make sure the bidding proposals guaranteed competition.

“They never lobbied him related to the issues, and the letters went out before they were contracted” by EADS, McCain campaign spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker said Monday.

According to lobbying records filed with the Senate, Loeffler Group lobbyists on the project included Loeffler and Susan Nelson, who left the firm and is now the campaign’s finance director. Ogilvy lobbyist John Green, who was assigned the EADS work, recently took a leave of absence to volunteer for McCain as the campaign’s congressional liaison.

“The aesthetics are not good, especially since he is an advocate of reform and transparency,” said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst with the aerospace consulting firm Teal Group. “Boeing advocates are going to use this as ammunition.”

McCain, a longtime critic of influence peddling and special interest politics, has come under increased scrutiny as a presidential candidate, particularly because he has surrounded himself with advisers who are veteran Washington lobbyists. He has defended his inner circle and has emphatically denied reports last month in The New York Times and The Washington Post that suggested he helped the client of a lobbyist friend nine years ago.

He has also cast himself as a neutral watchdog in the Air Force tanker contract, one of the largest in decades.

“All I asked for in this situation was a fair competition,” he told reporters Monday at Lambert Field in St. Louis, home of a Boeing fighter jet plant.

On Friday, he defended his aggressive oversight: “I never weighed in for or against anybody that competed for the contract. All I asked for was a fair process. And the facts are that I never showed any bias in any way against anybody — except for the taxpayer.”

Last week, Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the EADS-Northrop Gruman plane was “clearly a better performer” than the one proposed by Boeing.

It is unclear what EADS hired the lobbyists to do. Loeffler and Airbus officials did not immediately respond to phone and e-mail messages left late Monday.

A Boeing spokesman declined to comment Monday on the links between McCain and lobbying efforts on behalf of EADS.

But Boeing supporters already have begun to accuse McCain of damaging Boeing’s chances by inserting himself into the tanker deal.

One of them, Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., said the field was “tilted to Airbus” because the Pentagon did not weigh European subsidies for Airbus in its deliberations — a decision he blamed on McCain. Everett, Wash., is where Boeing would perform much of the tanker work, and Dicks is a senior member of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee.

In December 2006, just weeks before the Air Force was set to release its formal request for proposals, McCain wrote a letter to the incoming defense secretary, Robert Gates, warning that he was “troubled” by the Air Force’s draft request for bids.

The United States had filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization alleging that Airbus unfairly benefits from European subsidies. Airbus in turn argued that Boeing also receives government support, mostly as tax breaks.

Under the Air Force proposal, bidders would have been required to explain how financial penalties or other sanctions stemming from the subsidy dispute might affect their ability to execute the contract. The request was widely viewed as hurting the EADS-Northrop Grumman bid.

The proposed bid request “may risk eliminating competition before bids are submitted,” McCain wrote in a Dec. 1, 2006, letter to Gates. The Air Force changed the criteria four days later.

Dicks said the removal of the subsidy language was a “game-changer” that favored EADS over Boeing.

“The only reason that they could even bid a low price is because they received a subsidy,” Dicks said last week. “And Senator McCain jumped into this and said that (the Air Force) could not look at the subsidy issue — which I think is a big mistake, especially when the U.S. trade representative is bringing a case in the (World Trade Organization) on this very issue.”

EADS’ interest in the tanker deal is evident in the political contributions of its employees. From 2004 to 2006, donations by its employees jumped from $42,500 to $141,931, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. So far this election cycle, company employees have donated $120,350. Of that, McCain’s presidential campaign has received $14,000, the most of any other member of Congress this election cycle.

McCain prides himself in the role he played blocking an earlier version of the tanker deal that gave the contract to Boeing. As chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee and of an Armed Services subcommittee, McCain led an investigation that eventually helped kill that contract in 2004. A former Air Force official and a top Boeing executive both served time in prison, and the scandal led to the departure of Boeing’s chief executive and several top Air Force officials.

“I intervened in a process that was clearly corrupt,” McCain said Friday. “That’s why people went to jail.”

While McCain has praised Boeing for fixing its practices, his campaign said the experience prompted him to demand “a full, fair and open competition.” His letters — one to Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England in September 2006 and the other to Gates — were sent with that spirit in mind, Hazelbaker said Monday.

Once the rules were in place, Hazelbaker said, bidders submitted proposals, the Air Force reviewed them and the contract was awarded.

“That is a process that McCain, appropriately, had absolutely no role in,” she said.

____

Associated Press Writers Glen Johnson and Libby Quaid contributed to this article.

7 Responses to "McCain advisers lobbied for Airbus"

  1. pollchecker  March 11, 2008 at 9:09 am

    McCain, the Republican presidential nominee in waiting, has been a key figure in the Pentagon’s yearslong attempt to complete a deal on the tanker. McCain helped block an earlier tanker contract with Boeing and prodded the Pentagon in 2006 to develop bidding procedures that did not exclude Airbus.

    Despite what McCain says he plays politics as usual and his campaign filled with Lobbyists proves it.

    He has also cast himself as a neutral watchdog in the Air Force tanker contract, one of the largest in decades.

    Did you ever notice McCain is almost as good as GW at recasting himself to be something he isn’t?

    “The only reason that they could even bid a low price is because they received a subsidy,” Dicks said last week. “And Senator McCain jumped into this and said that (the Air Force) could not look at the subsidy issue — which I think is a big mistake, especially when the U.S. trade representative is bringing a case in the (World Trade Organization) on this very issue.”

    I just think it’s wonderful that countries that we once hated for not joinging us in Iraq are benefitting from something to be paid for by AMERICAN TAXPAYERS MONEY!

    McCain prides himself in the role he played blocking an earlier version of the tanker deal that gave the contract to Boeing.

    McCAin tries to excuse this but clearly he doesn’t take into consideration the need for jobs here in America.

    I am not a big Boeing fan but I don’t like the fact that US dollars are once again being shipped outside the country.

    McCain is no maverick. He’s no reformer. No matter how he tries to cast himself, his record will prove he’s just another spend and steal Republican. Maybe not as conservative as the “Crazy Rightwing Christian group” would like. But he has gone along with EVERYTHING GW has asked for PROUDLY!

    Personally, if it wasn’t so pathetic it would be laughable.

  2. Elmo  March 11, 2008 at 9:24 am

    Yawn!
    Our current government is the military-industrial complex of which President Eisenhower spoke in his farewell address. This government, like all others, exists solely to preserve and project the interests of the rich and powerful.

  3. pollchecker  March 11, 2008 at 9:32 am

    It was the same in 1776. There was King George and his military that represented the Military Industrial Complex of the time.

    Thank God that there were men of courage during those days. I’d hate to imagine what our country would be like if people like George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson who were willing to put EVERYTHING on the line for liberty and justice.

    These were wealthy men for the most part. They could have sat back on their laurels and done nothing but preserve their wealth.

    However, they believed in liberty and justice more than their personal wealth.

    It’s too bad we don’t have more people like that. It seems we have too many fat and lazy people who would rather yawn about what is going on and make excuses than do something about it.

    It is too bad that people don’t cherish what they have until they lose it!

    America like all other civilizations will come tumbling down if we don’t act to preserve it!

  4. Carl Nemo  March 12, 2008 at 1:05 am

    The photo supplied with this article says it all…!

    We’re looking at the sneaky eyes of “King Rat” the ever hopeful pol…no?!

    Here’s one of the best links ever that discloses McCain’s true persona and lifelong m.o. as a pol on both the make and the take.

    http://www.electricnevada.com/pages00/mccain.htm

    Carl Nemo **==

  5. almandine  March 11, 2008 at 10:47 pm

    That’s a great link Carl, and when you pair it with the Keating 5, the budding lobbyist scandal, McCain’s lack of self-control, and his hundred years war… Kate Smith seems to be singing.

  6. Hoggy  March 11, 2008 at 11:44 pm

    Ask McCain why he sold out our national security to a foreign corporation ? I have lots of questions I’d like to ask him. Here are a few.

    1. Why is it good for us to have our refueling tankers for our military being built in a foreign country on another continent thousands of miles and an ocean away. One that has been instantly conquered in war time and again ? Doesn’t that put our nation at risk ? Better yet, how is that good for our national security ?

    2. If you know nothing about the economy as you have stated, why do you consider yourself a good candidate to be the steward of our nations finances. By your own admission doesn’t that make you unqualified to sign a budget or veto one ?

    3. Since you who were a POW and were tortured as you were for years and now agree that torture is a good tool to gain information. What information was it that you gave up under torture that would make you believe that torture works.

    I think if anyone has the balls to ask him question #3, that ends McCains chances for the White House, because you will see the vicious little ba*tard that he is. He will not be able to hold his temper on that one. Yes it is a vicious question, but a legitimate one.

  7. SEAL  March 12, 2008 at 2:03 am

    Right on Woody! Us bunch of old SEALs that talk to each other all the time have been wondering about Mac’s justification for supporting torture ever since this thing started. Comments like ” I wonder what he gave up that allowed him to survive all those years at the Hanoi Hilton?”

    How anyone who has ever been subjected to years of torture and brainwashing could come out in favor of torture is mindboggling to us. I had a few days of personal experience with the North Viet style of torture before I escaped and I can tell you there is no way in hell a man could survive that crap for all the years Mac was held. At the very least, his mind would be mush. But, oddly, He didn’t look all that bad when he came home. He has to be carrying a ton of guilt inside of himself and that should explain his anger problem. Anger at himself and he wants to get even. He needs a war to do that.

    Unfortunately, we have a very ignorant public when it comes to wars. They view John McCain as a hero who survived a terrible ordeal. They don’t question how he managed to do that. He is a very dangerous man. Handing him the reins of power our president has would be the most foolish thing we could do.

Comments are closed.