A prominent businessman boasting significant influence in Texas and possessing a close relationship with the inbound President, Donald Trump, is eyeing sizeable cuts in federal funding for the F-35 program run by Lockheed Martin. The potential removal of this program is alarming Texas representatives in Congress, though, achieving this might prove to be more challenging than anticipated.
Elon Musk, the figurehead behind ambitious projects Tesla and Space X, is poised as a co-leader of the newly established Department of Government Efficiency in the President-elect’s regime, assigned the huge task of reducing federal expenditure. Musk has expressed critical views of the F-35, an advanced fighter jet assembled by Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth. Musk has been quite vocal about the need to bring a halt to the F-35 program, harshly criticizing it as ‘the most deplorable military value for money throughout history’.
Musk, in his criticism, also referred to the fighter jet as a ‘costly and intricate jack-of-all-trades, master of none’, contending that ‘manned fighter jets are obsolete in an era dominated by drones’. Musk, along with his co-leader, the once-Republican presidential candidate and fellow billionaire Vivek Ramaswamy, aim to slash around $2 trillion in federal expenditure. However, this proposition is greeted with skepticism among specialists.
In an opinion article penned by them, the pair expressed their decisive intention to target ‘$500 billion plus of annual federal expenditure that Congress has neither approved nor intended for the current purposes’. Jim Riddlesperger, a professor of political science at TCU, suggested that making cuts in defense spending could be a complex task, as these funds are distributed throughout the nation.
Cal Jillson, another professor of political science at SMU, foresees a potential slowdown in production while the comprehensive evaluation of the program takes place, rather than an outright program cut. As Musk’s remarks cast doubt on the continued existence of the F-35 program, representatives from the Fort Worth area in the House have taken up the defense of the program.
Rep. Marc Veasey, a Fort Worth Democrat, expressed his concern by stating, ‘The largest-ever perceived threat to the plant indeed exists at this moment, primarily because Elon Musk commands a significant influence on the newly elected president, and also because the expenses associated with the F-35 render it a tempting target for those interested in experimenting with a shift from pilots to drones and a similar paradigm in Pentagon.’
The future of the F-35 program—whose roots in Fort Worth trace back to the moment the first F-35 rolled out of Lockheed Martin’s factory—might become clearer once Trump assumes office. However, here are some vital facts in the interim. Sustaining an annual economic impact of roughly $72 billion, the F-35 program maintains a broad base of suppliers across all US states, Puerto Rico, and numerous overseas nations.
According to Lockheed Martin, their program fuels more than 250,000 sophisticated manufacturing employment opportunities. Furthermore, in the Fort Worth neighborhood, the program serves to bolster over 49,000 direct and indirect jobs, contributing a significant $9.4 billion to the local economy each year.
A preliminary pact promoting an increase in F-35 production has been reached between Lockheed Martin and the Pentagon. The United States Government Accountability Office has pointed out that the F-35 holds a pivotal role in the Department of Defense’s strategic aims in meeting present and forthcoming national security goals of the U.S.
Conversely, the program has also encountered issues with production and rising costs, amid indications of reduced utilization of the jet by the U.S. military. Defense News reports the cost of the program could potentially rise to $2 trillion.
When questioned about Musk’s views during a press conference, Defense Department Press Secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder referred to Musk as a civilian and refrained from commenting on his opinions regarding the F-35. However, if the F-35 program were to get the cut is quite another situation, as Riddlesperger suggests that implementing cuts can be a vastly more intricate operation than merely setting them.
In essence, all cuts need to pass through Congress in the budget appropriations process. Riddlesperger does not anticipate representatives from North Texas to support a termination of the F-35 program, regardless of party lines. Musk and Ramaswamy have indicated that their work will be on a volunteer basis and will not have federal official status.
Opposed to the norms of governmental commissions or committees, the duo states they ‘won’t just write reports or cut ribbons,’ but their main objective will be to ‘cut costs.’ Their focus will be on ‘initiating changes through executive actions based on pre-existing legislations as opposed to passing new laws’, as per the same article.
They have also expressed a belief that ‘the government procurement process is deeply flawed.’ Musk’s close relationship with Trump might spell trouble for the F-35 program, as Musk is set to approach the reduction in a manner markedly different from Congress, warns Jillson.
Jillson also highlighted the importance of a careful, critical review of the F-35 program. ‘The F-35 has long been in desperate need of a thorough review due to several issues related to the aircraft. However, it is unlikely that cuts will result in an abrupt halt in production. Instead, we predict a slow-down in production and a simultaneous study analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of the F-35 and its future,’ shared Jillson. The ensuing debates over the F-35 program will provide a gauge to evaluate the implications of U.S. Rep. Kay Granger’s retirement from Congress, for Fort Worth, as assessed by Jillson. Granger’s successor, Republican Craig Goldman, already pledged to champion the continuation and expansion of the program.