House Votes in Favor of More B-2 Bombers

WASHINGTON — The House of Representatives on Monday narrowly rejected an amendment that would have removed from its defense-budget bill $331.2 million to start production of nine additional Northrop Grumman Corp. B-2 bombers.

“What is before us is not whether we go forward with the B-2 bomber,” said amendment sponsor Rep. Ronald V. Dellums (D-Oakland), the senior Democrat on the House National Security Committee. “It is about spending $27 billion to restart production for an additional nine B-2s for which people in authority have stated they have not asked for, do not want and do not need.”

Dellums was joined by Ohio Republican Rep. John R. Kasich, chairman of the House Budget Committee, and Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.). Kasich referred to the B-2 as a “relic of the Cold War” and said “the military doesn’t want this plane. If they wanted it, they would ask for it and make space for it.”

The amendment lost by a 209-216 vote. The Clinton administration and the Senate Armed Services Committee oppose buying more than the 21 B-2s for which the Air Force has already spent $45 billion.

Funding for additional B-2s has attracted heated debate from both sides of the aisle, including comment from House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), who urged that lawmakers set aside monetary concerns in favor of a more able Air Force.

“This is not about pork,” Gingrich said. If those against more B-2s are wrong in thinking the U.S won’t need more bombers in the future, he added, “either our allies will lose, we will lose, or we’ll win at the expense of American lives.”

The House has supported additional funding for the radar-evading bomber, built in Pico Rivera, Calif., since Republicans took control three years ago. However, the B-2, whose primary subcontractors are Seattle-based Boeing Co. and Fairfield, Conn.’s General Electric Co., enjoys bipartisan support.

“Of all the weapons we’re buying, none has more conventional military potential than the B-2,” said Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash). “This administration has made a terrible, tragic mistake in not recommending to the Congress to keep this program going.”

Dicks’ district borders the one that includes Seattle.

Originally designed for nuclear attacks against Soviet targets, the B-2 fleet is being modified to carry nonnuclear weapons. Each B-2 can carry about 16 nuclear bombs and travel 5,000 miles before refueling. Unless the additional planes are ordered, Northrop Grumman will complete its B-2 work by late 1999.

The B-2’s other House supporters include Republican Leader Rep. Richard Armey of Texas and California Reps. Duncan Hunter (R-El Cajon) and Howard P. McKeon (R-Santa Clarita).

Northrop Grumman’s stock fell 3/8 Monday to $88.50.

Last week, Defense Secretary William Cohen told congressional leaders, “The loss in combat capabilities from retiring current weapon systems to pay for additional B-2s, the loss due to foregoing investment in other needed capabilities and the additional costs of the B-2 far outweigh the benefits” of buying more B-2s.

Cohen said nine more B-2s would cost $14 billion, plus another $7 billion to operate and maintain, during the next 20 years.

The House’s fiscal 1998 defense budget bill will be reconciled with a version from the Senate Armed Services Committee into a compromise bill to be sent to Clinton.

The bill the House began debating last week recommends $268.2 billion for military activities during the fiscal year starting Oct. 1, $2.9 billion more than Clinton requested and equal to the Senate bill.

The House bill has $2.1 billion for Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-22 fighter, as the administration requested, $1.3 billion for McDonnell Douglas Corp.’s F/A-18E/F fighter, less than the $2.1 billion requested. It also has $2.8 billion requested for three destroyers built by General Dynamics Corp. and Litton Industries Inc., and $661.3 million for seven V-22 aircraft built by Boeing and Textron Inc., rather than the $472 million for five the Pentagon requested.