Obama cut air tankers...really?

[GilpinGuy]

(sorry if it's a repost....jeeesus, this guy...)

How Obama Bureaucrats Fueled Western Wildfires
by Michelle Malkin

Creators Syndicate

Copyright 2012

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. — The smell of singed air here is inescapable. Less than 50 miles west of my neighborhood, the latest wildfire has spread across 1,100 acres. It’s the fifth active blaze to erupt in our state over the past month. But ashes aren’t the only things smoldering.

The Obama administration’s neglect of the federal government’s aerial tanker fleet raises acrid questions about its core public safety priorities. Bipartisan complaints goaded the White House into signing a Band-Aid fix last week. But it smacks more of election-year gesture politics: Too little, too late, too fake.
Ten years ago, the feds had a fleet of 44 firefighting planes. Today, the number is down to nine for the entire country. Last summer, Obama’s U.S. Forest Service canceled a key federal contract with Sacramento-based Aero Union just as last season’s wildfires were raging. Aero Union had supplied eight vital air tankers to Washington’s dwindling aerial firefighting fleet. Two weeks later, the companyclosed down, and 60 employees lost their jobs. Aero Union had been a leader in the business for a half-century.
Why were they grounded? U.S. Forest Service bureaucrats and some media accounts cite “ safety” concerns. But as California GOP Rep. Dan Lungren noted in a letter obtained by reporter Audrey Hudson of the conservative D.C. newspaperHuman Events last year, a Federal Aviation Administration representative said it was a contractual/compliance matter, not safety, that doomed Aero Union’s fleet.
“I am deeply troubled by the Forest Service’s sudden action,” Lungren warned, “particularly as California enters into the fire season. Our aerial firefighting fleet is already seriously undercapitalized.” Both the U.S. Government Accountability Office and the Department of Agriculture’s Inspector General have been critical of the Forest Service’s handling of the matter. All of this has been known to the Obama administration since it took the reins in 2009.
Nine months after Lungren’s warning, the deadly High Park fire in Larimer County, Colo., claimed a grandmother’s life, destroyed 189 homes and scorched nearly 60,000 acres. Arizona, New Mexico, Washington and Wyomingalso have battled infernos this summer.
After months of dire red flags from a diverse group of politicians ranging from Texas GOP Gov. Rick Perry and Arizona GOP Sen. Jon Kyl to Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden and New Mexico Democratic Sen. Jeff Bingaman, President Obama finally signed emergency legislation last week to expedite the contracting process. Obama will borrow planes from Canada and provide $24 million for new aerial tanker contracts.
But the money won’t come until next year, and the dog-and-pony rescue moves will not result in any immediate relief. “It’s nice, but this problem isn’t fixed with a stroke of the pen,” former Forest Service official and bomber pilot Tony Kern told the Denver Post this week. “You need to have the airplanes available now.” Veteran wildland firefighter and blogger Bill Gabbert of WildfireToday.comadds: “The USFS should have awarded contracts for at least 20 additional air tankers, not 7.”
Imagine if Obama’s Forest Service had been a private company. White House eco-radicals would be rushing to place their “boots on the necks” of the bureaucrats who made the fateful decision to put an experienced aerial tanker firm out of business as wildfires raged and the available rescue fleet shrunk.
“The Obama administration is scrambling now to help ensure the Forest Service has the air assets it needs to fight the ongoing inferno,” Colorado free-market environmental watchdog Sean Paige reported atMonkeyWrenchingAmerica.com last week. “But the crisis is bound to raise questions not just about whether the cancelled contract created additional weaknesses and vulnerabilities, but about what the administration has been doing over the past three summers to shore-up the service’s air fleet.”
Where there’s smoke swirling over Team Obama, there are usually flames of incompetence, cronyism and ideological zealotry at the source. The ultimate rescue mission? Evacuating Obama’s wrecking crew from the White House permanently. November can’t come soon enough.
***
From commenter McRidge:
Michelle, Another option that the U.S. Forest Service is ignoring is the Evergreen Aviation Supertanker Service. This is a huge 747 developed just to fight fires. It has been used in firefighting tasks around the world, but not in the U.S. It is available and is extremely cost effective compared to the current Forest Service fleet. Evergreen is located in McMinville, Oregon, so this would be buying American, in addition to the other advantages. More information is available at the Evergreen Aviation website at http://www.evergreenaviation.com/supertanker/index.html.
From commenter Backwoods Conservative: Unfortunately, the current administration would rather throw money at “green” energy projects that are not economically viable than to spend it on things that are actually useful and needed.

[Rucker61]

Do you really think that these decisions made its way up to Obama's level? Isn't it more likely that these decision were made by long term government employees who have served under more than one president to rise to the level of authority required to make these decisions?

And it's this Aero Union, right:

Airtanker scandal
Aero Union was one of the contractors involved in the U.S. Forest Service airtanker scandal. With the grounding of the U.S. Forest Service's aging C-119 Flying Boxcar fleet in 1987 (some of which were operated by Aero Union) due to safety concerns the Forest Service found its aerial fire fighting capability greatly reduced. In order to quickly replace the retired aircraft and modernize the fleet the USFS, organized a deal with the Department of Defense and the General Services Administration to exchange the grounded planes with more modern C-130a Hercules and P-3 Orion aircraft. The unpublicized exchange program eventually allowed six different contractors to acquire twenty-eight aircraft at no cost, without a bidding process or public access. The exchange of these aircraft was found to have been illegally carried out by the USFS and instead of merely allowing the contractors to operate the aircraft many of their titles were transferred, effectively giving many of the aircraft away for free. Several of the planes ended up being operated for tasks outside of their intend firefighting duties. Some were used for cargo service, dismantled for parts or sold outright at considerable profit. Aero Union exchanged planes with the USFS, with the government retaining the titles and ownership, and was charged with maintaining and operating them for firefighting duties. Instead Aero Union dismantled the planes and sold the parts for a profit. Aero Union made an out of court settlement with the government over its actions but this was later challenged in court.[5]


On July 29, 2011 the U.S. Forest Service announced that it had canceled its 6 plane contract with Aero Union after the company's planes failed their required safety inspections.[6][7] In April 2011 Aero Union had voluntarily disclosed that its planes were not current on inspections and were in violation of the contract.[8] The contract, worth about $30 million a year, made up about 95% of the companies income.[9] Less than a month later Aero Union informed its employees that they were out of work and that the company was shutting down operations.[10] That August Aero Union failed to make its lease payments to the City of Chico and the lease was declared invalid by the city that September due to concerns that the city would be unable to re-lease the facilities if they became tied up in bankruptcy proceedings.[11][12] Reduced to a staff of 5 people after the last round of layoffs, down from approximately 230 in 2008, CEO Brett Gourley claimed “The company is in sort of hibernation mode” and was looking for other sources of income. The company has since completely shutdown all of its facilities, websites and other points of contact and is assumed to be out of business.

The illegal transfer of aircraft happened under Reagan's Adminstration, but he's not to blame, is he? Furthermore, the entire fleet of C-130s was permanently grounded in 2004, so if Obama is to be held responsible, then some of the blame needs to be shared with Bush, neh?

[spqrzilla]

Your defense of Obama is that he didn't know? The man whose mere election began to reverse the rise of the seas ... didn't know?

Pathetic.

And the continual "Blame Bush" of the Obama administration and its sycophants? The acts of people too juvenile to be entrusted with running our nation.

[sniper7]

Why not cut the funding. Obama needed it to give to the banks, autos etc.

I really hope Mitt can reverse SOME of this shit starting next January.

[Rucker61]

Your defense of Obama is that he didn't know? The man whose mere election began to reverse the rise of the seas ... didn't know?

Pathetic.

And the continual "Blame Bush" of the Obama administration and its sycophants? The acts of people too juvenile to be entrusted with running our nation.

There was no "Blame Bush" in my statement. Do you really think that any President gets involved in every contract with every vendor for every Bureaucracy in the Executive Branch? Read the article - the planes failed FAA regulations. We need something now, but I have no idea what it takes to get a contract in place in the government, only that it's not easy.

[spqrzilla]

There was no "Blame Bush" in my statement.

Another false statement by you. You wrote: "... then some of the blame needs to be shared with Bush, neh?"

It shows a need to find a new excuse, one not already beaten to death by the incompetent Jay Carney.

[sniper7]

Another false statement by you. You wrote: "... then some of the blame needs to be shared with Bush, neh?"

It shows a need to find a new excuse, one not already beaten to death by the incompetent Jay Carney.

Just put Rucker on your ignore list like I have done. If nobody listens he will go away.

[Byte Stryke]

Just put Rucker on your ignore list like I have done. If nobody listens he will go away.

know your enemy.

[CrufflerSteve]

I think the Republicans should leave this one alone. I has too much possibility of blowing back on Romney:

“He says we need more fireman, more policemen, more teachers,” Romney says in the Web video. “Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”


It's in a danged video! It could be parsed better to show that Romney means the pension issue, public employee unions and such but elections aren't based on subtlety.

Steve

[Rucker61]

Another false statement by you. You wrote: "... then some of the blame needs to be shared with Bush, neh?"

It shows a need to find a new excuse, one not already beaten to death by the incompetent Jay Carney.

Actually, logically, I didn't blame Bush. I presented an if/then statement: If the current President is to be blamed for action x, then a previous President should be blamed for action x. Since I made no claim that Obama should be blamed, logically, I've made no claim that Bush should be blamed.