President Barack Obama and former President George W. Bush don't agree on much. But one thing on which they see eye to eye is that paying for two different engines for a new fighter plane is a waste of money.
Development of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has been in the works for years. It is an important project, designed to provide nearly 3,000 aircraft to the Air Force, Marines and Navy during a 28-year lifespan.
Lockheed Martin Corp. is to build the plane. The company's plans call for use of an engine manufactured by Pratt & Whitney. But Congress has been funding development of a second engine by General Electric and Rolls-Royce.
Why two engines?
Defenders of the program make several claims.
First, they say competition will prompt Pratt & Whitney to produce a better product.
Second, they cite ongoing development challenges with that company's engine. In essence, they say spending billions of dollars more will ensure the F-35 has an effective, reliable engine.
But there are political issues, as well.
The F-35 engine project, taken as a whole, has a price tag of $100 billion. Many members of Congress are eager for businesses in their districts to receive chunks of that money, even if it means approving the second-engine spending.
Another round of funding for the second engine is being debated in Congress. Lawmakers are being asked to approve $485 million to continue the project, despite objections from Obama - and the Pentagon. Both Democrats and Republicans can be found on both sides of the debate.
In essence, funding the second engine would be an admission that the U.S. defense contracting system is incapable of obtaining a quality product on its first try. Even the military, notorious for overspending, sees it that way. Congress should go along with Obama and stop wasting money on the duplicate power plant.