美众议员质询空军部长：美空军采购这一袋子衬套花了多少钱？9万美元！
https://hqtime.huanqiu.com/article/4HRdXKkMmjL
4月17日，美国众议员迈克•沃尔兹在社交媒体X上贴出一段视频，内容是他在国会质询美国空军部长弗兰克•肯德尔。
沃尔兹：部长先生，这是一袋子衬套（一种常用零件），衬套是技术工人生产的，技工都不需要高中毕业，这里没什么高科技，在袋子里的都符合美国联邦航空管理局（商用）标准，你知道美国空军采购这一袋子衬套花了多少钱？
肯德尔：我不知道，议员先生。
沃尔兹：9万美元！买这袋子衬套花了9万美元。任何涡轮式发动机都在用这种零件，这种高昂成本是因为，五角大楼只从原始设备制造商（OEM）那里购买商用零件，其实就是唯一来源，真的正在让我们（美国政府）破产，美国的国债利息在历史上首次超过军费支出，我们负担不起了。
Moment 众议员迈克·沃尔兹 Mike Waltz 举起一袋价值 90,000 美元的绝缘子接头，美国空军部长一脸困惑，承认他不知道这样的基本零件对纳税人来说要花这么多钱
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13325745/Mike-Waltz-busings-air-force-military-overspending.html
美国空军部长弗兰克·肯德尔在国会被难住，沃尔兹举起一袋套管，他说美国空军为一袋支付了 9 万美元，他警告说，军事超支“实际上正在让我们破产”
作者：WILL POTTER for DAILYMAIL.COM 2024 年 4 月 18 日
美国空军部长弗兰克·肯德尔在国会遭遇了尴尬的时刻，因为他被一个有关军事超支的问题所困扰。
佛罗里达州国会议员迈克·沃尔兹以一袋套管为例，质问这位军事领导人在普通廉价物品上花费“过高”的金额。
沃尔兹表示，尽管一小袋电动螺栓的普通美国人售价约为 100 美元，但军方为每袋支付了 9 万美元。
“这确实让我们破产了，”他说。 “仅我们债务的利息现在就超过了整个国防预算，这在美国历史上还是第一次。”
佛罗里达州国会议员迈克·沃尔兹（Mike Waltz）以一袋价值 9 万美元的套管为例，猛烈抨击美国空军部长弗兰克·肯德尔（Frank Kendall）的军费超支
当被问及“过高”的支出时，肯德尔感到困惑，特别是因为国防部直接从工厂采购商业零件
当被问及“过高”的支出时，肯德尔感到困惑，特别是因为国防部直接从工厂采购商业零件
沃尔兹拿起一小袋衬套开始拷问空军部长，里面只装了一把螺栓。
“国务卿先生，这是一袋套管，”他开始说道。 “这袋衬套是机器冲压出来的，不需要高中文凭，没有什么高科技，所有这个袋子都符合 FAA 规范。
“你认为空军要花多少钱买这袋衬套？”
肯德尔回答说他“不知道”，沃尔兹很快澄清：“90,000 美元。”
这位愤怒的代表在空中挥舞着小袋子，继续说道：“这是一袋价值 9 万美元的衬套，任何喷气涡轮发动机都需要它。”
衬套是发动机的重要部件，小型旋转部件通常放置在接头支架之间，用于减震、旋转支撑和耐热。
沃尔兹称其成本“过高”，并指出国防部的所有商业零件都直接从原始设备制造商那里采购，这意味着它们应该比现成的零件便宜。
然而，虽然普通美国人预计要为一袋套管支付大约 100 美元，但 Waltz 质疑为什么纳税人要为巨额加价买单。
“这确实让我们破产了，”他说。 “仅我们债务的利息现在就超过了整个国防预算，这在美国历史上还是第一次。”
沃尔兹的言论在社交媒体上流传后引发了对军方的强烈反对，观众认为“纳税人被MIC（军事工业联合体）欺骗是非常疯狂的”。
另一位评论道：“国防部赠送了一袋价值 90,000 美元的套管。” “典型的美国政府浪费和欺诈。”
另一个人说：“一小袋‘衬套’要 9 万美元。” 应该是90美元左右！
“私有化只是意味着私人承包商敲诈美国政府！ 当然，其中一些资金又回到了政客的口袋。
这个问题的提出是因为军费支出没有放缓的迹象，俄罗斯入侵乌克兰后，世界各地的军事成本突破了 2.24 万亿美元。
这并不是沃尔兹第一次猛烈抨击军事领导人，此前他曾提出立法来审计军方的 DEI 政策，他认为这些政策“损害了我们的军事准备”。
去年六月，这位退伍军人、绿色贝雷帽议员提出了《战士法案》，以打击他认为渗透到军队的左翼意识形态。
沃尔兹表示，军事超支“实际上正在让我们破产”，并指出“仅我们的债务利息现在就超过了美国历史上的整个国防预算”。 我们破产了”，并指出“仅我们债务的利息现在就超过了整个国防预算，这是美国历史上的第一次”。
除了终止 DEI 之外，沃尔兹还游说反对军事院校教授批判种族理论，并希望对 Covid-19 疫苗对军队的影响展开调查。
沃尔兹当时表示，“在拜登政府的领导下，五角大楼将重点从杀伤力上转移，转而推行将我们的作战队伍政治化并损害我们的军事准备的举措。”
“我们的军队面临最严重的征兵危机
自越南战争以来，因为美国年轻人不想加入曾经值得信赖的机构，但该机构已变得过度政治化且过度关注 DEI 计划。
“这项立法中提出的改革将在我们的队伍中恢复择优文化，审核不必要的政治性 DEI 计划，并要求针对以绿色能源为重点的提案提供成本效益分析报告。”
Moment Rep. Mike Waltz holds up a $90,000 bag of insulator joints as stumped USAF Secretary admits he has NO IDEA such basic parts cost that much for taxpayers
- US Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall was stumped in Congress
- Waltz held up a bag of bushings which he said the USAF pays $90K a bag for
- He warned that military overspending is 'literally driving us out of business'
By WILL POTTER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
US Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall suffered an awkward moment in Congress as he was stumped over a question about military overspending.
The military leader was questioned by Florida Congressman Mike Waltz over the 'exorbitant' amounts spent on regular inexpensive items, using a bag of bushings as an example.
Despite the small bag of electrical bolts costing average Americans around $100, Waltz said the military forks out $90,000 a bag.
'This is literally driving us out of business,' he said. 'The interest on our debt alone is now exceeding, for the first time in American history, the entire defense budget.'
Florida Congressman Mike Waltz slammed US Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall over military overspending, using a $90,000 bag of bushings as an example
Kendall was stumped when quizzed over the 'exorbitant' spending, particularly as the DOD sources commercial parts directly from factories
Waltz began his grilling of the Air Force secretary by holding up the small bag of bushings, which only contained a handful of bolts.
'This, Mr. Secretary, is a bag of bushings,' he began. 'This bag of bushings, stamped out by machines, don't need a high school diploma, nothing high tech about this, all of this bag is compliant with the FAA specifications.
'How much do you think the Air Force pays for this bag of bushings?'
Kendall responded that he 'didn't know', leading Waltz to quickly clarify: '$90,000.'
Waving the small bag in the air, the exacerbated representative continued: 'This is a $90,000 bag of bushings, that you need for any jet turbine engine.'
Bushings are essential components of engines, and the small rotating parts are typically placed between joint mounts for vibration absorption, rotation support and thermal resistance.
Branding the cost 'exorbitant', Waltz noted that the Department of Defense sources all commercial parts directly from original equipment manufacturers, meaning they should be cheaper than off-the-shelf items.
However, while everyday Americans can expect to pay roughly $100 for the bag of bushings, Waltz questioned why the taxpayers were footing the bill for the huge markup.
'This is literally driving us out of business,' he said. 'The interest on our debt alone is now exceeding, for the first time in American history, the entire defense budget.'
Waltz's remarks sparked backlash towards the military after it circulated on social media, with viewers feeling it is 'pretty insane how the taxpayer is ripped off by the MIC (military industrial complex).'
'A $90,000 bag of bushings courtesy of the DOD,' commented another. 'Typical American government waste and fraud.'
Another said: '$90,000 for a small bag of “bushings.” Should be like $90!
'Privatization just means private contractors fleece the US government! Of course, some of this money cycles back into the pockets of politicians.'
The issue was raised as military spending shows no signs of slowing down, with the cost of militaries around the world topping $2.24 trillion in the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
It is not the first time that Waltz has slammed military leaders, after previously introducing legislation to audit the military's DEI policies that he argued were 'harming our military readiness.'
Last June, the congressman, a Green Beret veteran, introduced the WARRIOR Act to combat what he perceived as left-wing ideology infiltrating the military.
Waltz said the military overspending is 'literally driving us out of business', noting that 'the interest on our debt alone is now exceeding, for the first time in American history, the entire defense budget' Alongside ending DEI, Waltz also lobbied against critical race theory being taught in military academies, and hoped to launch an investigation into the effect of Covid-19 vaccines on troops.
'Under the Biden Administration, the Pentagon has diverted its focus from lethality and have instead pushed initiatives that have politicized our warfighting ranks and harmed our military readiness,' Waltz said at the time.
'Our military faces the worst recruiting crisis since the Vietnam War because young Americans don’t want to join what was once a trusted institution that has become overly politicized and hyper-focused on DEI initiatives.
'The reforms proposed in this legislation will restore a merit-based culture to our ranks, audit unnecessary and political DEI programs, and require cost-benefit analysis reports for green-energy-focused proposals.'
Waltz Leads Letter Pressing Air Force on General’s Political Comments
https://waltz.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=748?
Washington, June 23, 2023
WASHINGTON, D.C. – On Friday, U.S. Congressmen Mike Waltz (FL-6), Greg Steube (FL-17), and Pat Fallon (TX-4) sent a letter to the Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall expressing their deep concern with a speech given by U.S. Space Force Lieutenant General DeAnna Burt, Deputy Chief of Space Operations for Operations, Cyber, and Nuclear, at a Pentagon Pride event earlier this month.
During her remarks, Lt. Gen. Burt stated, while in uniform, that: “Since January of this year, more than 400 anti-LGBTQ+ laws have been introduced at the state level. That number is rising and demonstrates a trend that could be dangerous for service members, their families, and the readiness of the force as a whole. When I look at potential candidates, say, for squadron command, I strive to match the right person to the right job. I consider their job performance and relevant experience first. However, I also look at their personal circumstances, and their family is also an important factor,”
She continued, “If the good match for a job does not feel safe being themselves and performing at their highest potential at a given location, or if their family could be denied critical health care due to the laws in that state, I am compelled to consider a different candidate, and, perhaps, less qualified.”
These remarks refer to state legislatures which are protecting children by preventing their exposure to sexual material in schools and barring gender transition operations for minors. Lt. Gen. Burt’s speech, again conducted publicly and uniform, inappropriately commented on laws passed by elected officials reflected the views of their constituents and raises serious concerns about civilian oversight of the military.
Read the full letter below:
Dear Mr. Secretary:
I am writing to express my deep concern with a speech given by U.S. Space Force Lieutenant General DeAnna Burt at a Pentagon Pride event on June 7, 2023. Lt. Gen. Burt currently serves as the Space Force’s Deputy Chief of Space Operations for Operations, Cyber, and Nuclear, making her one of the most important officials in an organization that is vital to the national security of the United States.
At this event, Lt. Gen. Burt said, while in uniform, that she would base promotion and posting decisions on an officer’s sexuality and not their ability to effectively do their assigned job. “Since January of this year, more than 400 anti-LGBTQ+ laws have been introduced at the state level. That number is rising and demonstrates a trend that could be dangerous for service members, their families, and the readiness of the force as a whole,” she said. “When I look at potential candidates, say, for squadron command, I strive to match the right person to the right job. I consider their job performance and relevant experience first. However, I also look at their personal circumstances, and their family is also an important factor,” Lt. Gen. Burt continued. “If the good match for a job does not feel safe being themselves and performing at their highest potential at a given location, or if their family could be denied critical health care due to the laws in that state, I am compelled to consider a different candidate, and, perhaps, less qualified.”
By reasonable inference, Lt. Gen. Burt is referring to state legislatures like Florida, which are protecting children by preventing their exposure to sexual material in schools and barring gender-transition operations for minors. Lt. Gen. Burt’s speech, again conducted publicly and in uniform, inappropriately commented on laws passed by elected officials reflected the views of their constituents and raises serious concerns about civilian oversight of the military.
The Space Force must clarify this policy change alleged by one of its most senior leaders. Among other issues, it could have enormous impact on operations and readiness. As you know, Florida is home to Patrick Space Force Base (SFB) and an estimated 13,000 military, civilians, contractors, and dependents associated with the base and its mission. Patrick SFB houses Space Launch Delta 45, which controls and operates Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and the Eastern Range, a vital task.
Additionally, the Air Force recently decided to base the Space Training and Readiness
Command (STARCOM) at Patrick SFB in Florida. STARCOM plays a critical role in our national security and is responsible for educating and training Guardians, developing the Space Force’s doctrine and tactics, and testing Space Force capabilities. The basing decision is expected to bring more than 350 personnel to STARCOM once it reaches full operational capability.
If posting and promotion decisions for Patrick SFB and STARCOM are determined based on political concerns over state law, and the Space Force is posting less qualified officers to Patrick SFB, that would be an egregious dereliction of the Defense Department’s primary responsibility to ensure the Armed Forces are ready to deter and if necessary, defeat our adversaries.
In light of Lt. Gen. Burt’s comments, I request answers to the following questions.
• Do you agree with Lt. Gen Burt’s decision to intentionally promote less qualified Guardians?
• What is the impact to the Space Force when senior leadership intentionally promotes and stations less qualified candidates based on progressive ideology?
• Would the Space Force extend the same courtesy to Guardians who may be concerned about their Second Amendment rights and their ability to protect their family near a high crime city like Chicago, which also has restrictive gun laws? Would it similarly locate servicemembers away from localities expressing their religious freedom like the Muslim-majority city of Hamtramck, MI, that voted not to fly pride flags on government buildings? I hope it is apparent to you from these questions the slippery slope of political issues the Department should avoid when making personnel decisions.
• What is the Space Force’s policy on uniformed officers commenting on laws passed by duly elected legislatures at the federal, state or local level? Lt. Gen Burt’s comments seem to reflect a policy change with enormous implications for civil-military relations.
Our nation faces an existential threat from the Chinese Communist Party, which views space as a domain of war and a place to build an asymmetrical advantage against the United States. This challenge is too important to allow general officer political views to impact military personnel decisions. I look forward to your prompt reply to these important questions.
