July 18, 2008
Posted: 04:11 PM ET
The cost of the new Marine One fleet could run into the billions.
The cost of the new Marine One fleet could run into the billions.

WASHINGTON (AP) — John McCain and Barack Obama vow to reform the nation's defense procurement if elected president, yet each is unwilling to take a firm stand against the skyrocketing cost of a plum White House perk: the new Marine One helicopter.

Originally carrying a hefty price tag at $6.1 billion, the fleet of 28 helicopters being built to fly the next president is now projected to cost $11.2 billion.

At $400 million apiece, the helicopters far exceed a prime example McCain uses on the campaign trail to rail against congressional pork-barrel spending, a $230 million "bridge to nowhere" in Alaska. The British have bought the same base model helicopter for $57 million each.

In separate interviews with The Associated Press, the Republican and Democratic presidential candidates pledged to look at the program but stopped short of saying whether it should be canceled. Any review after the next president takes office in January would butt up against the first deliveries of the helicopters, slated for 2010.

McCain labeled the contract growth a "scandal" before asking to revise his assessment "in a more polite way." He said the program is part of "an out-of-control procurement system that has to be fixed."

Obama said, "I haven't taken a close look at it, but, in principle, it is a lot of money, even in Washington."

Asked whether the president needed such a large and expensive fleet of helicopters for his most common trip, a 10-minute flight to and from Andrews Air Force Base, Obama said: "Here's what I know: that we should be spending a lot more money trying to figure out how to get our energy policy right than we should be on helicopters for the president. I have not examined in detail this proposal, and since you brought it up, I'll take a close look at it."

Congress and the Pentagon are already reviewing the program to determine how to cope with the contract growth. In an audit, the Government Accountability Office has also raised concerns about the helicopter's weight and its new rotor system.

The program has its roots in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. After the attacks, President Bush flew on Air Force One, a customized Boeing 747, from Florida to military bases in Louisiana and Nebraska before returning to Washington. The chaos of that day underscored the need for secure communications and the commander in chief's ability to remain in contact at all times.

Some of the existing fleet of 19 presidential helicopters, any of which is known as "Marine One" when the president is aboard, are more than 30 years old. Several have broken down on presidential trips, a concern that prompted then-White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card to begin the replacement process in 2002.

In 2005, the Pentagon awarded the contract, itself a subject of controversy. Connecticut-based Sikorsky Aircraft, which had always supplied helicopters for the president, was beaten in the bidding process by Lockheed Martin. The Maryland-based firm proposed a variation of a European helicopter built by Agusta-Westland.

Since then, the contractor has complained the Navy has added 1,900 requirements that have driven up the cost. A swift development schedule has production starting while design is still underway. Pentagon officials insist the contract has not been changed since it was signed.

The current plan calls for fielding five helicopters, which will then be replaced by a fleet of 23 more once equipment and design issues are resolved.

White House and Pentagon officials say the president needs so many because he can make several stops in a day requiring helicopter travel. Pilots in the elite HMX-1 Marine division also train constantly in the aircraft and fly other dignitaries, including the vice president, defense secretary and foreign heads of state.

And as can be witnessed by tourists on the National Mall near the White House, several of the identically marked helicopters often accompany Marine One in flight as decoys.

McCain, a former Navy pilot, has promised to review all military programs with the aim of reforming defense procurement. He argues he saved taxpayers $6.2 billion program by scuttling an Air Force plan to lease aerial refueling planes from Boeing. Two company executives, one of them a former Air Force procurement official who helped negotiate the tanker lease before being hired by Boeing, went to jail over the deal. Boeing's chief executive officer subsequently stepped down.

"I'm talking about a broken system in Washington, and the helicopter is a visible manifestation of a very serious problem we have of overspending," McCain said. "So, all I can say is it's also going to be the responsibility of the president to get defense procurement fixed and give the taxpayers a reasonable return on their defense dollar."

Should the contract be halted?

"The helicopter? Should it be stopped?" the Arizona senator said to the AP as his "Straight Talk Express" campaign bus rolled through Ohio. "I haven't gotten an update on it recently enough to know it. But it's certainly an unacceptable situation with costs overruns."

Obama said the cost growth is an example "of some of the systemic problems that we have in Pentagon procurement."

Filed under: AP • Barack Obama • John McCain


Shasta   July 18th, 2008 5:23 pm ET

Oh come on, Obama- denounce this waste of money. Unbelievable. Don't any politicians have the balls to call this what it is?

whiner   July 18th, 2008 5:26 pm ET

they better make them electric,or they wont be able to afford flying them.

psittacines   July 18th, 2008 5:27 pm ET

A helicopter for $400 million…

That the British can buy a base model at $57 million…

MCCain's Pentagon war machine is stealing from American taxpayers big time….

Just like the Haliburton $200 toilet seat….:(

DflateMacsStr8TalkXpress: Econ MIA, AWOL on facts, POW from reality   July 18th, 2008 5:28 pm ET

In desperation, John McCain will likely foot the bill on his wife's credit card just so he can say he's against pork barrel spending while being lying pig out of the other side of his mouth about expendtures and escesses of the last 8 years to which he was part and parcel.

Corey, Maryland   July 18th, 2008 5:33 pm ET

why do we let our government get away with this crap!! why does any president need 28 helicopters, he can only be in one at a time so all you need is one helicopter, plain and simple.

And to go along with this why do we allow our government officials to get away with only buying Chevy Suburbans. They are one of the worst cars next to Hummers when it comes to fuel efficiency and it is a huge waste of money.

No wonder George Bush got elected again, this country is filled with idiots!!

Capt. Smash, Salt Lake City, Utah   July 18th, 2008 5:39 pm ET

This is not an issue the president should always be taken care of. Even if it is Bush, McCain or Obama

Lisa   July 18th, 2008 5:39 pm ET

Obama's only up by 1 point in the Gallup Poll!!!

Montana is Obama Country   July 18th, 2008 5:40 pm ET

**

Why,,,Why does it cost so much… ???

Chuck   July 18th, 2008 5:41 pm ET

It would be obvious that this Helicopter carries a lot of specialized equipment as well as is more than likely heavily armored. I would also dare say that it also more than likely has some defensive equipment on board incase the aircraft is shot at. A heafty price tag? Maybe, but regardless, a simple version for transport and military ops vs a presidential version, lets really compare apples and oranges.

LA   July 18th, 2008 5:43 pm ET

Cindy can just put it on her credit card.

jimmy velman   July 18th, 2008 5:44 pm ET

WE KNOW ONLY TOO WELL THAT THE 11 BILLION PRICE TAG FOR A NEW PRESIDENTIAL HELICOPTER IS TOO HIGH.
WE ALSO KNOW ONLY TO WELL THAT COST OVER-RUNS ARE THE RULE IN ALL FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS.
DOES THE PRESIDENT REALLY NEED 11 BILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF "NEW" CHOPPERS?

Dandelion.   July 18th, 2008 5:46 pm ET

McCain gives that same "I don't know enough about it to form an opinion" answer on EVERYTHING. He's such an idiot.

ARE-YOU-FOR-REAL   July 18th, 2008 5:46 pm ET

Why is it costing the US 343 Million more the the British?

Martin Agnew   July 18th, 2008 6:00 pm ET

Insanity! Interesting that the savior Obama didn't take a stance even as firm as McCain's.

Yon, MI   July 18th, 2008 6:03 pm ET

Bad idea, helicopters are not safe. i think they should scrap this idea. No helicopters, especially when Barack is about to become our next president.

Dee   July 18th, 2008 6:05 pm ET

Wow, 52 million dollars in June, when a lot of fundraisers were not sending money because of Hillary. Barack did very well.

Obama 08

Code Blue   July 18th, 2008 6:09 pm ET

Sounds like McCain needs fancy aircraft to host his lobbyist buddies and Obama is gonna "change" what seat he'll sit in.

rhoward   July 18th, 2008 6:18 pm ET

$400 million for a $57 million helicopter? I don't doubt the helicopters need replacing but knowing the how the government and the military procure things, you can bet the $400 million helicopters will most likely not be as good as the $57 million ones. People in the government love to write the specs on items they purchase so specific that the items can only be purchased from one source - usually one of the companies one of their buddies work for.

Your government in action.

Delegate from California   July 18th, 2008 6:20 pm ET

This is ridiculous!

This is a waste of our tax money, I can think of what can we do with the 11.2 Billion dollars, help our economy, schools, homeless problems.

Instead of having the Presidents and staff flight in luxury helicopters, why they can not use regular military helicopters? I am sure they do not need all the luxurious amenities, for example a million dollar toilet?

This is so pathetic!

Delegate from California   July 18th, 2008 6:22 pm ET

Gasoline not included!!!

Roy   July 18th, 2008 6:22 pm ET

There is plenty of blame to spread around when it comes to Pentagon procurement. Requirements piled on requirements, a process that takes years from conception to delivery, poor oversight of contractors, contractors who inflate costs, loss leader proposals based on the expectation that requirements changes will bring profit, and more. The bureaucracy continues to grow while presidents come and go.

Soupy   July 18th, 2008 6:22 pm ET

Wow, good job buying at a reasonable price US government.

Invisible Ink   July 18th, 2008 6:25 pm ET

Double talk from both of them. They like the idea of having those shiny new toys, plain and simple.

The must have some expensive, super-secret missle defense counter measures and some sort of mechanical crash landing survival equipment.

Willow, from Iowa   July 18th, 2008 6:59 pm ET

The British are buying the basic model for 57 million each and we are buying the extreme model for 400 million. That must mean the gold plating is expensive. Seriously, why not buy the 57 million dollar models, and use the difference somewhere else? I can see why both nominees don't want to go there. McCain wants to spend it all on helicopters, and Obama probably doesn't want to spend any of it on helicopters. I sure wish they'd ask me. I 'd tell them to buy the basic model, that's all we would really need. As long as its safe, I'm happy.

Ray from CA   July 18th, 2008 6:59 pm ET

i dont think we need to spend that money

McCain=War Candidate   July 18th, 2008 7:15 pm ET

How can one helicopter cost $400 million dollars? What is wrong with these people? Look at America - There are countless that are homeless, without jobs, children that are hungry, sick elderly that can't afford medicines, and a dying economy. This is just criminal!

aware   July 18th, 2008 7:16 pm ET

Where's the beef CNN? :)

Angi's mom   July 18th, 2008 7:18 pm ET

For once, I agree with McCane. How many helicopters does it take to fly a president? 19? 28? Why not 50? For $400 million EACH, this helicopter better be able to fly to the moon and back. The American people deserve better than to foot this bill.

Bosworth   July 18th, 2008 7:27 pm ET

This is news? I know hypotheticals are part of the election game, but with so many, many more important issues (the Wars in Iraq/Afghanistan, the economy, oil, alternate energy, global warming, etc., etc.) is this really a relevant "what if" right now?

I know; let's ask how they feel about a "CNN All-Access to the White House" policy, too?

Give me a break, please.

Johnny boy   July 18th, 2008 7:30 pm ET

Its a Global Economy now,lets not get protectionist now after selling our jobs away already.Everyone should feel the pain including the Neocon warmongers.

Uh, when can we vote?   July 18th, 2008 7:33 pm ET

CNN, hurry, dust off your "analyst" Carl Bernstein for another "hatchet job" mission. That is, unless he is only capable of attacking the Clintons.

Brandon in Indiana   July 18th, 2008 7:58 pm ET

This is an issue of reasonableness. We need to protect the President with all reasonable measures. That includes the cost of protection during day to day activities and visits. It costs over a million dollars for the President to make a stop somewhere, at any time.

So the balance is to ensure that the cost of such measures is reasonable with the offset of added protection. I agree that the President, whoever he is, needs the latest in military technology for his protection.

But at such a cost, this might be a case of pentagon inefficiency. Anyone who has seen The Pentagon Wars knows what I am talking about.

Anonymous   July 18th, 2008 7:59 pm ET

money that could have been sent building the worlds 10 best
hospitals

Paul C. Palmetto Bay, FL   July 18th, 2008 8:15 pm ET

Someone needs to get control of these idiots. They surely have a Napoleon complex and can deny themselves nothing. Maybe we can put a bathroom with gold fixtures. Some one send them a Sears catalog.

David   July 18th, 2008 8:31 pm ET

This serves as a prime example of how we have put the executive branch out of touch with everyday people that such a thing is even considered worthy of consideration, let alone now needs review. The government infrastructure we have allowed to be created is a creaky, lumbering beast in need of a serious long-term diet.

bruce FORMER REPUBLICAN FROM MA.   July 18th, 2008 8:34 pm ET

Okay…..duh…….. is this an "air force" project….????

How many $1000.00 tolit seats on board…???

Perhaps its a problem with the new math…
.
lets see… 28 units times $57m equals …1.596B, perhaps someone settled for 20 units @ $57m equals 1.14B… maybe they got the decimal point in the wrong place which would equal 11.4B…

When the social security department has to send out two (2) statements to give me the correct form for tax filing… first was not accurate…and two (2) of 3 numbers were incorrect… I wonder…

Lets see…12x (enter an amount)= perhaps the s/s department need a new pc.

Bruce… that old/retired white guy from Ma. …. OBAMA PLEASE LORD

Phil, FL   July 18th, 2008 8:36 pm ET

Ridiculous - I think our POTUS should set an example and downgrade to a smaller plane also. Check the cost of running that 747 cross-country one time.

It Would buy ALL of us a lot of gas, food, or hear. But maybe the republican ego won't fit into anything smaller. Maybe the cash given to W by the arabs would fit into anything smaller.

Impeach Bush/Cheney - hang Rove.

Tim   July 18th, 2008 8:43 pm ET

Why are we buying 5 helicopters with known design flaws? That seems both wasteful and unsafe. It does seem that there is justification for a large and costly fleet of helicopters for the president but maybe it shouldn't be so large and so costly.

A Nightingale Sings in Berkley Square   July 18th, 2008 9:06 pm ET

So what is a few more dollars wasted of your hard earned taxes. The congress controlled by Democrats approved this expenditure. Expect more of the same if obama gets into the White House. He will fund every liberal cause or event or request. He will even send a lot to Kenya to get his grandma out of the hovel she is living in.

Why is it whenever anyone mentions obama, he is charged with racism.

It is sickening to me to hear all the crap that some of you write. i wish you could have shared a cell with Bud and John. Think about what you have now because of guys like them, You have freedom. With people like obama in charge, you probably would be on the plantation picking cotton.

rexx   July 18th, 2008 9:10 pm ET

Oh please CNN get a grip. This is ALL you can come up with?

GM From MN   July 18th, 2008 9:11 pm ET

hmmm…a 900% mark up….sounds reasonable….what a joke

RJ, CA   July 18th, 2008 9:22 pm ET

Typical example of bureaucracy mucking things up: Take two pieces of bread, some ham, and turn it into a $5,000 sandwich. Take those same two pieces of bread, some ham, let private industry make the sandwich, and get a $1.99 lunch — with a Coke and fries thrown in. Liberals at the helm = more big government = more bureaucracy!

Comments have been closed for this article

subscribe RSS Icon
About The Ticker

The latest political news from CNN's Best Political Team, with campaign coverage, 24-7. Sign up for our twice daily Ticker emails. Got a news tip or feedback? For complete political coverage, bookmark CNNPolitics.com.

CNN=Politics Screensaver

CNN=Politics ScreensaverTap into the power of The Situation Room. Download this powerful new tool that keeps you posted on the latest political news from the campaign trail.
Download (4.1 MB, PC only)

Follow us on Twitter

CNN on TwitterGet Ticker updates the moment they appear online via the Web, SMS, or instant messages.
Follow politicalticker

Categories
CNN Comment Policy: CNN encourages you to add a comment to this discussion. You may not post any unlawful, threatening, libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic or other material that would violate the law. Please note that CNN makes reasonable efforts to review all comments prior to posting and CNN may edit comments for clarity or to keep out questionable or off-topic material. All comments should be relevant to the post and remain respectful of other authors and commenters. By submitting your comment, you hereby give CNN the right, but not the obligation, to post, air, edit, exhibit, telecast, cablecast, webcast, re-use, publish, reproduce, use, license, print, distribute or otherwise use your comment(s) and accompanying personal identifying information via all forms of media now known or hereafter devised, worldwide, in perpetuity. CNN Privacy Statement.
Home  |  World  |  U.S.  |  Politics  |  Entertainment  |  Health  |  Tech  |  Travel  |  Living  |  Business  |  Sports  |  Time.com
Podcasts  |  Blogs  |  CNN Mobile  |  Preferences |  Email Alerts  |  CNN Radio  |  CNN Shop  |  Site Map
© 2008 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by WordPress.com