Stealth Funding

The House just gave defense contractor Northrop Grumman the go-ahead to build nine more stealth bombers. Of course, Northrop Grumman’s money did most of the deciding.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Once again, a congressional decision has shown that money talks — or in this case, flies. The House recently voted down Rep. Ron Dellums’ (D-Calif.) proposal to eliminate $331.2 million in funding for nine B-2 stealth bombers to be built by defense contractor Northrup Grumman — nine bombers, that is, that the Pentagon and President Clinton never asked for in the first place.

This deal didn’t just fall into Northrop Grumman’s lap, though. The contractor had to buy its way in. In the last election, Northrop Grumman stealthfully carpeted federal candidates and parties with nearly $900,000 in PAC and soft money donations, according to a study by the Center for Responsive Politics. House National Security Committee members, who proposed the additional bomber funding, got an average of $2,705 from the contractor’s PAC. On the whole, the contractor’s PAC dropped $2,378 on Representatives who voted for stealth funding, ten times more those who voted against it. In the first five months of this year, the contractor’s PAC dropped $84,500 on House members, two-thirds of them Republicans.

Did it pay off? See for yourself (an N indicates a vote against cutting stealth funding):


Northrop Grumman’s Contribution Dispersal Pattern:
Key Targets

Represents $1,000

PAC contributions are inclusive from Jan. 1995-May 1997, based on Federal Election Commission data.
§ Indicates members of the House National Security Committee.

Rank Representative Vote Amount
1
Jane Harman (D-Calif.)§ N

2
Martin Frost (D-Texas) N
3(tie)
Howard P “Buck” McKeon (R-Calif.)§ N
3(tie)
Tom DeLay (R-Texas) N
4
Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif.) N
5
Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.)§ N
6
Dick Armey (R-Texas) N
7
Robert L Livingston (R-La.) N
8(tie)
Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) N
8(tie)
Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas) N
9(tie)
C W Bill Young (R-Fla.) N
9(tie)
Ike Skelton (D-Mo.)§ N
9(tie)
John P Murtha (D-Pa.) N
9(tie)
Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) N
9(tie)
Vic Fazio (D-Calif.) N
9(tie)
Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) N
10
Dave Weldon (R-Fla.) N

Source: The Center for Responsive Politics


You can find out how heavily Northrop Grumman targeted your Representative at Congressional Quarterly‘s Vote Watch.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate