Daddy Warbucks

The New York Times, known pawn of the liberal movement (/sarcasm) has the news that even the Pentagon is starting to think it has helped arms companies get too rich too quick.

Of course the defense contractors aren't the only people benefitting hugely from Bush's rush to war. Look at Exxon Mobil, who top the list of cash rich companies with $25 billion in hand. However, as the NYT notes in a patriotic take:

But military companies are different. So tight are the ties between military contractors and the Pentagon that it is often difficult to determine where one ends and the other begins. And the cash surpluses come as the Pentagon must repeatedly go to Congress to pay for the war in Iraq as well as finance expensive weapon systems for the future.

In other words, wouldn't it be nice for all the companies who have made such huge profits from the war on terror and the war on Iraq to help their nation by giving some back - say by helping out on the development costs of that new fighter plane or body armor design? Unfortunately, the companies aren't feeling all that patriotic.

Michael W. Wynne, the acquisition chief for the Defense Department, said that while "we do not encourage companies to work for us below cost," he would like the Pentagon to benefit from some of the cash.
"The only concern here, and it is a large one, is that the companies have an apparent negative view that investment within the defense sector for independent research and development on new products is not better than holding cash," Mr. Wynne said.

Basically, the companies want the nation, via the Pentagon, to foot the bill for research then they make huge profits by selling the end result of that research to the nation. (Sounds like just what the pharma companies do!)

So how big is the cash windfall?

The Pentagon procurement budget for the current year is $78 billion. Lockheed Martin, the leading military contractor, whose revenues have risen by $11.5 billion since 2001 to reach $35.5 billion last year, has $2.7 billion in cash on hand. This compares with $455 million in cash at the end of 2000. In the last few years, the company has eliminated all its short-term debt, cut $5 billion from its long-term debt, repurchased its shares and increased its dividends.
...

Like Lockheed, Northrop Grumman, with $1.2 billion in cash on hand, has used its money to cut $4 billion from its debt. General Dynamics now has $1.1 billion in cash, up from $270 million in 2000.
Boeing, the No. 2 Pentagon supplier, has about $6.5 billion in cash. While a big share of its business is building commercial airliners, the company recently reported a rise in anticipated revenue from its military division, to $32.5 billion. Profit margins on its military business exceeded 11 percent in the first quarter of 2005.

A total of $10.3 billion cash in hand - or about 13% of the Pentagon's procurement budget.

Here is a chance for Republican politicians to show which they really support - the nation and it's troops or the big arms companies who line their pockets with lobbyist money. They should be speaking clearly on this issue. There's profit, and then there's profiteering at the expense of the nation in time of war. Can anyone on the Right tell me what the name for that should be?