What Others Are Saying

“We feel strongly that it’s a waste of money.” U.S. Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/budget-appropriations/270973-senate-passes-key-defense-policy-bill-

“[MEADS] has gotten into developmental problems, cost overruns in the developmental phase that have caused us to question whether or not it should continue.” Frank Kendall, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, Department of Defense http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-112shrg67121/html/CHRG-112shrg67121.htm

“The MEADS project is really a drain on taxpayers and it has no potential future use. We need to be mindful of how we are spending our money and the Department of Defense has already said it has no use for this program now or in the future.” U.S. Senator Mark Begich (D-Alaska) http://begich.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?ContentRecord_id=c216f10a-a3b2-46db-9dbe-b04ce9259fc1

“I am disappointed that the Department has chosen to ignore current law and congressional direction by requesting an additional $400 million for MEADS in fiscal year 2013 to continue the ‘proof of concept’ that Congress instructed be completed utilizing no more funding than the level appropriated for fiscal year 2012.” U.S. Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/06/13/wagging-the-meads-dog/

“The system will not meet U.S. requirements or address the current and emerging threat without extensive and costly modifications.” U.S. Army memo http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/08/AR2010030804865.html

“Facing a serious fiscal crisis, we cannot afford to spend a single additional dollar on a weapons system such as MEADS that our warfighters will never use.” U.S. Senators Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), Scott Brown (R-Mass.), Mark Begich, (D-Alaska), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Claire McCaskill, (D-Mo.), David Vitter (R-La.) and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). http://alaska-native-news.com/national_news/4929-begich-ayotte-lead-bipartison-effort-to-cut-wasteful-funding-for-troubled-pentagon-weapons-program.html

“[MEADS] is a program that has had a very troubled history.” Robert Hale, Chief Financial Officer for the Department of Defense http://www.cagw.org/assets/reports/hearing_of_the_readiness_and_management_supp.pdf

“I don’t know how we managed to get the taxpayers into a situation where we have to waste another $800 million to build an air defense system with the Italians and the Germans when we do it very well ourselves here.…So we’re going to spend $800 million just go get a little bit of technology and knowledge. Are you kidding me?” U.S. Senator Scott Brown (R-Mass.) http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/Transcripts/2011/04%20April/11-23%20-%204-5-11.pdf

“We should not be spending millions of dollars on a program [MEADS] that will never be delivered to our troops – especially at a time when the Pentagon faces the threat of across-the-board sequestration cuts, in addition to $487 billion in already planned reductions over the next decade.” U.S. Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) http://www.ayotte.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=671

“An argument in favor of this option is that the [MEADS] program has experienced technical difficulties, and development of the MEADS interceptor has exceeded DoD’s thresholds for both cost growth and schedule delay. In addition, some critics of the program argue that MEADS may not provide effective protection.” Non-partisan Congressional Budget Office http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12085/03-10-ReducingTheDeficit.pdf\

“The MEADS program is at risk of not meeting several technical performance measures, including assembly, disassembly, and emplacement times, especially in extreme temperatures. According to officials, the Army has approved a request for relief for several system performance specifications related to the transportability of various components on C-130 aircraft as well as CH-47 and CH-53 helicopters. The MEADS program faces other transportability challenges as well because the vehicles used to move the system do not meet all NATO road requirements.” Government Accountability Office http://www.gao.gov/assets/320/317081.pdf

“MEADS is a multilateral program for theater missile defense funded with Germany and Italy. The project however, duplicates the Army’s Patriot capabilities. All three partners may actually be unenthusiastic about continuing the program.” Bipartisan Policy Center http://bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/BPC%20FINAL%20REPORT%20FOR%20PRINTER%2002%2028%2011.pdf

“If you’re looking to cut budgets, [MEADS] is an obvious target. … It’s redundant, over-budget and hasn’t met performance expectations.” Thomas Collina, Arms Control Association http://www.publicintegrity.org/node/8878

“Last year, [the Senate Armed Services] committee unanimously agreed to get rid of the funding for MEADS, but you have now presented again in your budget to fund it, almost a half a billion dollars. It makes no sense. Now, I know you will tell me the contract says this. Every contract ever let by any Department of any Federal Government, State government, local government is subject to appropriation. Subject to appropriation. Now, I know people say, well, we never really exercise that. Well, too bad. Contractors sign that.” U.S. Senator Mark Begich (D-Alaska) http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/Transcripts/2012/03%20March/12-26%20-%203-29-12.pdf

What Others Are Saying

Links

News

Analysis