Does American-made matter in tanker competition?

Published 12:58 pm Tuesday, January 15, 2008

“Is this really about buying American? What does ‘Buy American’ really mean?”

Those were questions raised by a Northrop Grumman executive during a press briefing today on the company’s bid to win a coveted tanker contract with the U.S. Air Force.

You can read the Herald’s initial story about the briefing posted online or wait for the full story in tomorrow’s newspaper.

Northrop’s Paul Meyer outlined the benefits of the Northrop-EADS KC-30 tanker as well as the drawbacks of rival the Boeing Co.’s KC-767.

Yesterday, EADS promised to move some work from Europe to Alabama if it wins the tanker bid. Northrop-EADS says their tanker supports 25,000 American jobs. Boeing says its KC-767 tanker supports 44,000 American jobs (a figure Meyer disputed).

The offer to add jobs in Alabama seems to suggest that Northrop’s Meyer and EADS already know the importance of “American-made” – if only for appearance sake. Even Boeing acknowledges its KC-767 isn’t 100 percent “Made in America” – a point that has long irked its unions.

Still, when Boeing’s unions go to bat for the KC-767 as they have been doing for months, they willingly use the American-made argument.

In her letter to U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, SPEEA president Cynthia Cole wrote: “This isn’t just about the current order for tankers. This decision is about whether Americans or Europeans will produce tankers for the U.S. Air Force for decades to come.”

And in his letter to the Washington state Congressional Delegation last fall, Machinists’ leader Tom Wroblewski wrote: “In the case of the Air Force tanker, American workers as taxpayers are the customers and should have the right to build the airplane they are paying for.”

I’m interested in your thoughts on how much the Made in America label matters. Send me your comments.