Senate panel refuses to fund GE engine made by Rolls-Royce

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A U.S. Senate panel on Tuesday refused to fund General Electric Co.’s back-up engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter in its fiscal 2011 defense budget, according to a press release.

The decision holds potential bad news for Indianapolis engine maker Rolls-Royce, which produces the enginest. Rolls-Royce, part of London-based Rolls-Royce Group PLC, is the region's second-largest manufacturer, behind Eli Lilly and Co., with about 4,300 local employees.

The Senate defense appropriations subcommittee, in approving $671 billion for defense, followed the lead of the chamber’s committee that authorizes defense programs.

The U.S. House has taken a different view, with its defense appropriations panel in July adding $450 million for the alternate engine. That was after the full House included funding for the engine in the measure it passed that authorizes military programs and sets defense policy for fiscal 2011.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates says a second engine is a wasteful expense. President Barack Obama said after the House authorization bill passed May 28 that he would veto the legislation if its final version includes the funding.

If the full Senate approves the appropriations panel’s budget, the engine’s fate will be decided by House and Senate negotiators later this year. A similar scenario unfolded with the fiscal 2010 budget: The House approved $465 million for the engine and the Senate did not. The money was finally approved by congressional negotiators.

The Senate Armed Services Committee rejected money for the engine in its version of the authorization bill. The full Senate hasn’t voted on that measure. House and Senate versions of the authorization and appropriations budgets must be reconciled and their joint measure must signed by the president before becoming law.

Pratt & Whitney supplies the primary engine for the Lockheed Martin Corp. jet fighter and opposes the GE program.

The battle in Congress pits supporters of Fairfield, Conn.-based GE and partner London-based Rolls-Royce Group Plc, who are clustered in Ohio, Indiana, Massachusetts and Virginia where GE has operations, against supporters of Pratt & Whitney in Maine, Connecticut and Florida, states where Pratt has facilities.

The bill the Senate defense appropriations panel passed today includes $157.7 billion for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.