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 CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists 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 hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists 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 hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

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