[HOUSE] Air Defence Fighter Development Bill

[Coin]

I thank my colleague from Texas for his proposed amendment, as discussed in private with him I find nothing untoward in the upgrade clause, and find the bidding process an entirely sensible move if it was the true cause for my socialist colleague's severe opposition. In order to get this bill through Congress I will happily accept the amendments and move for the bill to now move for a formal vote on the amended bill, as we appear to have moved through all issues.

Might I also take the opportunity to say I welcome, as stated earlier, lost as it was in the arguments, a separate debate on Representative Robertson's ideas on defence. I also welcome the cross-party support for this bill after an initially sluggish start.

The amended bill is seconded.

13 Republican Conservative votes IN FAVOUR

[Gesar]

14 Progressive Liberal votes IN FAVOR

[OYID]

10 Socialist votes in favor.

[Snacks]

11 Progressive Hard Left votes IN FAVOR.

[Flamelord]

10 Progressive Moderate votes IN FAVOR

[Coin]

This bill, at long last, is brought before the Senate.

Seconded.

May I congratulate the opposite aisle for coming to see sense on this issue of most vital strategic national interest. It is my hope that we may, bit by bit, eradicate the anti-American interests that hampered the last bill to go before this house.

3 Republican Conservative Senators vote IN FAVOUR

[Flamelord]

I'm glad to see that this bill reach the Senate at last, and appreciate it as a necessary step towards addressing the state of the nations defense, especially in the face of recent events. It is my sincere hope that this debate will continue in the immediate future, until the safety of the MSA and it's citizens is assured

5 Progressive Moderate votes IN FAVOR

[Snacks]

2 Progressive Hard Left votes IN FAVOR

[Zar]

I have a question to ask about this bill. Was the Department of Defense ever contacted beforehand about the need for this type of fighter jet? It seems rather silly to give the DoD orders to create a plane that they never asked for. I think it would be wise to wait for some sort of response from the DoD before moving this bill forward.

[Coin]

As I am given to understand it, the Secretary of Defence was consulted on this bill and raised no objections - quite the opposite. I am aware that the Department of Defence has gone through several administrative changes since the beginning of the year, but at no point has this bill been drafted, amended or voted on without the knowledge of the aforementioned department. Indeed, an upgraded fighter jet is the very thing the department has required and pushed for over the years.

[Zar]

I do not doubt your words, Senator Perryman. I just cannot vote in good conscious for this bill unless I see an official statement by the DoD, especially when a large amount of taxpayer money is at stake.

[Zar]

In light of the recent comments by the Secretary of Defense, I believe I cannot support this bill as it currently stands.

1 Neo-Conservative vote AGAINST

[RinKou]

As stated by Senator Rice, quoting the Secretary of Defense, there are a number of issues with the Air Defense Fighter Development Bill. Furthermore, as a nation with considerable caps on our force projection capabilities, this massive funding for a completely new fighter seems misguided at best. We should consider developing better surface-to-air missile systems for our air defense needs, rather than spending 20 credits and untold years to produce a fighter that will be outclassed by our US and PS American neighbors.

2 R-L votes against (Zachary Goldman, KS; Nathan Holloway, NE)

1 R-L vote for (Edwin Copeland, ND)

[Coin]

The Republican Conservatives shall continue to support this bill as it stands, not dance to the tune of fascist appeasement. When did the Senator from Wyoming decide she was against indigenous development? Are we to understand the neo-conservatives now wish us to become nothing more than the US and PS government's most slavishly loyal customers in all matters - surely the wiser option is to support our country's companies, not let our brave pilots fly sub-standard aircraft from abroad.

To Senators Goldman and Holloway, however, as has already been explained, the "issues" identified by Senator Rice are nothing more than a lobbyist's sales pitch. I would urge them to reconsider, and stand on the side of an MS American defence industry not reliant on the goodwill of neighbours. The price is not insignificant, but the price of inaction is steeper still.

I would agree with Senator Perryman. The Secretary of Defence's comments are short-sighted, bordering on appeasement. Perhaps the neo-Conservatives think their bargaining with the Nazis or Co-Prosperity Sphere will bring them benefits further on. As for myself, I think it pertinent to remember what was said in the debate on the matter in the House.

We lose the ability, expertise and industrial base associated with our defence industry at our peril, and lose that pioneering self-sufficiency so unique to America.

It is a sad day when I see those in my own party act so against our national interest. But I am heartened that the majority in the Republican Party, and in the Progressive Party - even, some in the Socialist Party - and the citizens of these Mountain States of American, stand with this bill in ensuring we defend ourselves with the best technology possible. Senator Rice, I truly hope you see the error of your ways, and see that Mr Caprini presently plays the role of pawn in another's chess set.

Senators, please do not let backroom dealing with a fascist lobbyist get in the way of our national security.

[Huojin]

[[Maddox has been inactive since the 6th so treating the Republican Moderates like NPCs until he reappears or a replacement is located]]

The Moderate Caucus of the Republican Party supports this bill as vital to safeguarding our nation's defense.

5 Republican Moderates vote IN FAVOR.