What to make of Trump's tweets - Public Spend Forum

Interesting question. I’ll attempt a non-partisan answer!

Part of me says that all his tweets should be taken with a grain of salt as they can’t possibly reflect any depth of thinking or analysis. I feel like I’m a pretty good “tweeter” myself, but its tough to encapsulate a single thought in 140 characters, much less a policy position! It makes me nervous that he’s making these statements in such simple terms and in such a public forum – if this continues he could literally move markets with a single tweet storm.

OTOH, if there’s a silver lining I guess its somewhat refreshing to hear a leader talk so frankly about waste?

However, its not like the waste is totally Boeing’s fault – someone inside government wrote the requirement and put it out for bid. Somebody inside government is responsible for approving invoices and adding funding. His tweets on the topic make it seem a one-sided issue, and for a public that effectively reads and internalizes in sound bytes, this could be a disservice to us all.

So to boil down a really complex issue into such simple terms is probably not on the whole a positive thing. And while procurement is certainly a wickedly complex problem, I’d say it pales in comparison to international diplomacy and military strategy. I’ll hope Mr. Trump reserves his comments on those issues for a forum that allows a few more than 140 characters per statement.

——————————
Frank McNally
Director, Learning & Content Development
————————————————————————-
Original Message:
Sent: 12-12-2016 15:15
From: Jonathan Messinger
Subject: What to make of Trump’s tweets

Not to start a partisan discussion here, I’m legitimately curious to know what people here think about Trump’s recent tweets regarding the expense of Air Force One, and the F-35 program. In the former he called out Boeing specifically and said “Cancel order!” while Lockheed avoided specific mention in the latter.

Steve Kelman has a really interesting post today about how this all could be a good thing, the idea being that it’s good for the president to be aware of the issues with programs and signaling to contractors that lowering costs is a priority. It’s of course unusual for a president-elect to put specific contractors and contracts on blast, but it’s also difficult to defend the enormous cost overruns with the F-35.

Really curious to hear what impact this approach is likely to have, in real-world terms.

——————————
Jonathan Messinger
Public Spend Forum
Washington DC
——————————

0

We should also remember that in his first month in office President Obama moved to eliminate the VH-71 program on the grounds that it was wasteful and that he was perfectly satisfied with the helicopters he already had. So while his style is a bit different, it’s not with precedent.

To Frank’s point though, Trump could have taken the opportunity to bash all heads together. This isn’t really Boeing fault. There’s a whole acquisition culture to blame here. So singling out individual companies without also slapping DoD doesn’t really help anything.

——————————
Spence Witten
Director of Federal Sales
Lunarline
————————————————————————-
Original Message:
Sent: 12-12-2016 15:15
From: Jonathan Messinger
Subject: What to make of Trump’s tweets

Not to start a partisan discussion here, I’m legitimately curious to know what people here think about Trump’s recent tweets regarding the expense of Air Force One, and the F-35 program. In the former he called out Boeing specifically and said “Cancel order!” while Lockheed avoided specific mention in the latter.

Steve Kelman has a really interesting post today about how this all could be a good thing, the idea being that it’s good for the president to be aware of the issues with programs and signaling to contractors that lowering costs is a priority. It’s of course unusual for a president-elect to put specific contractors and contracts on blast, but it’s also difficult to defend the enormous cost overruns with the F-35.

Really curious to hear what impact this approach is likely to have, in real-world terms.

——————————
Jonathan Messinger
Public Spend Forum
Washington DC
——————————

0

Interesting points from both of you, including Obama’s history. I think Obama has done that a couple times (most recently when DoD gave Lockheed a “unilateral” award), and of course when he got involved with the issues at the root of healthcare.gov.

Of course, the difference here is certainly a matter of style—Trump can’t even eat a taco bowl without tweeting about it—but I don’t think we should overlook that. Trump’s doing more than just saying he wants to hold companies accountable for inflated costs or waste, he’s putting them on blast and stirring up some uncertainty. Does that factor into the conversation at all?

——————————
Jonathan Messinger
Public Spend Forum
Washington DC
————————————————————————-
Original Message:
Sent: 12-13-2016 09:36
From: Spence Witten
Subject: What to make of Trump’s tweets

We should also remember that in his first month in office President Obama moved to eliminate the VH-71 program on the grounds that it was wasteful and that he was perfectly satisfied with the helicopters he already had. So while his style is a bit different, it’s not with precedent.

To Frank’s point though, Trump could have taken the opportunity to bash all heads together. This isn’t really Boeing fault. There’s a whole acquisition culture to blame here. So singling out individual companies without also slapping DoD doesn’t really help anything.

——————————
Spence Witten
Director of Federal Sales
Lunarline
————————————————————————-
Original Message:
Sent: 12-12-2016 15:15
From: Jonathan Messinger
Subject: What to make of Trump’s tweets

Not to start a partisan discussion here, I’m legitimately curious to know what people here think about Trump’s recent tweets regarding the expense of Air Force One, and the F-35 program. In the former he called out Boeing specifically and said “Cancel order!” while Lockheed avoided specific mention in the latter.

Steve Kelman has a really interesting post today about how this all could be a good thing, the idea being that it’s good for the president to be aware of the issues with programs and signaling to contractors that lowering costs is a priority. It’s of course unusual for a president-elect to put specific contractors and contracts on blast, but it’s also difficult to defend the enormous cost overruns with the F-35.

Really curious to hear what impact this approach is likely to have, in real-world terms.

——————————
Jonathan Messinger
Public Spend Forum
Washington DC
——————————

0

Anyone remember the story of how we ended up with the KC-46? I know McCain does. First a sole-source to Boeing, then Congressional meddling. Then Airbus-NG won. Then, a protest, which Boeing won. Requirements changed, and somehow Boeing won the new competition.

Coincidentally, Pegasus, like AF1, is based on a passenger plane no commercial companies want anymore (though a 767 with seven across in coach is my favorite transcon ride). In the case of the 748, no one ever wanted it, which is rough on Boeing’s famed program accounting.

How much of the above is about serving the war fighter or the mission, or even meeting the requirements?

I say all this to say sometimes contractors play their clients, including the U.S. government. As a tax-payer and a patriot, I’m discouraged when they’re not held accountable for it. So, I may disagree with the specifics of what Trump’s doing, but I’m surprisingly sympathetic to the spirit.

(To be clear, I love planes and I love Boeing. Amazing engineering and innovation. Sophisticated enough to survive a tweet.)

——————————
Jason Bakke
Proposal Manager
Censeo Consulting Group (Censeo)
Washington DC
————————————————————————-
Original Message:
Sent: 12-13-2016 08:43
From: Frank McNally
Subject: What to make of Trump’s tweets