Business Patriots

Even though this may not normally be the sort of thing that contractors weigh in on, I figured, what the heck — I'll make a few calls and see what I can find out. A reality check on those ads.

The first guy I talked with, Kendell Pease, VP for Government Relations and Communications at General Dynamics, told me that General Dynamics doesn't run ads. Period. He does, however, see the ads others run "every morning." (General Dynamics' headquarters are right outside Washington, in Falls Church.) As a matter of policy the company doesn't take positions on issues like Webb's bill, though Kendell says he "know[s] it well." Anyhow, since they don't run super patriotic ads, by the metric I'm using here they're off the hook.

Boeing tells me that they don't take positions on military personnel policy issues except as they may affect the company. I asked whether any advocates of S. 22 — from Senator Webb through the variety of activists out there — have lobbied Boeing to take a position. "Not as far as I know" said a DC press person. Boeing, by the way, runs lots and lots of ads around here so their agnosticism, to me, seems logically quite inconsistent.

Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin (the latter the largest defense contractor in the world) told me they will get back to me.

As one knowledgeable friend put it to me, however, "in reality these are business oligopolies who see every dollar going to vets' benefits as one less dollar they can claim for their own. That's a harsh attitude, so they minimize it by 'not taking a position.'"

No doubt true. Nevertheless, I should think that if these companies want to talk the talk, some pressure should be applied to make them walk the walk.